Atheism is not a "tenet". It is simply the lack of faith in the supernatural.
A tenet may be a belief. Lack of faith in the supernatural (God, gods, whatever) is the central tenet of atheism. Like it or not, the thing that atheism has in common with religion is that both are belief systems.
Atheists don't sit around actively disbelieving; they just don't actively believe. The thing that most theists tend to not understand about atheists is that we mentally categorize the invisible man in the sky with things like fairies, unicorns, and the modern moderate republican.
I've never had someone "with different background and views" get upset when I've asked them how they're doing, or complimented them, or asked them for suggestions or...
If you converse rather than proselytize I don't think you'll run into too many problems.
Ps - it's funny how the word "atheist" has been co-opted. The prefix "a" means "not applicable", or "not concerned with". Someone who is actually a-theitical is someone who is not interested in theology. The word has become most often used as a disguise by people who are very much interested, who are anti-God. If they described were honest enough to use accurate wording for their cause, the Atheist League would be called the Antichrist League. I wonder why they aren't honest, why they lie by labeling themselves as people not interested in the topic.
In my experience as an atheist (and someone who knows many atheists), atheists tend to not care about religion or gods until religious types try to stereotype or demonize them (as you are doing), try to impose their religious based morality on others, or do terrible things in the name of their beliefs in the supernatural.
More often than not, the "persecution" and "atheists-agenda" that Christians face from atheists is from those who stand up to Christians bullying others.
Aren't they obligated (by law) to protect their trademark, or risk loosing it?
IANAL but as I recall it, you can only keep a trademark if you actively protect it. If you don't, you may loose your right to keep it.
- Jesper
If that's true, then the Church of Scientology should sue Canonical for using their trademarked tactic of suing people for negatively or critically referring to their trademarked property.
Ok, they Scientology didn't really "trademark" the tactic, but the have employed it a hell of a lot. We also see politicians invoke the DMCAA in order try to remove embarrassing information and media about them.
We now have an unprecedented ability to disseminate information to the world, and so many people that try to make sure it doesn't happen.
Why do modern military planes even have a canopy anymore? The vast majority of interesting visual information gets presented to the pilot via HUD anyway. The actual physical scenery amounts to nothing more than a distraction. Ditch the canopy, stick the pilot deeper inside the plane, and present everything as a video feed.
Because the real world is in Super-Duper-Ultra-HD-X-treme (TM).
Until you can figure out why cigarettes causes lung cancer in on person, and not his neighbors who smoked similar amounts, it seems rather more likely that it wasn't the cigarettes that had anything to do with the cancer.
Frankly, I am not informed enough to have an opinion in this matter. However, even someone as ignorant in the matter as myself can see that your fact does not prove your conclusion. It doesn't prove that there is no link; it only proves that it isn't an absolute direct causation. It could mean that it affects probability and that different results were the luck of the draw. It could mean that there are other contributing factors (that we don't understand).
I'm curious what you mean by profiling? Is there anything to be done aside from hasty generalisations which would just mean body search every dark-skinned guy with a beard? I don't mean to troll, it's just that I genuinely doubt the efficacy of profiling.
I have heard that in Israel, they have security that does a fair bit of profiling. However, they supposedly profile based on behavior, not ethnicity. Profiling strictly based on skin color is as stupid as completely random checking of grandma and her 4 year old granddaughter. Reasonable profiling that has correlation to real threats is not a bad idea, but blanket profiling brown people is not only discriminatory, it's not going to be effective.
The guy built that company up from a two-bit hole in the wall operation into one of the largest computer empires known to man. He could fairly ask for a billion bucks a year as a salary and he would deserve it all!
He did it all by himself, with no employees or investors. The self-made man rises again.
I agree that Blizzard wasn't a pioneer, but to claim that they succeeded due to marketing is selling Blizzard short.
What originally made Blizzard great was their attention to detail, production value, and they didn't cater exclusively to high-end gaming PCs. They had quality art, sound, music, refined gameplay, placing impressive (for the time) video cut scenes, lots of whimsy and flavor, and were just overall solid games that ran stable.
Even their instruction manuals were well made and aesthetically pleasing. Their games showed they cared about the craft of games, and their presentation.
They still have some of these qualities, but over time there seems to be an increasing amount of the business becoming prioritized over the craft.
Saying Blizzard was all about marketing is like saying Apple's success was all marketing. I'm not a big fan of Apple, but they obviously did more than market.
Remember the "Got Milk" campaign? One of the largest and most recognized ad campaigns in history and milk sales went DOWN while it was going on. It did more for the stars that showed up in the adds than it ever did for the milk industry.
But just imagine how much more the sales would have gone down without the campaign!
Me: immunity to venom, like the mongoose? Nature: nah, here take forward-facing eyes, and just be careful. NEXT!
Bullshit, this is stupid. It's a mockery of Nature.
Nature doesn't "pick"" mutations based on a cost benefit analysis. They just happen by chance. If they work and allow the species to last longer, then it gets passed on. It doesn't matter if it's the best answer. It's not like sickle cell anemia is the ideal way to prevent malaria...
I've become much more libertarian since I came to slashdot. Nothing like having people tell you you're an idiot simply because you disagree with them on policy. Yeah, liberal elitism has turned me completely away from anything "socialism". Rarely have the people in ivory towers ever figured the world as it really is, only as it should be.
That's funny... You are turned off by "liberal elitism" because of the name calling and condescending attitude from their "ivory towers", because they aren't the ones that have figured out the "way the world really is"?
Awe. The pirates are screwing over the artists. Why should they expect anyone to treat them with respect when they're blatantly stealing from the artists? If they were betrayed, they got what they deserved. There's no honor among thieves.
If you think that it's pirates that are the ones screwing over the artists, then I think you should become better informed as to how this industry works... The damage done to artists by pirates is not only debatable in itself, its a drop in the bucket compared to what the labels do to artists.
I've heard (or experienced) good things from Sin and Punishment, Muramusa: The Demon Blade, No More Heroes, Resident Evil 4 (even if it was a remake), Xenoblade Chronicles, Tatsunoko vs Capcom, The Last Story, Red Steel 2, and Zack & Wiki.
I have a Wii and 360. I don't play either much anymore, but the only games I played much of on the 360 was Rock Band games. Other than that, it was just for the NetFlix or Xfinity apps, which I stopped using when I concluded what a waste of money the Gold membership was just to do those.
That's it—not the absolute number of injuries/fatalities, but the rate. It's very high, at least around my area, considering the relatively small number of cyclist miles ridden on roads.
But would the injury rate remain the same if the number of drivers was reduced and the number of bicyclists was increased? Does their rarity contribute to the lack of awareness that cars have for them? Would an increase in bicyclists help justify extra costs of building extra safety measures for bicyclists (suck as bike lanes, perhaps even ones divided from other traffic?)
Strawman much? I certainly am not an ends justify the means type, and I am vehemently against an authoritarian rule. In fact, I wasn't even voicing my opinions on the parts that someone might want to change.
It's just that your argument that you can't change one part without destroying the whole thing is complete and utter crap.
The nerve of calling someone "ignorant", simply because they were... Ignorance is lacking knowledge. Why do people get so upset by being called out on what they don't know? Every human being is ignorant to the vast majority of human knowledge. Ignorance isn't the problem. Denial of ignorance is.
Don't people understand?? You can't weaken/nullify/sidestep one part of the Constitution you disagree with without also having an equal destructive effect on the parts you do like.
Either all of it is valid as it was written, or none of it is and the USA has become an authoritarian State where "Constitutional Rights", "Rule of Law", and/or any other limits to what government can do are meaningless and empty words & concepts.
Exactly! It's like computer software! If one feature turns out to be a bad feature, you can't simply remove the one feature! You must remove them all!
We simply can't decide that the society has evolved and that parts must change! This isn't a living document! If we change anything, we are going to fall into chaos, fascism, and communism!
For every person saying that "they'll take my guns from my cold dead hands", you've got another who won't be satisfied until every gun is rounded up and destroyed. The people in the middle aren't very vocal.
I'm in the middle, vocal, and tend to get rabid opposition from both sides... there's no compromise, especially from pro-gun folks...
Don't know about your country, but in mine they cannot force you to fork over the pin number. So the first thing when the police comes knocking is to turn your cell off or simply remove the battery pack.
They covered this in the article that I linked, that you are replying to....
From the article I linked:
"If you think a password lock will keep your content secure, think again. Major phone manufacturers will generally help police officers with tricks to get around the passcodes."
Slashdot Mirror
But "BSDy" doesn't roll off the tongue as well!
Atheism is not a "tenet". It is simply the lack of faith in the supernatural.
A tenet may be a belief. Lack of faith in the supernatural (God, gods, whatever) is the central tenet of atheism. Like it or not, the thing that atheism has in common with religion is that both are belief systems.
Atheists don't sit around actively disbelieving; they just don't actively believe. The thing that most theists tend to not understand about atheists is that we mentally categorize the invisible man in the sky with things like fairies, unicorns, and the modern moderate republican.
I've never had someone "with different background and views" get upset when I've asked them how they're doing, or complimented them, or asked them for suggestions or ...
If you converse rather than proselytize I don't think you'll run into too many problems.
Ps - it's funny how the word "atheist" has been co-opted. The prefix "a" means "not applicable", or "not concerned with". Someone who is actually a-theitical is someone who is not interested in theology. The word has become most often used as a disguise by people who are very much interested, who are anti-God. If they described were honest enough to use accurate wording for their cause, the Atheist League would be called the Antichrist League. I wonder why they aren't honest, why they lie by labeling themselves as people not interested in the topic.
In my experience as an atheist (and someone who knows many atheists), atheists tend to not care about religion or gods until religious types try to stereotype or demonize them (as you are doing), try to impose their religious based morality on others, or do terrible things in the name of their beliefs in the supernatural.
More often than not, the "persecution" and "atheists-agenda" that Christians face from atheists is from those who stand up to Christians bullying others.
No, not really "dickish"?
Aren't they obligated (by law) to protect their trademark, or risk loosing it?
IANAL but as I recall it, you can only keep a trademark if you actively protect it. If you don't, you may loose your right to keep it.
- Jesper
If that's true, then the Church of Scientology should sue Canonical for using their trademarked tactic of suing people for negatively or critically referring to their trademarked property.
Ok, they Scientology didn't really "trademark" the tactic, but the have employed it a hell of a lot. We also see politicians invoke the DMCAA in order try to remove embarrassing information and media about them.
We now have an unprecedented ability to disseminate information to the world, and so many people that try to make sure it doesn't happen.
IE 9 requires at least Vista. Making IE 10 the requirement means you can't even use Vista, you have to have at least Windows 7 (or switch browsers).
Why do modern military planes even have a canopy anymore? The vast majority of interesting visual information gets presented to the pilot via HUD anyway. The actual physical scenery amounts to nothing more than a distraction. Ditch the canopy, stick the pilot deeper inside the plane, and present everything as a video feed.
Because the real world is in Super-Duper-Ultra-HD-X-treme (TM).
Until you can figure out why cigarettes causes lung cancer in on person, and not his neighbors who smoked similar amounts, it seems rather more likely that it wasn't the cigarettes that had anything to do with the cancer.
Frankly, I am not informed enough to have an opinion in this matter. However, even someone as ignorant in the matter as myself can see that your fact does not prove your conclusion. It doesn't prove that there is no link; it only proves that it isn't an absolute direct causation. It could mean that it affects probability and that different results were the luck of the draw. It could mean that there are other contributing factors (that we don't understand).
I'm curious what you mean by profiling? Is there anything to be done aside from hasty generalisations which would just mean body search every dark-skinned guy with a beard? I don't mean to troll, it's just that I genuinely doubt the efficacy of profiling.
I have heard that in Israel, they have security that does a fair bit of profiling. However, they supposedly profile based on behavior, not ethnicity. Profiling strictly based on skin color is as stupid as completely random checking of grandma and her 4 year old granddaughter. Reasonable profiling that has correlation to real threats is not a bad idea, but blanket profiling brown people is not only discriminatory, it's not going to be effective.
The guy built that company up from a two-bit hole in the wall operation into one of the largest computer empires known to man. He could fairly ask for a billion bucks a year as a salary and he would deserve it all!
He did it all by himself, with no employees or investors. The self-made man rises again.
And in the future, we will no longer be able to see all these terrible things that Obama is doing on new Panasonic plasma TVs!
I agree that Blizzard wasn't a pioneer, but to claim that they succeeded due to marketing is selling Blizzard short.
What originally made Blizzard great was their attention to detail, production value, and they didn't cater exclusively to high-end gaming PCs. They had quality art, sound, music, refined gameplay, placing impressive (for the time) video cut scenes, lots of whimsy and flavor, and were just overall solid games that ran stable.
Even their instruction manuals were well made and aesthetically pleasing. Their games showed they cared about the craft of games, and their presentation.
They still have some of these qualities, but over time there seems to be an increasing amount of the business becoming prioritized over the craft.
Saying Blizzard was all about marketing is like saying Apple's success was all marketing. I'm not a big fan of Apple, but they obviously did more than market.
Remember the "Got Milk" campaign? One of the largest and most recognized ad campaigns in history and milk sales went DOWN while it was going on. It did more for the stars that showed up in the adds than it ever did for the milk industry.
But just imagine how much more the sales would have gone down without the campaign!
Me: immunity to venom, like the mongoose?
Nature: nah, here take forward-facing eyes, and just be careful. NEXT!
Bullshit, this is stupid. It's a mockery of Nature.
Nature doesn't "pick"" mutations based on a cost benefit analysis. They just happen by chance. If they work and allow the species to last longer, then it gets passed on. It doesn't matter if it's the best answer. It's not like sickle cell anemia is the ideal way to prevent malaria...
I've become much more libertarian since I came to slashdot. Nothing like having people tell you you're an idiot simply because you disagree with them on policy. Yeah, liberal elitism has turned me completely away from anything "socialism". Rarely have the people in ivory towers ever figured the world as it really is, only as it should be.
That's funny... You are turned off by "liberal elitism" because of the name calling and condescending attitude from their "ivory towers", because they aren't the ones that have figured out the "way the world really is"?
Where to begin?
Awe. The pirates are screwing over the artists. Why should they expect anyone to treat them with respect when they're blatantly stealing from the artists? If they were betrayed, they got what they deserved. There's no honor among thieves.
If you think that it's pirates that are the ones screwing over the artists, then I think you should become better informed as to how this industry works... The damage done to artists by pirates is not only debatable in itself, its a drop in the bucket compared to what the labels do to artists.
I've heard (or experienced) good things from Sin and Punishment, Muramusa: The Demon Blade, No More Heroes, Resident Evil 4 (even if it was a remake), Xenoblade Chronicles, Tatsunoko vs Capcom, The Last Story, Red Steel 2, and Zack & Wiki.
I have a Wii and 360. I don't play either much anymore, but the only games I played much of on the 360 was Rock Band games. Other than that, it was just for the NetFlix or Xfinity apps, which I stopped using when I concluded what a waste of money the Gold membership was just to do those.
Mine is sitting and collecting dust... but so is my 360, and my Rock Band instruments. What's your point?
That's it—not the absolute number of injuries/fatalities, but the rate. It's very high, at least around my area, considering the relatively small number of cyclist miles ridden on roads.
But would the injury rate remain the same if the number of drivers was reduced and the number of bicyclists was increased? Does their rarity contribute to the lack of awareness that cars have for them? Would an increase in bicyclists help justify extra costs of building extra safety measures for bicyclists (suck as bike lanes, perhaps even ones divided from other traffic?)
Strawman much? I certainly am not an ends justify the means type, and I am vehemently against an authoritarian rule. In fact, I wasn't even voicing my opinions on the parts that someone might want to change.
It's just that your argument that you can't change one part without destroying the whole thing is complete and utter crap.
The nerve of calling someone "ignorant", simply because they were... Ignorance is lacking knowledge. Why do people get so upset by being called out on what they don't know? Every human being is ignorant to the vast majority of human knowledge. Ignorance isn't the problem. Denial of ignorance is.
Don't people understand?? You can't weaken/nullify/sidestep one part of the Constitution you disagree with without also having an equal destructive effect on the parts you do like.
Either all of it is valid as it was written, or none of it is and the USA has become an authoritarian State where "Constitutional Rights", "Rule of Law", and/or any other limits to what government can do are meaningless and empty words & concepts.
Exactly! It's like computer software! If one feature turns out to be a bad feature, you can't simply remove the one feature! You must remove them all!
We simply can't decide that the society has evolved and that parts must change! This isn't a living document! If we change anything, we are going to fall into chaos, fascism, and communism!
For every person saying that "they'll take my guns from my cold dead hands", you've got another who won't be satisfied until every gun is rounded up and destroyed. The people in the middle aren't very vocal.
I'm in the middle, vocal, and tend to get rabid opposition from both sides... there's no compromise, especially from pro-gun folks...
I think the answer is obvious. We cut you in half.
Whichever land gives up its claim in order to save you is your true motherland.
You consider ubiquitous to be a 5 dollar word?
.
.
Wow.
I have to agree... I thought the word was ubiquitous...
Don't know about your country, but in mine they cannot force you to fork over the pin number. So the first thing when the police comes knocking is to turn your cell off or simply remove the battery pack.
They covered this in the article that I linked, that you are replying to....
From the article I linked:
"If you think a password lock will keep your content secure, think again. Major phone manufacturers will generally help police officers with tricks to get around the passcodes."