Hmmmm... no, when I write a paper on it, I'll get labelled a quack, no matter how much scientific evidence I put in to support my theory, no matter how well it explains observable phenomenon.
The government doesn't control what we think. No, not all. That's not propaganda you hear on the media, it's the truth. The media would never be used to propagate government lies. Nope. Never.
Similarly, the human soul (whatever that means) and human society needs a certain morality in order to survive. Every culture has developed a morality which satisfies these needs, or it has died off. Any culture which develops an unhealthy set of ethics will suffer the consequences.
Your analogy to food doesn't, while it makes sense to some degree, doesn't mean that everyone's morality and ethics (or diets for that matter) should be the same. Steak and potatoes are consumed here because they exist in abundance here. In Thailand (I don't know much about Korean food, sorry), no such luck. They eat fish and rice.
In Japan, for instance, honor is the driving force behind their morality. In generally Christian societies such as the U.S., Christian moral codes and ethics are the driving force.
Which is right? Which is wrong? There are healthy attitudes in both systems of ethics, but neither are 100% perfect. Therefore, neither are 100% percent right.
Another poster mentioned social darwinism; think about cultures and their ethics in that sense. There have been societies that have tried lots of things. People get the idea that being chaste until marriage, or emphasising a nuclear family, is 'old fashioned' and not really necessary anymore. The fact is, that cultures with loose morals have been tried before -- but all the ones that lasted and flourished are the ones that have discovered that there needs to be limitations on the sexual drive.
The Greeks lasted a long time and greatly flourished, lasting longer than any Western society that exists today. The idea of being chaste until marriage most certainly did not exist.
Moral objectivism is wrong. Forcing your own moral beliefs and ethics upon the rest of society is wrong. It's what gave the Christians a bad name.
Just because something is inobservable doesn't mean it's irrelevant. If every action causes an opposite reaction in this universe, maybe every opposite action in the MIRROR universe causes an opposite opposite reaction there as well. Which might make sense from the standpoint of polarity and the universe equalizing itself out.
Honestly, I don't see how this is a big improvement. You have, basically:
struct somestruct {
int a;
int [3];//3 pad bytes
int b; }
vs.
struct somestruct {
int a;
int pad[3];// 3 pad bytes, do not use
int b; }
The only thing its really saving you is the variable name, and its giving you an extra check at compile time to ensure you don't use the 'pad' array. Which shouldn't be a problem with proper variable naming and documentation, right?
Ummmm...I can *show* you the A+ Magazine review article for the IIgs from back in 1986. CD-ROM drives were *indeed* an option, but they were expensive. I still have it.
Think about the indexing capablities of Google, which as another poster mentioned, just bought Blogger.com. You could search for exactly what you wanted news on. Now, combine that with a system that stores your personal preferences and/or most common searches, turns it into a portal, and voila! Instant, raw, uncut news from blogs and mob-blogs everwhere!
OF course, then there wouldn't be some guy in the anchor desk to tell you what to think about the situation, and you'd have to *gasp* think for yourself. No, we wouldn't want people to do that.
Nope, we should just let Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings tell us what to think, because we're too stupid to do that for ourselves.:)
It's NOT an Alzheimer's joke. Read your history books. Reagan had "convenient" memory problems well before he contracted Alzheimer's, during the Iran-Contra hearings in which Reagan couldn't recall answers to important questions that would have indicated his level of involvement in the Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scandal.
Read the article with the Ransom Love keynote quote, but they owned the original SCO IP in question at that point. Love was specifically referring to the fact that Project Monterrey, UnixWare, and their Linux work all seemed to be in direct competition with one another.
Heathen! Read thee the works of Douglas Adams and don't come back until you know where your towel is!;-)
But...but...I *did*. And I always know where my towel is, per the recommendation of the HHGTG, which also says, above all, "Don't Panic." I don't recall 'grillions', quite honestly.
Slashdot Mirror
Tesla :-P
Universal just bought SCO today for an undisclosed amount...
Hmmmm... no, when I write a paper on it, I'll get labelled a quack, no matter how much scientific evidence I put in to support my theory, no matter how well it explains observable phenomenon.
Um. I can program in Fortran. Just don't tell anyone unless they're willing to pay me lots of money. :)
What's so great about sex then, that overcomes this obvious numerical handicap?
;)
If you don't know, you're probably too young for me to explain it to you!
To which the response would inevitably be:
:)
YOU FAIL IT!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
The government doesn't control what we think. No, not all. That's not propaganda you hear on the media, it's the truth. The media would never be used to propagate government lies. Nope. Never.
Similarly, the human soul (whatever that means) and human society needs a certain morality in order to survive. Every culture has developed a morality which satisfies these needs, or it has died off. Any culture which develops an unhealthy set of ethics will suffer the consequences.
Your analogy to food doesn't, while it makes sense to some degree, doesn't mean that everyone's morality and ethics (or diets for that matter) should be the same. Steak and potatoes are consumed here because they exist in abundance here. In Thailand (I don't know much about Korean food, sorry), no such luck. They eat fish and rice.
In Japan, for instance, honor is the driving force behind their morality. In generally Christian societies such as the U.S., Christian moral codes and ethics are the driving force.
Which is right? Which is wrong? There are healthy attitudes in both systems of ethics, but neither are 100% perfect. Therefore, neither are 100% percent right.
Another poster mentioned social darwinism; think about cultures and their ethics in that sense. There have been societies that have tried lots of things. People get the idea that being chaste until marriage, or emphasising a nuclear family, is 'old fashioned' and not really necessary anymore. The fact is, that cultures with loose morals have been tried before -- but all the ones that lasted and flourished are the ones that have discovered that there needs to be limitations on the sexual drive.
The Greeks lasted a long time and greatly flourished, lasting longer than any Western society that exists today. The idea of being chaste until marriage most certainly did not exist.
Moral objectivism is wrong. Forcing your own moral beliefs and ethics upon the rest of society is wrong. It's what gave the Christians a bad name.
nevermind. Ignore what I said. ints. not bytes. right.
Just because something is inobservable doesn't mean it's irrelevant. If every action causes an opposite reaction in this universe, maybe every opposite action in the MIRROR universe causes an opposite opposite reaction there as well. Which might make sense from the standpoint of polarity and the universe equalizing itself out.
Actually, there *does* exist an Object-Oriented COBOL. (No, I'm NOT making this up!)
I was hoping someone would point this out. In the example, they resize the array using sizeof() which costs you *more* code. :)
Honestly, I don't see how this is a big improvement. You have, basically:
//3 pad bytes
// 3 pad bytes, do not use
struct somestruct {
int a;
int [3];
int b;
}
vs.
struct somestruct {
int a;
int pad[3];
int b;
}
The only thing its really saving you is the variable name, and its giving you an extra check at compile time to ensure you don't use the 'pad' array. Which shouldn't be a problem with proper variable naming and documentation, right?
Ummmm...I can *show* you the A+ Magazine review article for the IIgs from back in 1986. CD-ROM drives were *indeed* an option, but they were expensive. I still have it.
Um, Slashdot with videos? Can you imagine the bandwidth usage? The storage requirements? The videos of the Goatse guy spreading his cheeks?
Mmm'kay!
Right. SmartPort, not SCSI. Grrr... I'm getting too old to remember this stuff!
Think about the indexing capablities of Google, which as another poster mentioned, just bought Blogger.com. You could search for exactly what you wanted news on. Now, combine that with a system that stores your personal preferences and/or most common searches, turns it into a portal, and voila! Instant, raw, uncut news from blogs and mob-blogs everwhere!
:)
OF course, then there wouldn't be some guy in the anchor desk to tell you what to think about the situation, and you'd have to *gasp* think for yourself. No, we wouldn't want people to do that.
Nope, we should just let Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings tell us what to think, because we're too stupid to do that for ourselves.
Moblogs: Complete with popups that will make you an offer you CAN'T refuse!
I watched the Iran-Contra hearings as well, and some of the questions were rather basic questions that couldn't have been kept secret from him, like
:)
Q: What did such and such tell you about so and so.
A: I don't remember.
Democrats are all b@stards, too. I'm an equal opportunity viewer of b@stards.
It's NOT an Alzheimer's joke. Read your history books. Reagan had "convenient" memory problems well before he contracted Alzheimer's, during the Iran-Contra hearings in which Reagan couldn't recall answers to important questions that would have indicated his level of involvement in the Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scandal.
let me guess, Microsoft designed the onboard software,
:-)
Would that mean that the Blue Screen o' Death is now a WMD?
Read the article with the Ransom Love keynote quote, but they owned the original SCO IP in question at that point. Love was specifically referring to the fact that Project Monterrey, UnixWare, and their Linux work all seemed to be in direct competition with one another.
It'll just lose all the data stored in its memory systems after every mission. Particularly secret CIA ones.
Heathen! Read thee the works of Douglas Adams and don't come back until you know where your towel is! ;-)
But...but...I *did*. And I always know where my towel is, per the recommendation of the HHGTG, which also says, above all, "Don't Panic." I don't recall 'grillions', quite honestly.