Matter more than an attempt to dictate good spending habits. The credit card companies fear blow back from the price of the bitcoin moving significantly during the time it takes to formalize the transaction, which on bitcoin can be several 10s of minutes.
We have two switches around my house, and both are well used. While it's not mobile the way a 3ds is, it's fabulous for long car or airplane rides or situations where a kid is stuck waiting a long time for a parent. It has also been useful for easy, instant Mario Kart competitions.
I think the mobile nature of it could add a lot of sales to families like mine with more than one kid in the right demographic. Some really fantastic network play has broken out in the backseat of our family car.
I don't understand the outrage over Netflix changing the terms of the deal. Let's face it, this happens all the time. Sometimes it's good for a given customer, sometimes it's bad. Businesses that stand still don't survive. In this case you get your disk a little slower in some cases. Previously, they added a bunch of original content (Orange Is the New Black anyone?).
When the deal changes in such a way you don't think you are getting your money's worth, don't buy it anymore
It's easy enough to compare. It was not my last degree in sciences (others not at BYU), and I work in the field. Even during my undergraduate at BYU I had friends at several other significant universities, including MIT and Princeton. I took time off to spend a few week with each attending classes. I'm not looking at this from an isolated perspective.
I suppose this depends on a number of things, and perhaps in the end you may be right. But at the moment there really isn't a clear conflict; the conflict is more manufactured than real, especially if you see religion as a road to life happiness and not an explanation of all things. I admit that there is a certain about of dealing with ambiguity that is required. Frankly, I tend to be much more of an agnostic or a deist than your average Christian. I tend to believe that my life is mine to live, there is such a thing as a good way to live life from a happiness perspective, and my religion provides some guidance along those lines, but ultimately I have to figure it out for my own life
So far as science is concerned I tend to think that we are very, very far from a complete understanding of the universe. There are so many things that we simply don't understand that I don't worry too much about conflict between the possibility of the existence of a God and what science is telling me. The evidence is what it is, we build theories to understand and predict it, and we use those to move forward, but I don't kid myself thinking that we have a complete understanding of the world around us. We will be working for a long time yet to get there.
You could make an excellent argument you can only be clear minded about science or religion. That is to say, if your world is evidence based but you are willing to work with things where there is no evidence I think you can still be a clear minded scientist. On the other hand if you put assertions without evidence in the first place and try to work science around it you're going to have problems.
If the religion is really real, the first approach will leave the two in agreement in the end, but if it is not true you aren't really in a bad place when you can see the whole picture. If you adopt the other approach inevitably you will end up with some kind of conflict that just doesn't leave room for thinking.
Yea, I expect if you signed up for biology you tended to get over that pretty quick, or generally dislike your life. It's easier to have an irrational viewpoint about science as an English major where you don't have to face it to function each day.
At least there's one professor at BYU that believes in evolution!
I understand why it might be tempting to put BYU in a basket along with the rest of the evangelical christian universities. However, on the issue of evolution it could not be more different. I graduated from there with a degree in microbiology and my college at least evolution was the coin of the realm, just like it is in any serious biology department. I did not have a single professor that did not see evolution as you might expect a biologist to see it; as the only serious explanation of the data at hand, the only theory that works with what we know and provides valid predictions of future results. Not once did I hear even the smallest bit of credibility being given to creationism or its various variants (intelligent design, etc).
And yes, my professors were all Mormons. You might ask yourself how they square this. It turns out that while there are certainly Mormons that take a very literal reading of the bible on this issue, that is not the official church position, and there are many members that don't see it that way at all. Basically I had several professors that explained it as religion was about how to live life, science was about how life works, and we really have no idea how the two come together. The bible, while providing a lot of information to believers on a moral life, provides no real information on how the world works in any of the scientific fields.
Interestingly, many believe this is on purpose, that God has no interest in proving his existence; it's a matter of faith for a reason. Because of this He stays out of offering scientific explanations. I realize that sounds distinctly like a cope-out, but frankly it leads to a fairly rational place where you can function as a scientist an still be a Mormon. And by function I don't mean some half-way hands over eyes sort of a way, but in a real, go where the evidence takes you sort of a way.
Take it for what it's worth, but that was my experience
Funding or otherwise supporting a religion is understood to fall under the establishment clause. So when you fund something, or let it use your property, or otherwise enable it you are establishing it. The issues with this particular school is that it is publicly funded. There are many, many private, religious schools out there that teach all kinds of viewpoints including creationism that comply with one or more religious traditions. These are not in question, it is only the ones being funded by the government that are being looked at askance.
If you choose to go against any number of supreme court decisions and take a very narrow view of the meaning of the word establishment to be a strict synonym with found or start it would allow the government to effectively promote a state religion by sending it unlimited funds.
BTW, when you are reading about similar issues you will see the 'establishment clause' referenced. This is what they are talking about, saying that whatever the government is doing is supporting, funding, or otherwise establishing a religion in violation of the constitution.
Well, I often end up doing corporate in house sites where the capabilities of every machine that will access the site are known. In these kinds of cases the fallback case become much less important.
I agree with your point, however, for public sites.
Bird strikes at supersonic speeds are not the issue. You will notice that the intended refit doesn't make the canopy handle supersonic bird strikes, only bird strikes up to 400 knots, or a reasonable cruising speed. The problem they are facing is hitting birds while cruising at much slower speeds than supersonic, much closer to the ground.
Besides that, it's a horrible, horrible secret. Until just a few years ago the first five digits could be easily determined from your birthday and location of birth, leaving only 4 digits of somewhat randomness, and even that went in sequential order, giving you a pretty good guess at a much small range. To add insult to injury, whenever a company thinks they are helping you keep it secret they will ask you for the last four digits of the number, the only four digits that actually matter.
Who's to say that's not what's going on right now? I don't know if you have noticed, but building the necessary infrastructure for privately managed low earth orbit access is all the rage among a certain class of rich people.
Of course, if you can get really lucky you can find a company willing to pay California rates while you work from home in SLC. Get over 200k and live in a lower cost area. Works for me.
Well, if you wanted to really keep your energy usage down you'd grow a nitrogen fixing plant like peanuts every other year, avoiding the need for petroleum based fertilizers.
Yea, I agree it's harder today than it was then. To be fair, I usually worked during the school year, but that's not always feasible for people to do while maintaining good grades. Undergraduate some Pell grants are generally available, and some borrowing may be a necessity without any support from the parents. I don't understand the people that walk out of undergraduate with a six digit debt.
Hmm, to be clear. Neither undergrad degree was at an Ivy, they were boring state universities, workable with part time and summer work along with merit based scholarships. Her law school was at an Ivy, there is little to no financial aid available for professional degrees. Yes, I was working as an engineer by that time and had a good salary.
Tuition where I attended was pretty cheap, 5k a year or so. The wife's law school was not cheap, 24k a year. Add living expenses as needed. This was in the early/mid 90s
I struggle with this concept of it being impossible to get an education without taking on student debt. My wife and I finished four year degrees (Engineering and PolySci) and she did law school at an Ivy league with a total of 5,000 in debt. Neither set of parents paid for anything in any significant way. We got together after undergraduate and I had a real job that paid for law school for her, but otherwise it was pretty self supporting.
Lots of work was required, and probably less fun, but it is possible.
I can't stand it when evolution and religion are even mentioned in the same paragraph. They don't belong together in anyway and any question that compares them is the wrong question. Evolution is, like all scientific theories, the theory that best fits the facts we have. We then use the theory to make predictions and explanations. With a theory as proven as evolution those predictions usually turn out to be correct, but if they didn't we would add the new facts into the consideration and attempt to build a revised theory that accounted for them.
There is no belief anywhere in that process. It doesn't matter if you believe that evolution represents some kind of absolute truth or not. The only valid question is whether there is a better explanation for the facts that we have, and so far there most certainly isn't. If we start ignoring the facts because we believe we know something more that the facts on the ground indicate we stop being able to progress in our understanding of how the world works; we stop being able to do science.
Is this a conflict with a religious belief? I suppose that depends on whether your religious belief requires that you stop trying to understand the world around you. A well thought out religion would make no such requirement, but would instead stick to moral behavior and ways to live life to enhance personal happiness. Believing that helping out a recently laid-off neighbor will enhance your personal happiness in no way contradicts being able to function as a working scientist.
Any question that involves whether you 'believe' in a scientific theory is the wrong question. You don't believe in them, you simply evaluate their accuracy and use them to answer questions going forward.
I once worked for a defense subcontractor that produced a component for the cruise missile. Remember that the electronics in these things have to be nuclear hardened, which is tricky stuff.
In addition, every component on any circuit board is tracked independently, testing is really brutal, and all electronics assembly is done under clean room conditions.
I suppose it can be really inconvenient for a cruise missile to take a wrong turn just outside of Albuquerque
Slashdot Mirror
Matter more than an attempt to dictate good spending habits. The credit card companies fear blow back from the price of the bitcoin moving significantly during the time it takes to formalize the transaction, which on bitcoin can be several 10s of minutes.
We have two switches around my house, and both are well used. While it's not mobile the way a 3ds is, it's fabulous for long car or airplane rides or situations where a kid is stuck waiting a long time for a parent. It has also been useful for easy, instant Mario Kart competitions.
I think the mobile nature of it could add a lot of sales to families like mine with more than one kid in the right demographic. Some really fantastic network play has broken out in the backseat of our family car.
I don't understand the outrage over Netflix changing the terms of the deal. Let's face it, this happens all the time. Sometimes it's good for a given customer, sometimes it's bad. Businesses that stand still don't survive. In this case you get your disk a little slower in some cases. Previously, they added a bunch of original content (Orange Is the New Black anyone?).
When the deal changes in such a way you don't think you are getting your money's worth, don't buy it anymore
Do they accept payment in Bitcoins?
It's easy enough to compare. It was not my last degree in sciences (others not at BYU), and I work in the field. Even during my undergraduate at BYU I had friends at several other significant universities, including MIT and Princeton. I took time off to spend a few week with each attending classes. I'm not looking at this from an isolated perspective.
I suppose this depends on a number of things, and perhaps in the end you may be right. But at the moment there really isn't a clear conflict; the conflict is more manufactured than real, especially if you see religion as a road to life happiness and not an explanation of all things. I admit that there is a certain about of dealing with ambiguity that is required. Frankly, I tend to be much more of an agnostic or a deist than your average Christian. I tend to believe that my life is mine to live, there is such a thing as a good way to live life from a happiness perspective, and my religion provides some guidance along those lines, but ultimately I have to figure it out for my own life
So far as science is concerned I tend to think that we are very, very far from a complete understanding of the universe. There are so many things that we simply don't understand that I don't worry too much about conflict between the possibility of the existence of a God and what science is telling me. The evidence is what it is, we build theories to understand and predict it, and we use those to move forward, but I don't kid myself thinking that we have a complete understanding of the world around us. We will be working for a long time yet to get there.
You could make an excellent argument you can only be clear minded about science or religion. That is to say, if your world is evidence based but you are willing to work with things where there is no evidence I think you can still be a clear minded scientist. On the other hand if you put assertions without evidence in the first place and try to work science around it you're going to have problems.
If the religion is really real, the first approach will leave the two in agreement in the end, but if it is not true you aren't really in a bad place when you can see the whole picture. If you adopt the other approach inevitably you will end up with some kind of conflict that just doesn't leave room for thinking.
Yea, I expect if you signed up for biology you tended to get over that pretty quick, or generally dislike your life. It's easier to have an irrational viewpoint about science as an English major where you don't have to face it to function each day.
At least there's one professor at BYU that believes in evolution!
I understand why it might be tempting to put BYU in a basket along with the rest of the evangelical christian universities. However, on the issue of evolution it could not be more different. I graduated from there with a degree in microbiology and my college at least evolution was the coin of the realm, just like it is in any serious biology department. I did not have a single professor that did not see evolution as you might expect a biologist to see it; as the only serious explanation of the data at hand, the only theory that works with what we know and provides valid predictions of future results. Not once did I hear even the smallest bit of credibility being given to creationism or its various variants (intelligent design, etc).
And yes, my professors were all Mormons. You might ask yourself how they square this. It turns out that while there are certainly Mormons that take a very literal reading of the bible on this issue, that is not the official church position, and there are many members that don't see it that way at all. Basically I had several professors that explained it as religion was about how to live life, science was about how life works, and we really have no idea how the two come together. The bible, while providing a lot of information to believers on a moral life, provides no real information on how the world works in any of the scientific fields.
Interestingly, many believe this is on purpose, that God has no interest in proving his existence; it's a matter of faith for a reason. Because of this He stays out of offering scientific explanations. I realize that sounds distinctly like a cope-out, but frankly it leads to a fairly rational place where you can function as a scientist an still be a Mormon. And by function I don't mean some half-way hands over eyes sort of a way, but in a real, go where the evidence takes you sort of a way.
Take it for what it's worth, but that was my experience
Funding or otherwise supporting a religion is understood to fall under the establishment clause. So when you fund something, or let it use your property, or otherwise enable it you are establishing it. The issues with this particular school is that it is publicly funded. There are many, many private, religious schools out there that teach all kinds of viewpoints including creationism that comply with one or more religious traditions. These are not in question, it is only the ones being funded by the government that are being looked at askance. If you choose to go against any number of supreme court decisions and take a very narrow view of the meaning of the word establishment to be a strict synonym with found or start it would allow the government to effectively promote a state religion by sending it unlimited funds. BTW, when you are reading about similar issues you will see the 'establishment clause' referenced. This is what they are talking about, saying that whatever the government is doing is supporting, funding, or otherwise establishing a religion in violation of the constitution.
Well, I often end up doing corporate in house sites where the capabilities of every machine that will access the site are known. In these kinds of cases the fallback case become much less important. I agree with your point, however, for public sites.
Thanks, I'll take a look
I would love to know if this can be made to work with WebGL. There are so many possibilities in web applications for really nice font management.
Scientists say, or Scientist says - please not Scientists says
Bird strikes at supersonic speeds are not the issue. You will notice that the intended refit doesn't make the canopy handle supersonic bird strikes, only bird strikes up to 400 knots, or a reasonable cruising speed. The problem they are facing is hitting birds while cruising at much slower speeds than supersonic, much closer to the ground.
Besides that, it's a horrible, horrible secret. Until just a few years ago the first five digits could be easily determined from your birthday and location of birth, leaving only 4 digits of somewhat randomness, and even that went in sequential order, giving you a pretty good guess at a much small range. To add insult to injury, whenever a company thinks they are helping you keep it secret they will ask you for the last four digits of the number, the only four digits that actually matter.
Who's to say that's not what's going on right now? I don't know if you have noticed, but building the necessary infrastructure for privately managed low earth orbit access is all the rage among a certain class of rich people.
Of course, if you can get really lucky you can find a company willing to pay California rates while you work from home in SLC. Get over 200k and live in a lower cost area. Works for me.
Well, if you wanted to really keep your energy usage down you'd grow a nitrogen fixing plant like peanuts every other year, avoiding the need for petroleum based fertilizers.
Yea, I agree it's harder today than it was then. To be fair, I usually worked during the school year, but that's not always feasible for people to do while maintaining good grades. Undergraduate some Pell grants are generally available, and some borrowing may be a necessity without any support from the parents. I don't understand the people that walk out of undergraduate with a six digit debt.
Hmm, to be clear. Neither undergrad degree was at an Ivy, they were boring state universities, workable with part time and summer work along with merit based scholarships. Her law school was at an Ivy, there is little to no financial aid available for professional degrees. Yes, I was working as an engineer by that time and had a good salary.
Not exactly true of the professional degrees. Especially in those days there was basically no financial assistance for Law or MBA programs.
Tuition where I attended was pretty cheap, 5k a year or so. The wife's law school was not cheap, 24k a year. Add living expenses as needed. This was in the early/mid 90s
I struggle with this concept of it being impossible to get an education without taking on student debt. My wife and I finished four year degrees (Engineering and PolySci) and she did law school at an Ivy league with a total of 5,000 in debt. Neither set of parents paid for anything in any significant way. We got together after undergraduate and I had a real job that paid for law school for her, but otherwise it was pretty self supporting. Lots of work was required, and probably less fun, but it is possible.
Gah,
I can't stand it when evolution and religion are even mentioned in the same paragraph. They don't belong together in anyway and any question that compares them is the wrong question. Evolution is, like all scientific theories, the theory that best fits the facts we have. We then use the theory to make predictions and explanations. With a theory as proven as evolution those predictions usually turn out to be correct, but if they didn't we would add the new facts into the consideration and attempt to build a revised theory that accounted for them.
There is no belief anywhere in that process. It doesn't matter if you believe that evolution represents some kind of absolute truth or not. The only valid question is whether there is a better explanation for the facts that we have, and so far there most certainly isn't. If we start ignoring the facts because we believe we know something more that the facts on the ground indicate we stop being able to progress in our understanding of how the world works; we stop being able to do science.
Is this a conflict with a religious belief? I suppose that depends on whether your religious belief requires that you stop trying to understand the world around you. A well thought out religion would make no such requirement, but would instead stick to moral behavior and ways to live life to enhance personal happiness. Believing that helping out a recently laid-off neighbor will enhance your personal happiness in no way contradicts being able to function as a working scientist.
Any question that involves whether you 'believe' in a scientific theory is the wrong question. You don't believe in them, you simply evaluate their accuracy and use them to answer questions going forward.
I once worked for a defense subcontractor that produced a component for the cruise missile. Remember that the electronics in these things have to be nuclear hardened, which is tricky stuff. In addition, every component on any circuit board is tracked independently, testing is really brutal, and all electronics assembly is done under clean room conditions. I suppose it can be really inconvenient for a cruise missile to take a wrong turn just outside of Albuquerque