I can't help but wonder why everyone lately is attacking Mormonism. My suspicion is that people are jealous about the whole "multiple wives" thing. I don't blame them. I've walked the streets of Salt Lake City, (just passing through, absolutely true-story, by the way) and stayed at the Best Western, the 10 or 11 story one down-town? While there, I walked to a Chinese restaurant on a Saturday night, about 8 or 10 blocks to the south.
Along the way, I started to count the drop-dead-gorgeous, movie-star caliber girls I passed on the sidewalk, and lost count somewhere around 25. At the restaurant, I saw a woman who was dining with some of her friends, she looked like a cross between Sarah Michelle Gellar and Neve Campbell. I caught myself thinking "screw California, I wish they all could be Salt Lake City... girls!"
I think the attacks on Mormonism (if that's the term) are mainly by guys, and rooted in jealousy, and I can't say I'm surprised. Even toyed with the idea of converting myself. If I'd known that by converting, I'd be allowed not one, but several of these stunning cuties, I would have done it on the spot!
Actually, even if they have access to the terminal, they may not have access to the data if you have separate logins... of course, I tried something like this with my ex, once; it didn't work out real well. Separate computers turned out to be easier.
Of course, this only works if you're running a real OS. If you use Misro$oft Win/DOS, well, best of luck.
Even if your SO insists on having access to your user account and password, unless she's *NIX savvy you can always bury stuff in/usr/local/bin/whatever_arcane_sounding_subdirectory, make root the owner, and set permissions to rwx------.
If you're really worried, put the data on a separate partition, and use/etc/fstab to keep it from mounting, make an alias from the mount command to a shellscript that quietly wipes that partition, and overwrites it with garbage, unless you mount it with the correct alternate command...
Yeah, guess I'm a little paranoid.
~Hal
If you're worried about your privacy, don't forget to rm -rf/home/[username]/.macromedia everytime you logout.
rm -rf/home/user/Important\ Data\ I\ Don\'t\ Want\ Anyone\ Else\ To\ Have
is easier to execute on localhost.localdomain than on Googe's machines.
Before you mention forensic data recovery, consider the less-oft used option to the rm command: --sledgehammer.
This can be run on your home-box, whereas it is much harder to do to Google's servers strategically placed in EMP-Hardened underground bomb-shelters.
The point was and is, just as when the Catholic Church was considered the guardian of all knowledge, (at least in Europe,) and an observation was made which pointed out that one of their stances was incorrect, (by being in direct contravention to what was observed,) they resisted, tormented those who disagreed, but ultimately had to revise their position when it became obvious they were wrong; so it is today.
Someone like me points out a theory has a problem, but that theory is so entrenched in the minds of its adherents that people try to shout him down, rather than listen, or instead make patronizing remarks. Like yours. The nice thing about science though, is that eventually, observation TRUMPS hypothesis, no matter how dearly cherished, so I don't really need to argue this point, I can simply wait.
The tip-off to the rip-off, as they once said, about the Big Bang Theory is that it requires the suspension of the laws of physics at the beginning to work. There are several other important problems, but that's the most glaring, IMAHO.
So I'll put it to you. What is the Schwarzschild radius of an object with the mass of... oh, say... the entire observable universe? (According to Wikipedia, the Schwarzschild Radius of an object with as small a mass as our sun is 3km. The SR of an entire galaxy, to say nothing of... everything, would be substantially larger.)
How exactly is it that what we observe today got from being smaller than the head of a pin to LARGER than that? Oh, and then there's the CMB. Interestingly enough, if that's radiant energy from the supposed "Bang", how exactly did the Earth get IN FRONT OF IT, for our radio-telescopes to be in position to intercept it? If you can't understand what I mean, try this experiment: fire a gun AWAY from you, and try to run in front of and CATCH the bullet. Since the bullet travels hundreds (if not thousands) of miles per hour faster than you can, unless you started out in front of it, catching it would be, well, a tricky proposition.
Young Universe Cosmologists (I used the wrong word before, sorry,) contend the CMB is energy thrown out at the moment of the "Bang" right? (Perhaps I misunderstood.) We'd have to be IN FRONT of the expanding sphere, or on the surface of the light-cone, as it were, to see it. This would require the matter which would one day become the Earth, to have travelled FASTER than light, wouldn't it?
Clearly you misunderstood the last part of my post, which might explain your patronizing tone. I meant, (by "allowed") whatever experiments it is PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE to conduct, not what some PERSON SAYS they may or mayn't. My fault I guess for trying to be subtle.
I guess I'm the fool though, expecting rational discourse on/. Honestly, I usually don't read the comments, I come here to read interesting and/or funny tech stories, and when I post, usually I'm just venting. Perhaps you think I am a Creationist, and that's where your attitude comes from. Honestly, I don't really care, but I'm not a Creationist. The point I was trying to make, though failing, in your case, apparently, was that Bangists are really just Creationists, but they've replaced the characters in the story. It's still the same story, if you can see it objectively.
I believe the universe had no beginning, will have no end, and either way it doesn't matter because the entire span of my life is so short I'll never know either way. Our entire species has lived, and shall die in less than the blink of a cosmological eye. We can argue all we like, but I'd rather just go out for ice-cream.
How hard is it to use a 4 digit decimal to represent the year? Watch this: Decimal 2010. This should work until 9999 A.D., by which time, I think it's safe to say, no computer hardware or software in use now will still be in use then.
Okay, admittedly, there may be a few machines still running *NIX but... but that's really a long, long, LONG way off.
~Hal
When they manage to spot a body in space that, by the very best methods they can use to attain the age of very distant objects, which seems to be, oh... say, about 22 billion years old, they're going to scratch their heads and mutter, "well... that's odd".
As we observe objects at greater and greater distances, they have to keep revising their age-estimate of the universe. In the end, I think that they will eventually conclude the universe is infinitely vast, and infinitely old. This of course implies that either the all mass in the universe has infinitesimal density, or there is infinite mass, distributed more or less evenly in infinite space, of which we can only observe a small portion.
Difficult as this may be to contemplate, I believe that since, mathematically, n*INFINITY=INFINITY, for all positive real 'n', it is possible for x to equal infinity, y to equal infinity, and because infinity is an EXCLUDED endpoint of the real number system, and therefore NOT a real number, x can be UNEQUAL to y. So we can have infinite mass, distributed in an infinite volume, in a universe with neither beginning nor end.
What amazes me is how physicists, looking down their noses at the literal interpretation of the various creation myths, (such as the Young Earth crowd,) while embracing a theory (which is no more than a belief, really, with a different authority appealed to) that the universe was manufactured by a supreme particle. They've changed the details of the story, but for some reason, it seems people just cannot manage to wrap their heads around the idea of there being something without a "before there was".
So if they are allowed and able, in the end to do their experiments, I think they're going to get some truly baffling results.
~Hal
Don't confuse the VISIBLE universe and the ENTIRE universe.
They're not necessarily the same thing.
It is an implicit requirement that if they encode it, there must be a way for the "authorized consumer" to decode it, or no one will buy it. Furthermore, if that can be done, a way around it can be found. With sufficient interest in the product, and sufficient spite generated by the continued (nonsensical) implied accusations made by the various AA's words and deeds, that they consider their customers are thieves, any such restriction will be worked around. By trying to stop it, with the next annoying, and inevitably pointless scheme, all they do is encourage people to find ways to trip it up, or bypass it completely.
Maybe if they go far enough, people will get fed up and boycott their products. Imagine if we did the Great American Smoke Out, only with DVD/CD purchases. Show them we will not accept this kind of nonsense, and even go so far as to demand an end to region coding and encryption on DVD's, as it's pointless.
BTW, I found a great workaround combo for my music collection: jamando.com. Legal to download, and free too, (by and large) Creative Commons released content, on Jamando and sister sites, and I download in ogg and/or vorbis format formatted files, so I don't have to worry about someone else restricting my access, or ability to use the "content" at some point in the future.
I agree with previous poster who advocated refreshing your music/movie collection periodically, however, I want to retian the rights to listen to that which I've paid for. Getting the music under the CC license, and downloading and storing it in a non-patent-encumbered form assures me I will have access to my files again and again throughout the years.
~Hal
So let me get this straight - your defense of the system as is, is that if someone gives money away, and as a result, in effect takes away from me, MY recourse is to give money away TOO? Sounds way too much like cutting off the nose to spite the face. What you call 'selfish' is dictated by nature. My objection is that I should be able to KEEP what I earn. I think people who DON'T earn are waaay too eager to have those who do "not be selfish", especially when that benefits THEM. How about this as a proposal. How about the government stops stealing my money to give it away to whomever it favors, and stops allowing the same action on the part of others who choose to support people whose livelihood is predicated on an out-and-out fabrication? Just as an idea. I know it'll never happen, the parasites are entrenched, and it is illegal to kill them.
Sorry, I think you're wrong.
I'm not going to bother quoting the constitution or any laws, because I frankly don't have the energy to worry about that which the members of the very government whose existence it authorizes ignore it at will.
However, I am going to dispute the point that you're not forced to go to a church. When the federal gov. hands out money (which it collects from NON-VOLUNTARY taxes, pay them or GO TO JAIL) through the "faith based programs" BS, OR when it allows organizations (churches and such) to earn money and not pay taxes on them like any other business (which is what they truly are, religion businesses) OR when a person can dodge having to pay his/her fair share of the tax burden, (transferring that burden to EVERYONE ELSE) because he/she contributed money to a, for instance, CHURCH, that is, in effect, forcing me to give money to them.
Let me simplify this. You and I both share the rent bill, as required because we both make 1000 dollars per month. YOU decide to give money to your girlfriend, and the rules state I now have to cover a part of your share of the rent because money you gave to your gf cannot be counted against your income. You gave her 500 bucks. Now my income is 1000, and yours is (in effect) 500. Consequently, 2/3 of the rent falls on ME to pay. Do you see where I'm going with this?
I'm just tired of arguing this point. America has freedom of religion IN NAME ONLY. As long as people are compelled to support organized superstition against their will, there IS NO FREEDOM. Simply because you don't have to GO to church, doesn't mean you are free. And just because they're not supporting any one SPECIFIC sect DOESN'T make what they do NOT, IN FACT, A BLANKET ENDORSEMENT OF IDIOCY.
AT&T in this case,WOULD be hurt by this. They could certainly make the case that the price they place on minutes reflects the fact that they know people will not use ALL the minutes, and have adjusted the price, DOWNWARDS, accordingly. If this goes through, expect to see the cost per minute or whatever go UP at AT&T, and for the other Phone-Card companies to follow suit.
The consumer is the one who gets screwed in the end. Always.
I would rather use code with 1 line of high-level language, requiring three lines of comments, than 10 lines of high-level language code, with no comments, because 99% of the time, the MACHINE is what's going to be reading the code, in compiled binary form. At compilation time, as I think everyone on/. knows, (or should) all those comments get sent Express Mail to/dev/null, and the result is usually more compact final-product machine code, which executes faster, using less time and processor power. The other 1% of the time, when it is I who am actually looking at it, I don't mind reading a few sentences from the previous coder telling me what he was TRYING to accomplish with that function.
Protect their culture, mandel? e25,000 FINE? I think that's kinda overdoing it, don't you? And when did this become about culture? Did you read the article? The law supersedes one from the middle of last century which SPECIFICALLY protected them, the revision is aimed at keeping members of growing religious minorities in Ireland from having to hear... gasp... something which might offend their religious sensitivities. This is bad news, just hopefully it's so bad that it will soon be reversed. Begs the question, though... don't they have bigger things to worry about there?
The members of various governmental bodies in the US are able to dodge being accused of violations of the separation of church and state due to loose wording of the original law. Many people will point out that since they are not endorsing any one specific sect, that they can say and do things, (prayers before legislative sessions, swearing on the "Bible", the christmas tree on public property, put up, maintained, illuminated, etc., with taxpayer dollars,... the list goes on and on,) without crossing that line. The founding fathers should have made it "freedom FROM religion," which is I think what they meant, to get free of the tyranny of idiocy, when they wrote "freedom OF religion". They fumbled a little on that one. Stricter wording would have saved us from a lot of this nonsense for which we are all now paying.
BUT this whole conversation was about Irish blaspheme, wasn't it? I always wanted to go see Ireland, but God damn it, I guess I can't, now.
Wouldn't want to be fined for muttering something which might OFFEND someone.
Simple, Mr Photon. They think it's okay because someone told them that someone told THEM that the authors of the Big Book said that the Invisible, Magical Man in the Sky (TM), said they were to ensure everyone agreed and believed in HIM, or HE would cause grave coincidences to come to pass. So you see, that makes it perfectly acceptable.
Many Irish people are Catholics, as I understand it. In many of their religious services, as I understand it, and in their "bible", allegations are made which I would think would be considered blasphemous to at least one group, at a minimum, which fits the definition covered by the law. Since these claims are at the core of the Christian and Catholic religions, (Jesus was God, which I think the Jews, (whose religion is still practiced world-wide, and which faith has been around over twice as long as Christianity/Catholicism,) consider blasphemous AND heretical) I guess that means no more services, bible studies, etc. in Ireland. What a shame, and what a loss that would be. Could a cross-shaped building be considered, by reference, blasphemous? If so, guess all those churches and cathedrals have to come down.
What about when two religions are mutually exclusive? Don't the protestants consider the Pope to be the Antichrist? And wouldn't Catholics chafe at being told their spiritual leader is "the Devil (TM)" ?
Actually, I don't think that's a good idea. Using different shapes might not be bad, I just object to your particular choices. See, you want to use a square, a plus, and a circle. Next thing you know someone will run one and say "I got confused, man, I thought it was a triangle!" (Since so many people nowadays use game controllers with these same shapes.) Let's not go confusing people.
Does the Irish law specify WHAT constitutes a defense? The Guardian article states it's any religion with a substantial number of adherents. What about NEAR blaspheme, such as "Goram it!"? Is that covered? What about "Oh golly gosh!"? What is considered a verbal affront to the FSM? If you say, "That's marinara!" does he smite you with meatballs? Doesn't Ireland have some sort of notion of free speech?
It's odd, because when it comes to religion, all kidding aside, Ireland had a track-record of being the most progressive and forward thinking of all the mainly Catholic, European countries. For instance, Ireland is one of the only, if not THE ONE AND ONLY Catholic country in Europe which never decided to evict or murder its Jews. And now this. How the open-minded have fallen. I wonder how long this can stand?
No, I believe that's the book on having good and enjoyable (and not just a little bit athletic) sex. Seems odd a country with a VERY famous and old How-To manual for good sex would shy away from it like this. What is going on in India? Another/. story mentioned engineers as being a fairly conservative lot, and there is a lot of chatter on the tubes about engineers having to move abroad (to, for instance, India,) to get good jobs. I wonder if all these phenomena could be related.
How about a hydrophobic coating on the lenses, or... put the stoplights inside the cars. A system would have to be come-up-with for signalling the cars in a fool-proof (or at least fool-resistant) fashion, letting a car in any given lane know when it is approaching a red-light, and indicating this to the driver. Not sure how that would work, but it allows some interesting possibilities, like telling a car the light is red based on the car's speed and position, (knowing the car can't make it in time), reducing collisions at intersections. The same tech could be put in busses and trucks to let them know when a train is approaching. Wouldn't have to be expensive either.
Slashdot Mirror
Along the way, I started to count the drop-dead-gorgeous, movie-star caliber girls I passed on the sidewalk, and lost count somewhere around 25. At the restaurant, I saw a woman who was dining with some of her friends, she looked like a cross between Sarah Michelle Gellar and Neve Campbell. I caught myself thinking "screw California, I wish they all could be Salt Lake City... girls!"
I think the attacks on Mormonism (if that's the term) are mainly by guys, and rooted in jealousy, and I can't say I'm surprised. Even toyed with the idea of converting myself. If I'd known that by converting, I'd be allowed not one, but several of these stunning cuties, I would have done it on the spot!
Actually, even if they have access to the terminal, they may not have access to the data if you have separate logins... of course, I tried something like this with my ex, once; it didn't work out real well. Separate computers turned out to be easier.
Of course, this only works if you're running a real OS. If you use Misro$oft Win/DOS, well, best of luck.
Even if your SO insists on having access to your user account and password, unless she's *NIX savvy you can always bury stuff in /usr/local/bin/whatever_arcane_sounding_subdirectory, make root the owner, and set permissions to rwx------.
If you're really worried, put the data on a separate partition, and use /etc/fstab to keep it from mounting, make an alias from the mount command to a shellscript that quietly wipes that partition, and overwrites it with garbage, unless you mount it with the correct alternate command...
Yeah, guess I'm a little paranoid.
~Hal
If you're worried about your privacy, don't forget to rm -rf /home/[username]/.macromedia everytime you logout.
is easier to execute on localhost.localdomain than on Googe's machines.
Before you mention forensic data recovery, consider the less-oft used option to the rm command: --sledgehammer. This can be run on your home-box, whereas it is much harder to do to Google's servers strategically placed in EMP-Hardened underground bomb-shelters.
Power is nothing without control.
~Hal
(Sigh.)
The point was and is, just as when the Catholic Church was considered the guardian of all knowledge, (at least in Europe,) and an observation was made which pointed out that one of their stances was incorrect, (by being in direct contravention to what was observed,) they resisted, tormented those who disagreed, but ultimately had to revise their position when it became obvious they were wrong; so it is today.
Someone like me points out a theory has a problem, but that theory is so entrenched in the minds of its adherents that people try to shout him down, rather than listen, or instead make patronizing remarks. Like yours. The nice thing about science though, is that eventually, observation TRUMPS hypothesis, no matter how dearly cherished, so I don't really need to argue this point, I can simply wait.
The tip-off to the rip-off, as they once said, about the Big Bang Theory is that it requires the suspension of the laws of physics at the beginning to work. There are several other important problems, but that's the most glaring, IMAHO.
So I'll put it to you. What is the Schwarzschild radius of an object with the mass of... oh, say... the entire observable universe? (According to Wikipedia, the Schwarzschild Radius of an object with as small a mass as our sun is 3km. The SR of an entire galaxy, to say nothing of... everything, would be substantially larger.)
How exactly is it that what we observe today got from being smaller than the head of a pin to LARGER than that? Oh, and then there's the CMB. Interestingly enough, if that's radiant energy from the supposed "Bang", how exactly did the Earth get IN FRONT OF IT, for our radio-telescopes to be in position to intercept it? If you can't understand what I mean, try this experiment: fire a gun AWAY from you, and try to run in front of and CATCH the bullet. Since the bullet travels hundreds (if not thousands) of miles per hour faster than you can, unless you started out in front of it, catching it would be, well, a tricky proposition.
Young Universe Cosmologists (I used the wrong word before, sorry,) contend the CMB is energy thrown out at the moment of the "Bang" right? (Perhaps I misunderstood.) We'd have to be IN FRONT of the expanding sphere, or on the surface of the light-cone, as it were, to see it. This would require the matter which would one day become the Earth, to have travelled FASTER than light, wouldn't it?
Clearly you misunderstood the last part of my post, which might explain your patronizing tone. I meant, (by "allowed") whatever experiments it is PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE to conduct, not what some PERSON SAYS they may or mayn't. My fault I guess for trying to be subtle.
I guess I'm the fool though, expecting rational discourse on /. Honestly, I usually don't read the comments, I come here to read interesting and/or funny tech stories, and when I post, usually I'm just venting. Perhaps you think I am a Creationist, and that's where your attitude comes from. Honestly, I don't really care, but I'm not a Creationist. The point I was trying to make, though failing, in your case, apparently, was that Bangists are really just Creationists, but they've replaced the characters in the story. It's still the same story, if you can see it objectively.
I believe the universe had no beginning, will have no end, and either way it doesn't matter because the entire span of my life is so short I'll never know either way. Our entire species has lived, and shall die in less than the blink of a cosmological eye. We can argue all we like, but I'd rather just go out for ice-cream.
Okay, admittedly, there may be a few machines still running *NIX but... but that's really a long, long, LONG way off.
~Hal
As we observe objects at greater and greater distances, they have to keep revising their age-estimate of the universe. In the end, I think that they will eventually conclude the universe is infinitely vast, and infinitely old. This of course implies that either the all mass in the universe has infinitesimal density, or there is infinite mass, distributed more or less evenly in infinite space, of which we can only observe a small portion.
Difficult as this may be to contemplate, I believe that since, mathematically, n*INFINITY=INFINITY, for all positive real 'n', it is possible for x to equal infinity, y to equal infinity, and because infinity is an EXCLUDED endpoint of the real number system, and therefore NOT a real number, x can be UNEQUAL to y. So we can have infinite mass, distributed in an infinite volume, in a universe with neither beginning nor end.
What amazes me is how physicists, looking down their noses at the literal interpretation of the various creation myths, (such as the Young Earth crowd,) while embracing a theory (which is no more than a belief, really, with a different authority appealed to) that the universe was manufactured by a supreme particle. They've changed the details of the story, but for some reason, it seems people just cannot manage to wrap their heads around the idea of there being something without a "before there was".
So if they are allowed and able, in the end to do their experiments, I think they're going to get some truly baffling results.
~Hal
Don't confuse the VISIBLE universe and the ENTIRE universe.
They're not necessarily the same thing.
Maybe if they go far enough, people will get fed up and boycott their products. Imagine if we did the Great American Smoke Out, only with DVD/CD purchases. Show them we will not accept this kind of nonsense, and even go so far as to demand an end to region coding and encryption on DVD's, as it's pointless.
BTW, I found a great workaround combo for my music collection: jamando.com. Legal to download, and free too, (by and large) Creative Commons released content, on Jamando and sister sites, and I download in ogg and/or vorbis format formatted files, so I don't have to worry about someone else restricting my access, or ability to use the "content" at some point in the future.
I agree with previous poster who advocated refreshing your music/movie collection periodically, however, I want to retian the rights to listen to that which I've paid for. Getting the music under the CC license, and downloading and storing it in a non-patent-encumbered form assures me I will have access to my files again and again throughout the years. ~Hal
Tenth Life.
~Hal
So let me get this straight - your defense of the system as is, is that if someone gives money away, and as a result, in effect takes away from me, MY recourse is to give money away TOO? Sounds way too much like cutting off the nose to spite the face. What you call 'selfish' is dictated by nature. My objection is that I should be able to KEEP what I earn. I think people who DON'T earn are waaay too eager to have those who do "not be selfish", especially when that benefits THEM. How about this as a proposal. How about the government stops stealing my money to give it away to whomever it favors, and stops allowing the same action on the part of others who choose to support people whose livelihood is predicated on an out-and-out fabrication? Just as an idea. I know it'll never happen, the parasites are entrenched, and it is illegal to kill them.
Let me simplify this. You and I both share the rent bill, as required because we both make 1000 dollars per month. YOU decide to give money to your girlfriend, and the rules state I now have to cover a part of your share of the rent because money you gave to your gf cannot be counted against your income. You gave her 500 bucks. Now my income is 1000, and yours is (in effect) 500. Consequently, 2/3 of the rent falls on ME to pay. Do you see where I'm going with this?
I'm just tired of arguing this point. America has freedom of religion IN NAME ONLY. As long as people are compelled to support organized superstition against their will, there IS NO FREEDOM. Simply because you don't have to GO to church, doesn't mean you are free. And just because they're not supporting any one SPECIFIC sect DOESN'T make what they do NOT, IN FACT, A BLANKET ENDORSEMENT OF IDIOCY.
The consumer is the one who gets screwed in the end. Always.
I would rather use code with 1 line of high-level language, requiring three lines of comments, than 10 lines of high-level language code, with no comments, because 99% of the time, the MACHINE is what's going to be reading the code, in compiled binary form. At compilation time, as I think everyone on /. knows, (or should) all those comments get sent Express Mail to /dev/null, and the result is usually more compact final-product machine code, which executes faster, using less time and processor power. The other 1% of the time, when it is I who am actually looking at it, I don't mind reading a few sentences from the previous coder telling me what he was TRYING to accomplish with that function.
Protect their culture, mandel? e25,000 FINE? I think that's kinda overdoing it, don't you? And when did this become about culture? Did you read the article? The law supersedes one from the middle of last century which SPECIFICALLY protected them, the revision is aimed at keeping members of growing religious minorities in Ireland from having to hear... gasp... something which might offend their religious sensitivities. This is bad news, just hopefully it's so bad that it will soon be reversed. Begs the question, though... don't they have bigger things to worry about there?
Irish lawmakers have today joined this damp, respect-free group.
Uhm... you misspelled "damned". :-)
It has nothing to do with “beliefs” that’s a straw-man word.
You can't use that word! Only WE can use that word!
BUT this whole conversation was about Irish blaspheme, wasn't it? I always wanted to go see Ireland, but God damn it, I guess I can't, now. Wouldn't want to be fined for muttering something which might OFFEND someone.
Simple, Mr Photon. They think it's okay because someone told them that someone told THEM that the authors of the Big Book said that the Invisible, Magical Man in the Sky (TM), said they were to ensure everyone agreed and believed in HIM, or HE would cause grave coincidences to come to pass. So you see, that makes it perfectly acceptable.
What about when two religions are mutually exclusive? Don't the protestants consider the Pope to be the Antichrist? And wouldn't Catholics chafe at being told their spiritual leader is "the Devil (TM)" ?
Oh gods, when will this silliness end?
Actually, I don't think that's a good idea. Using different shapes might not be bad, I just object to your particular choices. See, you want to use a square, a plus, and a circle. Next thing you know someone will run one and say "I got confused, man, I thought it was a triangle!" (Since so many people nowadays use game controllers with these same shapes.) Let's not go confusing people.
Naturally, I figured it went without saying that the system would also have to employ anti-jam and anti-spoof measures.
It's odd, because when it comes to religion, all kidding aside, Ireland had a track-record of being the most progressive and forward thinking of all the mainly Catholic, European countries. For instance, Ireland is one of the only, if not THE ONE AND ONLY Catholic country in Europe which never decided to evict or murder its Jews. And now this. How the open-minded have fallen. I wonder how long this can stand?
No, I believe that's the book on having good and enjoyable (and not just a little bit athletic) sex. Seems odd a country with a VERY famous and old How-To manual for good sex would shy away from it like this. What is going on in India? Another /. story mentioned engineers as being a fairly conservative lot, and there is a lot of chatter on the tubes about engineers having to move abroad (to, for instance, India,) to get good jobs. I wonder if all these phenomena could be related.
O (red)
O (yellow)
. (green)
How about a hydrophobic coating on the lenses, or... put the stoplights inside the cars. A system would have to be come-up-with for signalling the cars in a fool-proof (or at least fool-resistant) fashion, letting a car in any given lane know when it is approaching a red-light, and indicating this to the driver. Not sure how that would work, but it allows some interesting possibilities, like telling a car the light is red based on the car's speed and position, (knowing the car can't make it in time), reducing collisions at intersections. The same tech could be put in busses and trucks to let them know when a train is approaching. Wouldn't have to be expensive either.