What happened to social responsibility and volunteering? Most people want great service, but just expect someone else to do the work. In the current economic environment, lets hope to see more local projects like this.
The real reason could be this: International students pay well for their studies. If they hav work, they stay on studying to the end of their courses and can pay their fees. More importantly, they also encourage other students to come and study in the USA.
As someone who has actually studied Christian Apologetics, good apologetics actually has to answer the specifics of the argument it opposes. Therefore it requires thought, good reasoning and careful construction of a solid case. Apologetics is part of a dialogue, so it must accurately respond to be good apologetics.
The difference between this and science is that science does not need to hold special classes in "How to convince non-believers that science works, and respond to their criticisms of science, in a canned way, without listening to them."
If this is so, then why do people get their knickers in a twist when schools don't teach evolution? Why do people study the sciences at university level if it's all so straight-forward? The only reason that the 'scientific' well, actually the modernist worldview seems so straight-forward and logical to you is that you were raised with it. To the majority of people groups around the world, the scientific worldview is only mumbo-jumbo.
The class is referred to as "Intelligent Design AND Christian Apologetics". Christian Apologetics is about giving an answer to critics of the faith. Therefore the course, if it does allow these posts, should require original, thought provoking and relevant posts to the forums. This would not be trolling, just a contribution from another viewpoint. Cutting and pasting material, posts unrelated to the topic and rants ARE trolling and should not be encouraged by the seminary.
There is a huge difference between trolling and giving an opposing viewpoint.
you're stuck in a conversation at work with Bob the Office Drone and you get
a terrible itch building up in waves across your scrotum? The kind that
makes you force a smile on your face while you're thinking "Man oh man, I
wish Bob would fuck off so I could scratch myself!"
What is the difference between harvesting from an embryo created from skin cells and harvesting from an embryo created using in vitro fertilization? Both have the potential to develop into full human beings.
AFAIK the development of embryos for harvest is not the focus of this research. It was a proof of concept on the versatility of adult stem cells. From TFA:
The approach has taken off because it sidesteps the cloning and embryo-destroying techniques traditionally used to derive true embryonic stem-cell lines. However, one big question has been whether reprogrammed cells are as versatile as true embryonic cells, and whether they can form all of the cells in an embryo. Using reprogrammed cells to create live offspring with normal organs and body tissues has been considered an important test. Chinese scientists now have shown that this is possible in mice.
Stem cell lines are to be used directly in therapy. Not for cloning 'body bags' of spare parts.
I really don't understand how this experiment could be seen as controversial, as the cloning effort was to prove that an adult's cells could be reprogrammed to form any type of tissue, as opposed to harvesting our own young, which is clearly a practice with ethical question marks all over it. The focus was not cloning. We can do cloning well enough now. The technology already exists. What this research does mean is a glimpse into a future with no waiting lists for donor organs, no harvesting from the dead and far fewer rejection issues for new organs, as they would be your own tissue, from your own cells. Good stuff.
Codeweavers will always have one major disadvantage. Windows is ahead of them and will always be so. That's the nature of the beast. If Windows declines in popularity, unfortunately so do windows applications run on codeweavers.
Either that, or my second sentence could have been addressing code in general? Or possibly entertaining the vague possibility that there could be bugs in the code that could be discerned by and improved on when it's viewed by more pairs of eyes. Actually I meant the whole of my first paragraph to be understood in a pretty general sense, not as referring to this one piece of code. Good code IS good code. No matter where it comes from. It echoes the weight of Linus Torvald's own pretty general statement that he doesn't really care about where code comes from as long as the license is right. Good code is good code. If I can use something I can use it. If code from x source is useful, it will be improved on if it is open sourced. Even if it was faulty when released, which a lot of code is, open sourcing it is likely to lead to improvement. General principles that I believe in. Personally I couldn't care less about the quality of the MS released code as I currently have no use for it. Sorry if I caused a misunderstanding.
"That's the sexiest thing to come from the Linux community in forever."
Which I why I will recite it, but certainly not buy into it. Without the "politics" of defending freedom, technology is reduced to a weapon against freedom.
Let's face it. Decent code is decent code. Even if it isn't the best code, if it's open sourced and useful enough, someone out there is going to improve on it. Everyone wins. Microsoft isn't all bad either and I actually quite like some of their products. Like, err, ummm. Well... Notepad. And maybe chkdsk. Man I wish they'd open source their NTFS tools from Win7... Leaves the NTFS tools currently available for Linux for dead!
Politics is there whenever 2 or more humans exist in the same airspace. That has always been and will be in the future. In this case however the politics is largely enclosed in the choice of license. Microsoft has chosen the right license for their product. They'll gain from it and others will no doubt gain from it as well. Hmmm. Net gain in freedom and choice for all. Sounds good to me!
In the end though, I think that there has to be proprietary software for open source and free software to survive. There also has to be open source and free software for proprietary software to thrive and be pushed to higher standards. Let people choose what they want and decide what their own needs are. With proprietary and OSS/FS growing up alongside each other we have the choice and freedom for that to happen.
I don't really know why I'm bothering to respond to you, but please do read my comments before answering. I WAS REPLYING TO A COMMENT MADE BY KIRBYSTAR ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE ISPs. I RESPONDED TO HIM STATING THAT SOME OF THE ISPs THAT HE RECKONED WERE VERY SMALL WERE ACTUALLY QUITE BIG. Please read what I have just written. You seem to have difficulties with comprehension, so read it twice. Thankyou.
Read parent post which I most helpfully even quoted. It referred to the size of ISPs used for the trial, not whether they commented or not. I did RTFA, so I know the iPrimus, which has a huge market share, did comment.
Please read comments before responding.
And they'd have to actually trial it on an ISP that has more than twenty subscribers.
Actually some of those ISP's listed are huge. Optus and iPrimus would be amongst our largest ISP's over here. Do your research BEFORE you comment please.
Slashdot Mirror
The year of Linux on the mobile device?
Actually, some ID proponents tend to outright ignore new evidence, or any evidence, that doesn't fit their theory.
Never see hat in any other fields of course...
What happened to social responsibility and volunteering? Most people want great service, but just expect someone else to do the work. In the current economic environment, lets hope to see more local projects like this.
Well, reuters actually...
The real reason could be this: International students pay well for their studies. If they hav work, they stay on studying to the end of their courses and can pay their fees. More importantly, they also encourage other students to come and study in the USA.
A fold-less centerfold :)
Does it remove staples as well?
As someone who has actually studied Christian Apologetics, good apologetics actually has to answer the specifics of the argument it opposes. Therefore it requires thought, good reasoning and careful construction of a solid case. Apologetics is part of a dialogue, so it must accurately respond to be good apologetics.
The difference between this and science is that science does not need to hold special classes in "How to convince non-believers that science works, and respond to their criticisms of science, in a canned way, without listening to them."
If this is so, then why do people get their knickers in a twist when schools don't teach evolution? Why do people study the sciences at university level if it's all so straight-forward? The only reason that the 'scientific' well, actually the modernist worldview seems so straight-forward and logical to you is that you were raised with it. To the majority of people groups around the world, the scientific worldview is only mumbo-jumbo.
The class is referred to as "Intelligent Design AND Christian Apologetics". Christian Apologetics is about giving an answer to critics of the faith. Therefore the course, if it does allow these posts, should require original, thought provoking and relevant posts to the forums. This would not be trolling, just a contribution from another viewpoint. Cutting and pasting material, posts unrelated to the topic and rants ARE trolling and should not be encouraged by the seminary.
There is a huge difference between trolling and giving an opposing viewpoint.
you're stuck in a conversation at work with Bob the Office Drone and you get a terrible itch building up in waves across your scrotum? The kind that makes you force a smile on your face while you're thinking "Man oh man, I wish Bob would fuck off so I could scratch myself!"
You wait til people are gone before you scratch?
The stupid thing is that the search business that they are suing is actually driving business to them? If only in a minor way (sans advertising).
You can fool some of the people some of the time, or all of the people all of the time. Unfortunately it seems that could be all that's needed...
Man. What's slashdot for if we have to RTFA?
What is the difference between harvesting from an embryo created from skin cells and harvesting from an embryo created using in vitro fertilization? Both have the potential to develop into full human beings.
AFAIK the development of embryos for harvest is not the focus of this research. It was a proof of concept on the versatility of adult stem cells. From TFA:
The approach has taken off because it sidesteps the cloning and embryo-destroying techniques traditionally used to derive true embryonic stem-cell lines. However, one big question has been whether reprogrammed cells are as versatile as true embryonic cells, and whether they can form all of the cells in an embryo. Using reprogrammed cells to create live offspring with normal organs and body tissues has been considered an important test. Chinese scientists now have shown that this is possible in mice.
Stem cell lines are to be used directly in therapy. Not for cloning 'body bags' of spare parts.
I really don't understand how this experiment could be seen as controversial, as the cloning effort was to prove that an adult's cells could be reprogrammed to form any type of tissue, as opposed to harvesting our own young, which is clearly a practice with ethical question marks all over it. The focus was not cloning. We can do cloning well enough now. The technology already exists. What this research does mean is a glimpse into a future with no waiting lists for donor organs, no harvesting from the dead and far fewer rejection issues for new organs, as they would be your own tissue, from your own cells. Good stuff.
Codeweavers will always have one major disadvantage. Windows is ahead of them and will always be so. That's the nature of the beast. If Windows declines in popularity, unfortunately so do windows applications run on codeweavers.
Either that, or my second sentence could have been addressing code in general? Or possibly entertaining the vague possibility that there could be bugs in the code that could be discerned by and improved on when it's viewed by more pairs of eyes. Actually I meant the whole of my first paragraph to be understood in a pretty general sense, not as referring to this one piece of code. Good code IS good code. No matter where it comes from. It echoes the weight of Linus Torvald's own pretty general statement that he doesn't really care about where code comes from as long as the license is right. Good code is good code. If I can use something I can use it. If code from x source is useful, it will be improved on if it is open sourced. Even if it was faulty when released, which a lot of code is, open sourcing it is likely to lead to improvement. General principles that I believe in. Personally I couldn't care less about the quality of the MS released code as I currently have no use for it. Sorry if I caused a misunderstanding.
No, you still have to do your baking at home...
AVG breaking something? Shock horror! It's normally Symantec that does that...
Alas... At least people are starting to stand up to them a bit now, but we've still got a long way to go in that political game...
If you would actually bother to read my comment you might find that neither was I...
Microsoft-hating is a disease that you catch from working with Microsoft products.
There. Fixed that for you.
"That's the sexiest thing to come from the Linux community in forever."
Which I why I will recite it, but certainly not buy into it. Without the "politics" of defending freedom, technology is reduced to a weapon against freedom.
Let's face it. Decent code is decent code. Even if it isn't the best code, if it's open sourced and useful enough, someone out there is going to improve on it. Everyone wins. Microsoft isn't all bad either and I actually quite like some of their products. Like, err, ummm. Well... Notepad. And maybe chkdsk. Man I wish they'd open source their NTFS tools from Win7... Leaves the NTFS tools currently available for Linux for dead!
Politics is there whenever 2 or more humans exist in the same airspace. That has always been and will be in the future. In this case however the politics is largely enclosed in the choice of license. Microsoft has chosen the right license for their product. They'll gain from it and others will no doubt gain from it as well. Hmmm. Net gain in freedom and choice for all. Sounds good to me!
In the end though, I think that there has to be proprietary software for open source and free software to survive. There also has to be open source and free software for proprietary software to thrive and be pushed to higher standards. Let people choose what they want and decide what their own needs are. With proprietary and OSS/FS growing up alongside each other we have the choice and freedom for that to happen.
I don't really know why I'm bothering to respond to you, but please do read my comments before answering. I WAS REPLYING TO A COMMENT MADE BY KIRBYSTAR ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE ISPs. I RESPONDED TO HIM STATING THAT SOME OF THE ISPs THAT HE RECKONED WERE VERY SMALL WERE ACTUALLY QUITE BIG. Please read what I have just written. You seem to have difficulties with comprehension, so read it twice. Thankyou.
Read parent post which I most helpfully even quoted. It referred to the size of ISPs used for the trial, not whether they commented or not. I did RTFA, so I know the iPrimus, which has a huge market share, did comment. Please read comments before responding.
And they'd have to actually trial it on an ISP that has more than twenty subscribers.
Actually some of those ISP's listed are huge. Optus and iPrimus would be amongst our largest ISP's over here. Do your research BEFORE you comment please.