So you read the Asimov novel where an entire planet was populated by a small number of people, each with a huge plantation and an army of robots to work it? That planet sucked.
Higher population drives technology. Technology empowers humanity as a whole. That's a good thing.
Also, your idea is not going to happen. Evolution states that every gene does whatever it can to make more copies of itself. Your idea goes against the fundamental principles of LIFE. You lose. Game over.
You must be married. Single people care about the style of the vehicle as the #1 spot. Our culture is causing people to be single longer. Car companies can't pretend it is the 50s where everyone is married with children anymore.
What industry do you work in? I guess I work in infosec, and a skilled security person needs to know a lot about all the common operating systems. These people agree about Windows. It's not bias. It's a better-informed opinion.
Do you know any people who have "power user" skill levels on both Windows and Linux, but are free from this pro-Linux "bias" you speak of? I thought not. Windows and Linux have their relative reputations (among people equally skilled on both OS) because there are DESERVED REPUTATIONS!
What you want is called beer. It helps you relax, but it also tastes good and is good for your health. It doesn't need upgrading every nine months, either.
You can either deny several passages in the Bible*, or you can claim that, in your opinion, only Christians should be saved from Hell.
Because the majority of humanity has had no chance to become Christian, you would be condemning most of humanity through no fault of their own. That's moral? No way!
To answer your question "what is moral," we don't need to delve into Magic. Evolutionary psychology demonstrates that social animals have evolved an innate sense of altruism. Basically, they help others prosper when the cost is not too great to themselves. They even sacrifice themselves when that action helps many others prosper greatly. Additionally, in human society, actions which perpetuate the society are defined as "moral."
Immoral actors are selected against in evolution. Do they "need" to be punished? Come on, this isn't grade school. They are "punished" by being selected against.
*To define the passages in the Bible I was referring to: Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. -- John 3:3 Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. -- John 3:5 Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. -- Matthew 18:3 Ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. -- James 5:1 Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. -- John 6:53-54 Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. -- Matthew 5:20 etc. etc. etc.
In the past 50 years? Baptist preachers are on television EVERY DAY talking about gays, biologists, and every non-baptist burning in hell for eternity.
Most protestant catechisms in the US with which I am familiar preach hell for non-believers. And this is based on specific passages in the New Testament (John 6:6, John 3:5, Matthew 18:3, etc. etc. etc.).
Catholics condemn non-believers to Hell, though it is Level 0 (or 1, or whatever).
When you say "we...made the whole hell thing clear," you are CLEARLY not speaking for Christians, but for a small sect.
I consider myself as having more ethics than the average. I am a Christian (yeah, hold your slams, that's not the point).
I'm sorry, but that is just an insulting statement. How could a Christian have more ethics than average? Christians strive to be like a god which tortures the majority of the human race in eternal hellfire. By modern ethical standards, that is evil.
It sounds like you are the racist. Only a racist would make the implication that nationality necessarily implies genetic ancestry. The guy you are replying to did not do that. You did.
Obviously, you don't know how these things work. OTHER PEOPLE put pictures online, then they tag you as being in the picture. You don't have to document your social life for it to appear online, other people do it for you.
Also, if you think of socializing on the internet as "documenting your social life," you already miss the point. Using websites to chat, share photos, and organize parties is just one of the many ways social people do social things.
The generation that went to college in the era of Facebook/Myspace already expects to be able to find drunken ramblings and absurd photos of themselves and their friends online. This generation thinks less of a person who has a web presence that indicates no social life. Who wants to work with a boring person? Once these people are in charge of hiring (another 10-15 years) this won't be seen as a bad thing for many companies.
One of the benefits of having a more open and honest society will be the acceptance of practices most people do but few admit to doing. In this respect, social networks mean social progress.
I've been wondering what happened to my dog ever since he wandered away while we were on vacation in Moscow in the fifties! Thank you for finally bringing me closure.
If you want someone to tell you without a doubt what the facts are, then you want religion, not science. Oh, and the facts they tell you will be wrong, but at least they will be confident about it.
And I demand that gravity is presented as a theory and not fact.
The existence of a force called "gravity" between all objects of nonzero mass is "proven" in the legal, but not scientific sense of the word.
Words like "theory" and "proven" mean different things in scientific terminology vs legal terminology. The public education system in the USA doesn't teach the difference. Blame the people who come up with the curriculum for your ignorance. Or educate yourself. Your choice.
Linux: On-guard! This MBR is MINE! Windows: *parry* *thrust* Never! The first 512B are the domain of NTLDR! Mu-ha-ha! Linux: Touche! Looks like the boot CD will be needed to get GRUB back on here. *removes mask*
Slashdot Mirror
So you read the Asimov novel where an entire planet was populated by a small number of people, each with a huge plantation and an army of robots to work it? That planet sucked.
Higher population drives technology. Technology empowers humanity as a whole. That's a good thing.
Also, your idea is not going to happen. Evolution states that every gene does whatever it can to make more copies of itself. Your idea goes against the fundamental principles of LIFE. You lose. Game over.
You must be married. Single people care about the style of the vehicle as the #1 spot. Our culture is causing people to be single longer. Car companies can't pretend it is the 50s where everyone is married with children anymore.
Clearly, Slashdot has the most best editors of all the internets.
What industry do you work in? I guess I work in infosec, and a skilled security person needs to know a lot about all the common operating systems. These people agree about Windows. It's not bias. It's a better-informed opinion.
I don't think your teacher was well-versed in Catholic dogma.
Do you know any people who have "power user" skill levels on both Windows and Linux, but are free from this pro-Linux "bias" you speak of? I thought not. Windows and Linux have their relative reputations (among people equally skilled on both OS) because there are DESERVED REPUTATIONS!
What you want is called beer. It helps you relax, but it also tastes good and is good for your health. It doesn't need upgrading every nine months, either.
Yeah! Now your home the flickery, spotty-spectrum lighting of an industrial warehouse! That must feel warm and comforting.
Screw CFL. Give me full-spectrum lighting. It costs more. It uses more power. It doesn't last as long. And it is still much much better than CFL.
You don't have an air-gap development lab?
You shouldn't be developing on your primary office machine, anyway!
You can either deny several passages in the Bible*, or you can claim that, in your opinion, only Christians should be saved from Hell.
Because the majority of humanity has had no chance to become Christian, you would be condemning most of humanity through no fault of their own. That's moral? No way!
To answer your question "what is moral," we don't need to delve into Magic. Evolutionary psychology demonstrates that social animals have evolved an innate sense of altruism. Basically, they help others prosper when the cost is not too great to themselves. They even sacrifice themselves when that action helps many others prosper greatly. Additionally, in human society, actions which perpetuate the society are defined as "moral."
Immoral actors are selected against in evolution. Do they "need" to be punished? Come on, this isn't grade school. They are "punished" by being selected against.
*To define the passages in the Bible I was referring to:
Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. -- John 3:3
Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. -- John 3:5
Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. -- Matthew 18:3
Ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. -- James 5:1
Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. -- John 6:53-54
Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. -- Matthew 5:20
etc. etc. etc.
In the past 50 years? Baptist preachers are on television EVERY DAY talking about gays, biologists, and every non-baptist burning in hell for eternity.
Most protestant catechisms in the US with which I am familiar preach hell for non-believers. And this is based on specific passages in the New Testament (John 6:6, John 3:5, Matthew 18:3, etc. etc. etc.).
Catholics condemn non-believers to Hell, though it is Level 0 (or 1, or whatever).
When you say "we...made the whole hell thing clear," you are CLEARLY not speaking for Christians, but for a small sect.
I'm sorry, but that is just an insulting statement. How could a Christian have more ethics than average? Christians strive to be like a god which tortures the majority of the human race in eternal hellfire. By modern ethical standards, that is evil.
Take it from me: you never know when simulations aren't real.
It sounds like you are the racist. Only a racist would make the implication that nationality necessarily implies genetic ancestry. The guy you are replying to did not do that. You did.
Obviously, you don't know how these things work. OTHER PEOPLE put pictures online, then they tag you as being in the picture. You don't have to document your social life for it to appear online, other people do it for you.
Also, if you think of socializing on the internet as "documenting your social life," you already miss the point. Using websites to chat, share photos, and organize parties is just one of the many ways social people do social things.
The generation that went to college in the era of Facebook/Myspace already expects to be able to find drunken ramblings and absurd photos of themselves and their friends online. This generation thinks less of a person who has a web presence that indicates no social life. Who wants to work with a boring person? Once these people are in charge of hiring (another 10-15 years) this won't be seen as a bad thing for many companies.
One of the benefits of having a more open and honest society will be the acceptance of practices most people do but few admit to doing. In this respect, social networks mean social progress.
Server-side Javascript, you say? It's so deliciously low, so horribly dirty!
</henry higgins>
Wow, Perl must be the best language. *gag*
Dense = complex.
Complex = bad.
I've been wondering what happened to my dog ever since he wandered away while we were on vacation in Moscow in the fifties! Thank you for finally bringing me closure.
If you want someone to tell you without a doubt what the facts are, then you want religion, not science. Oh, and the facts they tell you will be wrong, but at least they will be confident about it.
That is a stupid statement. The mechanism by which muscles grow, and the mechanism by which brain cells organize/reproduce are ENTIRELY different.
The existence of a force called "gravity" between all objects of nonzero mass is "proven" in the legal, but not scientific sense of the word.
Words like "theory" and "proven" mean different things in scientific terminology vs legal terminology. The public education system in the USA doesn't teach the difference. Blame the people who come up with the curriculum for your ignorance. Or educate yourself. Your choice.
Duel boot?
Linux: On-guard! This MBR is MINE!
Windows: *parry* *thrust* Never! The first 512B are the domain of NTLDR! Mu-ha-ha!
Linux: Touche! Looks like the boot CD will be needed to get GRUB back on here. *removes mask*
Ever read Asimov? Card? Sci-fi can be based in outer space but not be Trek. Trek is great, yeah, but I would love to see more variety in sci-fi on TV.