There's also no mention of hell in the old testament... nor is there even really much mention of any afterlife at all.
The subject of death is treated inconsistently in the Bible, though most often it suggests that physical death is the end of life. This is the case with such central figures as Abraham, Moses, and Miriam.
There are, however, several biblical references to a place called Sheol (cf. Numbers 30, 33). It is described as a region "dark and deep," "the Pit," and "the Land of Forgetfulness," where human beings descend after death. The suggestion is that in the netherworld of Sheol, the deceased, although cut off from God and humankind, live on in some shadowy state of existence.
While this vision of Sheol is rather bleak (setting precedents for later Jewish and Christian ideas of an underground hell) there is generally no concept of judgment or reward and punishment attached to it. In fact, the more pessimistic books of the Bible, such as Ecclesiastes and Job, insist that all of the dead go down to Sheol, whether good or evil, rich or poor, slave or free man (Job 3:11-19).
You are my sworn enemy. Not only do I have to worry about the corporations, I have to worry about their apologists and enablers.
I'm not your enemy here, buddy. I'm just trying to have a discussion.
Freedom to share music with our friends is very different than freedom to share their personal information.
Is it? An artist is selling you some information (a recording of them performing), while specifically telling you that you cannot distribute it without their permission. How is that any different from you giving your personal information to a company, and telling them they cannot distribute it without your permission? I'm not arguing that companies should be able to distribute your information without your consent... I'm simply questioning whether it is reasonable to restrict distribution of one type of information while simultaneously fighting to completely remove restrictions from another kind. Most, if not all, of the arguments used to promote the free distribution of music could be used by companies to promote the distribution of information they have gathered from usage statistics.
All the information that is in society's best interest to flow freely or more freely (scientific publications and creative works as long as we don't destroy the industries behind them) are restricted, while that which ought to be very private (all our private digital lives, search histories, emails, phone calls, texts, GPS coordinates, social connections) are being over-shared.
I agree that the former (science, creative works) should be distributed freely, but I question your logic in saying that distribution of the latter (search histories, social connections, etc...) necessarily has a negative effect on society.
If free distribution of creative works and science has a positive effect on society, can you definitively say that free distribution of social data won't also have a positive effect? Couldn't social connection data be used to prevent the spread of disease, or study social phenomena that give us insight into the human social organism? Couldn't purchasing data be used to better allocate scarce resources? Couldn't location data be used to improve public transportation and reduce congestion on roadways?
The truth is that most people aren't comfortable with sharing all of their information, even if doing so would have a positive impact on society. Just as an artist, developer, or scientist may not be comfortable with freely sharing their work, even if doing so would have a positive impact on society.
The technology is already here, we can't close the box, the important thing is whether suitable laws are in place to prevent misuse.
I agree. I also find it amusing how so many people on/. scream "information wants to be free" when talking about recordings of music made by someone, but when it comes to THEIR information, they are all up in arms about how evil corporations are for sharing their information with other corporations.
I'm not being robbed of anything. I generally don't care if people know where I am... and if, for whatever reason, I don't want people to know where I am, I can TURN OFF MY GODDAMN PHONE. There. Privacy.
Others have sentiments that are strongly different than yours, and for what they believe to be excellent reasons.
No kidding. I wasn't claiming to have any knowledge of what anyone else believes. I was merely stating my position.
What exactly are you doing that you're so worried about people knowing your location?
I don't really care if people know where I am. What I care about is if they try to contact me or interfere with my movements. Simply having knowledge of my location doesn't really amount to much.
And don't tell me "it's different in Europe". I was in Germany. I can drive from Munich to Berlin faster than the ICE train. And the train ride costs $150+ each way per person.
Berlin-Munich costs 44 Euros each way (you have to buy the ticket a few weeks in advance though), and takes 6 hours. Driving takes the same amount of time, and will cost you at least 50 Euros in gas (600 km * 5l/100km * 1.65 Eu/l = 49.5 ~ and that's a pretty efficient vehicle - you won't get that efficiency doing 160 on the autobahn). So you're just plain wrong. Not to mention, many routes are much faster than a car; Frankfurt - Gottingen takes 1h40m on the ICE and 2h30m by car.
You can't look at the "in station" ticket prices, that's just ridiculous... have you looked at the price of airplane tickets if you buy them at the airport??
Also, 0.6% per month is still ridiculously high. If you're getting 0.6% interest rate on a savings account, either your money is being highly leveraged and isn't guaranteed (i.e. there's risk involved- you could lose your money), or your currency has a high inflation rate. As a general rule, it doesn't make much sense for banks to give depositors interest rates which are much higher than GDP growth rate.
0.8% a year interest is not that low for a bank account in the USA (you said $1200, so one assumes you're banking in the USA). You certainly will never get anywhere near 0.8% per month. That's 9.6% per annum. I don't believe for a second that your bank ever gave you anywhere near 10% annual interest on a bank account.
Why would anyone ever invest in anything else if you could get a return of 10% per year in a savings account guaranteed by the government? Mutual funds which average 10% per year are considered good performers, and they have risk. It makes absolutely no sense to have a bank account which generates 10% at zero risk to the account holder.
The total "GDP" (if there is such a think in a socialist country -- definitions must be clarified)
Haha, you must be a Foxnews viewer (or maybe even editor)? Why would a socialist country not have a GDP??? Do they not produce things of value? Do they not trade with other countries?
I believe the parent thinks that compounded monthly means that you get the (annual) interest rate every month. While this would be nice for anyone who's not a bank, it's really quite silly.
Oh, and even if what you were saying was true, it wouldn't really change the resolution at all. That's not how sampling works. If your display is 1024*768, you have that many pixels. Making it so each pixel can show any color wouldn't really increase the resolution. Your ability to resolve spatial changes in color is lower than in intensity. So adding "color spatial resolution" is not equivalent to adding "intensity spatial resolution" - this is why many encoding schemes use more bits for intensity than color information - it's more efficient.
Color != Frequency. They always put that color chart under frequency, but it's rather misleading. Colors are the response of our three types of cones to a particular spectrum of light.
What good is light with a narrow spectral bandwidth?? The point of a TV is to make images life-like. Light sources in real life have wide bandwidth, and objects generally reflect relatively large swaths of frequency. It would be a nightmare to produce images using lots of pixels with 1 nm bandwidth... it's much better to just choose 3 or 4 primaries and mix them... but mixing works just fine with wide bandwidth primaries.
It's medieval Catholicism in which the patent lawyers and company executives would spend eternity in a nasty place.
Actually, in medieval Catholicism patent lawyers could have simply paid for an indulgence with some of the money they earned committing the sin. Pretty slick system really; one gets to do whatever they want as long as the Church gets to wet their beak.
Oh god, don't get me started about how the US still uses cheques. Last time I was there I was standing in line in the grocery store, and the woman in front of me whipped out her checkbook to pay for milk and eggs (five dollars!). I had forgotten all about cheques, what with the fantastic electronic system used in Germany.
I agree with much of what you're saying, but keep in mind that alot of the edge of a laptop is used for things like an optical drive, USB ports, card readers, etc...
If you open up the laptop, there probably isn't the space, depth-wise, on the edges to contain a keyboard.
That being said, I agree they could make an effort to give laptops (other than desktop replacement ones) a better keyboard. As another poster pointed out, maybe the switch in consuming content to tablets will allow (force) laptop makers to find a different market, one that caters to people who actually do serious work on their laptops.
As far as I can tell, they're only available on Ebay, shipping directly from Korea.
I may be wrong, but I suspect there's something in place preventing these from being imported to the US/European markets for resale. Dell may have some sort of deal with the panel manufacturer or something.
There has to be something like that, since the price (shipping included) is ~$300... meaning you could probably import them to the US in bulk for under $250. They would sell like hotcakes at $350, especially since they're the same panel as the Dell U2711, but with an LED backlight instead of the power hungry tube used in the Dell. It's basically the Apple Cinema Display at a third of the price.
Slashdot Mirror
The subject of death is treated inconsistently in the Bible, though most often it suggests that physical death is the end of life. This is the case with such central figures as Abraham, Moses, and Miriam. There are, however, several biblical references to a place called Sheol (cf. Numbers 30, 33). It is described as a region "dark and deep," "the Pit," and "the Land of Forgetfulness," where human beings descend after death. The suggestion is that in the netherworld of Sheol, the deceased, although cut off from God and humankind, live on in some shadowy state of existence. While this vision of Sheol is rather bleak (setting precedents for later Jewish and Christian ideas of an underground hell) there is generally no concept of judgment or reward and punishment attached to it. In fact, the more pessimistic books of the Bible, such as Ecclesiastes and Job, insist that all of the dead go down to Sheol, whether good or evil, rich or poor, slave or free man (Job 3:11-19).
Source: http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Theology/Afterlife_and_Messiah/Life_After_Death/Heaven_and_Hell.shtml
You are my sworn enemy. Not only do I have to worry about the corporations, I have to worry about their apologists and enablers.
I'm not your enemy here, buddy. I'm just trying to have a discussion.
Freedom to share music with our friends is very different than freedom to share their personal information.
Is it? An artist is selling you some information (a recording of them performing), while specifically telling you that you cannot distribute it without their permission. How is that any different from you giving your personal information to a company, and telling them they cannot distribute it without your permission? I'm not arguing that companies should be able to distribute your information without your consent... I'm simply questioning whether it is reasonable to restrict distribution of one type of information while simultaneously fighting to completely remove restrictions from another kind. Most, if not all, of the arguments used to promote the free distribution of music could be used by companies to promote the distribution of information they have gathered from usage statistics.
All the information that is in society's best interest to flow freely or more freely (scientific publications and creative works as long as we don't destroy the industries behind them) are restricted, while that which ought to be very private (all our private digital lives, search histories, emails, phone calls, texts, GPS coordinates, social connections) are being over-shared.
I agree that the former (science, creative works) should be distributed freely, but I question your logic in saying that distribution of the latter (search histories, social connections, etc...) necessarily has a negative effect on society.
If free distribution of creative works and science has a positive effect on society, can you definitively say that free distribution of social data won't also have a positive effect? Couldn't social connection data be used to prevent the spread of disease, or study social phenomena that give us insight into the human social organism? Couldn't purchasing data be used to better allocate scarce resources? Couldn't location data be used to improve public transportation and reduce congestion on roadways?
The truth is that most people aren't comfortable with sharing all of their information, even if doing so would have a positive impact on society. Just as an artist, developer, or scientist may not be comfortable with freely sharing their work, even if doing so would have a positive impact on society.
The technology is already here, we can't close the box, the important thing is whether suitable laws are in place to prevent misuse.
I agree. I also find it amusing how so many people on /. scream "information wants to be free" when talking about recordings of music made by someone, but when it comes to THEIR information, they are all up in arms about how evil corporations are for sharing their information with other corporations.
Others have sentiments that are strongly different than yours, and for what they believe to be excellent reasons.
No kidding. I wasn't claiming to have any knowledge of what anyone else believes. I was merely stating my position.
The gun was just as much responsible for that death as the app. Should we ban guns too?
I don't really care if people know where I am. What I care about is if they try to contact me or interfere with my movements. Simply having knowledge of my location doesn't really amount to much.
You could just bring women and a bunch of frozen sperm.
My bad, I guess you were just talking about far field waves, not charged particles.
Did you just claim that magnetic fields don't affect high energy particles, and that only other matter (such as the ozone layer) can do that?
And don't tell me "it's different in Europe". I was in Germany. I can drive from Munich to Berlin faster than the ICE train. And the train ride costs $150+ each way per person.
Berlin-Munich costs 44 Euros each way (you have to buy the ticket a few weeks in advance though), and takes 6 hours. Driving takes the same amount of time, and will cost you at least 50 Euros in gas (600 km * 5l/100km * 1.65 Eu/l = 49.5 ~ and that's a pretty efficient vehicle - you won't get that efficiency doing 160 on the autobahn). So you're just plain wrong. Not to mention, many routes are much faster than a car; Frankfurt - Gottingen takes 1h40m on the ICE and 2h30m by car.
You can't look at the "in station" ticket prices, that's just ridiculous... have you looked at the price of airplane tickets if you buy them at the airport??
Also, 0.6% per month is still ridiculously high. If you're getting 0.6% interest rate on a savings account, either your money is being highly leveraged and isn't guaranteed (i.e. there's risk involved- you could lose your money), or your currency has a high inflation rate. As a general rule, it doesn't make much sense for banks to give depositors interest rates which are much higher than GDP growth rate.
Why would anyone ever invest in anything else if you could get a return of 10% per year in a savings account guaranteed by the government? Mutual funds which average 10% per year are considered good performers, and they have risk. It makes absolutely no sense to have a bank account which generates 10% at zero risk to the account holder.
You're mixing shutter speed and framerate.
The total "GDP" (if there is such a think in a socialist country -- definitions must be clarified)
Haha, you must be a Foxnews viewer (or maybe even editor)? Why would a socialist country not have a GDP??? Do they not produce things of value? Do they not trade with other countries?
I believe the parent thinks that compounded monthly means that you get the (annual) interest rate every month. While this would be nice for anyone who's not a bank, it's really quite silly.
Oh, and even if what you were saying was true, it wouldn't really change the resolution at all. That's not how sampling works. If your display is 1024*768, you have that many pixels. Making it so each pixel can show any color wouldn't really increase the resolution. Your ability to resolve spatial changes in color is lower than in intensity. So adding "color spatial resolution" is not equivalent to adding "intensity spatial resolution" - this is why many encoding schemes use more bits for intensity than color information - it's more efficient.
Color != Frequency. They always put that color chart under frequency, but it's rather misleading. Colors are the response of our three types of cones to a particular spectrum of light.
What good is light with a narrow spectral bandwidth?? The point of a TV is to make images life-like. Light sources in real life have wide bandwidth, and objects generally reflect relatively large swaths of frequency. It would be a nightmare to produce images using lots of pixels with 1 nm bandwidth... it's much better to just choose 3 or 4 primaries and mix them... but mixing works just fine with wide bandwidth primaries.
the light-emitting semiconductor nanocrystals that shine pure colors
What the hell is a pure color? Something that matches the frequency response of our cones? Fully saturated colors?
It's medieval Catholicism in which the patent lawyers and company executives would spend eternity in a nasty place.
Actually, in medieval Catholicism patent lawyers could have simply paid for an indulgence with some of the money they earned committing the sin. Pretty slick system really; one gets to do whatever they want as long as the Church gets to wet their beak.
The real question is are you foolish enough to think she doesn't do that on purpose?
Oh god, don't get me started about how the US still uses cheques. Last time I was there I was standing in line in the grocery store, and the woman in front of me whipped out her checkbook to pay for milk and eggs (five dollars!). I had forgotten all about cheques, what with the fantastic electronic system used in Germany.
If you open up the laptop, there probably isn't the space, depth-wise, on the edges to contain a keyboard.
That being said, I agree they could make an effort to give laptops (other than desktop replacement ones) a better keyboard. As another poster pointed out, maybe the switch in consuming content to tablets will allow (force) laptop makers to find a different market, one that caters to people who actually do serious work on their laptops.
I may be wrong, but I suspect there's something in place preventing these from being imported to the US/European markets for resale. Dell may have some sort of deal with the panel manufacturer or something.
There has to be something like that, since the price (shipping included) is ~$300... meaning you could probably import them to the US in bulk for under $250. They would sell like hotcakes at $350, especially since they're the same panel as the Dell U2711, but with an LED backlight instead of the power hungry tube used in the Dell. It's basically the Apple Cinema Display at a third of the price.
Now I'm thinking about ordering one of those Korean ones to have a massive dual setup... At 310 dollars, it's a goddamn steal.
I don't understand how they can afford to not charge for international shipping too. It can't be cheap to Fedex a 27" monitor from Korea to Germany.
I just don't know how I would arrange the monitors... one on top of the other? They're kind of wide to be using side by side.