I should also add that - a) the people who think "God did it" is a simpler solution are/exactly/ the kinds of people I was thinking of who obviously misunderstand ockham's razor. and b) alternatively, if you can find an observation that is explained by "god did it" but not by "nature" then you will rock the entire world. Please do share it.
The parent poster was pointing out that Ockham's Razor is stupid, and the kind of thing that sounds profound to stoned college freshmen who think that they are discovering the mysteries of existence. Very clearly the simplest explanation of our universe is that God willed it to be that way.
No, you totally missed it. Try to postulate it more formally;
a) The universe was the product of nothing; b) The universe was the product of "God", an intangible being who himself was the product of nothing.
It's very easy to see which way Ockham's razor slices when you spell out the assumptions you must put into each hypothesis; In the first case you will suggest basically that the universe has always existed, and in the second that the universe was created by something else we have no evidence for that has always existed. Well, the both do match the observations, no doubt, so this is a fine time to apply the razor and slice away the "extra" parts. You can clearly see the extra parts are in 'b', not 'a'.
If you can find a way to state the "god did it" proposition that explains the observations as fully as the "natural" explanation, and also is truly simpler, I'd love to hear it!
At any rate, I'm glad you posted; it's evidence for my previous assertion that a lot of people misunderstand the razor. Even obviously smart people like yourself.
I think you fail in your understanding of the razor.
You see, it's used for deciding between two propositions. "The universe exists" might be one, but you need another to decide... so let's pick an obvious alternative. "The universe doesn't exist." OK. Now we try to apply the razor. Only there's a problem, see. Occham's Razor can only be applied when both theories fully explain the observations; only one "multiplies entities beyond necessity" -- which is fancy talk for "includes more than the other," basically. The problem here is the alternative hypothesis, "the universe doesn't exist" is going to require a/lot/ more explanation to fit. It doesn't fully explain the observations. Now you have to explain how, if it doesn't exist, we still seem to experience it as though it did. Any explanation you come up with for that is necessarily going to be far more complex than the alternative.
So I'm only really responding to you because at least one mod thought what you said was clever. With no malice, I'm telling you it's not clever, it's ignorant. A lot of people misunderstand Ockham's razor and jokes like yours don't help the matter any.
If you are saying that the existence of the universe would not have been/predicted/ by an application of Ockham's razor, you are talking nonsense on several levels. First off, it's not a predictor. It's just a simple reminder that adding "extra shit" into your theories is rarely a good idea. If you're going to put something into a theory, it needs to be something that's justified by the observations. Ockham's Razor is only good for helping decide when you've screwed up and included more than is necessary. Secondly, it doesn't make a lot of sense to talk about predicting the creation of the universe, I don't think. But maybe TFA has a few things to teach me on that point.
The main factor in Nigerian fraud, is that part of the Nigerian population that believe that God created cretins so they could be scammed. Not a very christian beliefe:
Yes its true, Christianity would stop Nigerian scams - send more missionaries
I can't help but notice that if you are correct, what might help them even more is not believing in silly propositions like "God" and "Christianity."
I don't own a lockpick set, and wish I did. Usually when it comes time to pick a lock I just make do with a flathead screwdriver and the hardest bit of wire I can find... sometimes a good jumbo paperclip is all you/need/, but it's too bendy to be a preferred method.
Anyhow, in the vein of sharing anecdotes, I once helped one of our company's salespeople get his keys back when he'd accidentally locked them into his filing cabinet. One of the other salesdudes came back to me in IT to see if we had a sledgehammer or something to bust the cabinet open with. I told him to hold his horses and had the lock sprung in under ten minutes using a good ol' paperclip.
A friend of mine actually got thrown out of the "House of Sushi and Noodles" on Belmont Ave. in Chicago, for eating too much of their "all-you-can-eat sushi." Normally it's a pretty good deal, though.
My point being, I think people are used to having hidden limits on unlimited offers... not that it's right.
I can answer the PCI question. VISA and the approved auditors do not currently allow virtual machines, even if you are running them yourself on your own hardware. And to have them run on someone else's hardware.... forgetaboutit.
That may be changing soon though, with the popularity of VMs, they will have to do/something/. I hope.
"The USPS holds a statutory monopoly on non-urgent First Class Mail, outbound U.S. international letters[3] as well the exclusive right to put mail in private mailboxes,[4] as described in the Private Express Statutes. According to a report from the Government Accountability Office, "The monopoly was created by Congress as a revenue protection measure for the Postal Services predecessor to enable it to fulfill its mission. It is to prevent private competitors from engaging in an activity known as cream-skimming, i.e., offering service on low-cost routes at prices below those of the Postal Service while leaving the Service with high-cost routes."
Maybe you should check into these things before you flame anyone.
For the record, the USPS also has a government guarantee. It's actually illegal to send a letter that is not high-priority with any other service and companies have been successfully sued for it.
So to say they're not subsidized by taxpayer money is really irrelevant. We're obligated to pay them to mail regular letters wily-nily.
I can tell you that as popular as this myth is, VISA is not generally able to track what you purchase. Generally, all they know is where you shopped and how much you spent, not what individual items you spent on.
The nearest there is to an exception to this is in hotels and fleet card purchases -- in the case of Hotels, VISA gets a breakdown of what money was spent on the room vs the room service vs the hotel lobby store, etc. Still doesn't know what actual items were purchased, but they do get told your check-in and check-out dates and some other things. For fleet card they might get told how many gallons of gas you purchased, but that's about it.
I know, I grew up thinking VISA was watching me, too, but it turns out it's just not watching that closesly. It doesn't have the capability; the protocols whereby credit card information are transferred just don't have any specification for that level of reporting.
Actually, there's a very convincing argument ot be made that "Thou Shalt Not Kill" meant only Jews. You could kill all the gentiles you wanted. In "The God Delusion" Dawkins makes this very claim, if oyu need a reference. Basically the idea is that killing Gentiles isn't murder.
I didn't enjoy Manhunt, the original, but it's a far cry from crap. Crap is something like the output (I hesitate to call them "games") of Derek Smart. Try Universal Combat and then get back to me on what makes a game crap.
In what sense do they mean "use only genuine Microsoft software?" Do they mean if you are using MS software you must agree to pay for it which is so obvious it hardly bears saying, I mean, they will be auditing you... of course you will not get away with using more MS pirated software.
Or do they mean you must avoid software from any vendor but MS?
Wow, when you learn how to handle all that in your router/firewall then you will/really/ be cool, and won't have to crawl around unplugging and plugging cables.
When I need a computer to stay off the internet, guess what I don't have to fuck with? That's right, ethernet cables.
I only want to ask about one part of your comment:
They obviously think it will work and they know more than you.
Why on Earth would you make an assumption like that, that's not only unfounded, but in my own estimation likely just plain wrong? You assume MS knows more than the GP because... what?
Slashdot Mirror
I should also add that - a) the people who think "God did it" is a simpler solution are /exactly/ the kinds of people I was thinking of who obviously misunderstand ockham's razor. and b) alternatively, if you can find an observation that is explained by "god did it" but not by "nature" then you will rock the entire world. Please do share it.
The parent poster was pointing out that Ockham's Razor is stupid, and the kind of thing that sounds profound to stoned college freshmen who think that they are discovering the mysteries of existence. Very clearly the simplest explanation of our universe is that God willed it to be that way.
No, you totally missed it. Try to postulate it more formally;
a) The universe was the product of nothing;
b) The universe was the product of "God", an intangible being who himself was the product of nothing.
It's very easy to see which way Ockham's razor slices when you spell out the assumptions you must put into each hypothesis; In the first case you will suggest basically that the universe has always existed, and in the second that the universe was created by something else we have no evidence for that has always existed. Well, the both do match the observations, no doubt, so this is a fine time to apply the razor and slice away the "extra" parts. You can clearly see the extra parts are in 'b', not 'a'.
If you can find a way to state the "god did it" proposition that explains the observations as fully as the "natural" explanation, and also is truly simpler, I'd love to hear it!
At any rate, I'm glad you posted; it's evidence for my previous assertion that a lot of people misunderstand the razor. Even obviously smart people like yourself.
I think you fail in your understanding of the razor.
/lot/ more explanation to fit. It doesn't fully explain the observations. Now you have to explain how, if it doesn't exist, we still seem to experience it as though it did. Any explanation you come up with for that is necessarily going to be far more complex than the alternative.
/predicted/ by an application of Ockham's razor, you are talking nonsense on several levels. First off, it's not a predictor. It's just a simple reminder that adding "extra shit" into your theories is rarely a good idea. If you're going to put something into a theory, it needs to be something that's justified by the observations. Ockham's Razor is only good for helping decide when you've screwed up and included more than is necessary. Secondly, it doesn't make a lot of sense to talk about predicting the creation of the universe, I don't think. But maybe TFA has a few things to teach me on that point.
You see, it's used for deciding between two propositions. "The universe exists" might be one, but you need another to decide... so let's pick an obvious alternative. "The universe doesn't exist." OK. Now we try to apply the razor. Only there's a problem, see. Occham's Razor can only be applied when both theories fully explain the observations; only one "multiplies entities beyond necessity" -- which is fancy talk for "includes more than the other," basically. The problem here is the alternative hypothesis, "the universe doesn't exist" is going to require a
So I'm only really responding to you because at least one mod thought what you said was clever. With no malice, I'm telling you it's not clever, it's ignorant. A lot of people misunderstand Ockham's razor and jokes like yours don't help the matter any.
If you are saying that the existence of the universe would not have been
I hope that helps someone.
The main factor in Nigerian fraud, is that part of the Nigerian population that believe that God created cretins so they could be scammed. Not a very christian beliefe:
Yes its true, Christianity would stop Nigerian scams - send more missionaries
I can't help but notice that if you are correct, what might help them even more is not believing in silly propositions like "God" and "Christianity."
I don't own a lockpick set, and wish I did. Usually when it comes time to pick a lock I just make do with a flathead screwdriver and the hardest bit of wire I can find... sometimes a good jumbo paperclip is all you /need/, but it's too bendy to be a preferred method.
Anyhow, in the vein of sharing anecdotes, I once helped one of our company's salespeople get his keys back when he'd accidentally locked them into his filing cabinet. One of the other salesdudes came back to me in IT to see if we had a sledgehammer or something to bust the cabinet open with. I told him to hold his horses and had the lock sprung in under ten minutes using a good ol' paperclip.
He posts here all the time! You just have to browse at -1...
A friend of mine actually got thrown out of the "House of Sushi and Noodles" on Belmont Ave. in Chicago, for eating too much of their "all-you-can-eat sushi." Normally it's a pretty good deal, though.
My point being, I think people are used to having hidden limits on unlimited offers... not that it's right.
The United States Constitution does not apply to Daniel.
Unless of course we annexed Brazil and I missed it.
I can answer the PCI question. VISA and the approved auditors do not currently allow virtual machines, even if you are running them yourself on your own hardware. And to have them run on someone else's hardware.... forgetaboutit.
/something/. I hope.
That may be changing soon though, with the popularity of VMs, they will have to do
Doesn't "Hell" start with an "H"? What is a BOF*A* ? All I keep reading it as is "Bank of America."
From Wikipedia entry on USPS:
"The USPS holds a statutory monopoly on non-urgent First Class Mail, outbound U.S. international letters[3] as well the exclusive right to put mail in private mailboxes,[4] as described in the Private Express Statutes. According to a report from the Government Accountability Office, "The monopoly was created by Congress as a revenue protection measure for the Postal Services predecessor to enable it to fulfill its mission. It is to prevent private competitors from engaging in an activity known as cream-skimming, i.e., offering service on low-cost routes at prices below those of the Postal Service while leaving the Service with high-cost routes."
Maybe you should check into these things before you flame anyone.
It's GATTACA with a silent 'P' and 'K'... so like... PGATTACKA I guess.
For the record, the USPS also has a government guarantee. It's actually illegal to send a letter that is not high-priority with any other service and companies have been successfully sued for it.
So to say they're not subsidized by taxpayer money is really irrelevant. We're obligated to pay them to mail regular letters wily-nily.
It goes to eleven.
I am in the credit-card processing business.
I can tell you that as popular as this myth is, VISA is not generally able to track what you purchase. Generally, all they know is where you shopped and how much you spent, not what individual items you spent on.
The nearest there is to an exception to this is in hotels and fleet card purchases -- in the case of Hotels, VISA gets a breakdown of what money was spent on the room vs the room service vs the hotel lobby store, etc. Still doesn't know what actual items were purchased, but they do get told your check-in and check-out dates and some other things. For fleet card they might get told how many gallons of gas you purchased, but that's about it.
I know, I grew up thinking VISA was watching me, too, but it turns out it's just not watching that closesly. It doesn't have the capability; the protocols whereby credit card information are transferred just don't have any specification for that level of reporting.
Two plus two equals four...
IN BASE TEN!
I'm fine!!
Bionic Commando had a plot?! Who knew!?
Your sig is from Planetfall / Stationfall, when you would save the game, Floyd would ask that.
You are totally fucking cool. That is all.
(Incidentally, Suspended was the Scariest-Game-Evar.)
Actually, there's a very convincing argument ot be made that "Thou Shalt Not Kill" meant only Jews. You could kill all the gentiles you wanted. In "The God Delusion" Dawkins makes this very claim, if oyu need a reference. Basically the idea is that killing Gentiles isn't murder.
I didn't enjoy Manhunt, the original, but it's a far cry from crap. Crap is something like the output (I hesitate to call them "games") of Derek Smart. Try Universal Combat and then get back to me on what makes a game crap.
In what sense do they mean "use only genuine Microsoft software?" Do they mean if you are using MS software you must agree to pay for it which is so obvious it hardly bears saying, I mean, they will be auditing you... of course you will not get away with using more MS pirated software.
Or do they mean you must avoid software from any vendor but MS?
I read the article but it doesn't clarify.
Ever check the HTTP headers on a request to the Slashdot webserver?
There's always a different, random Futurama quote in an X-Fry: or X-Bender: header.
Example:
$ curl -I slashdot.org
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 05:41:42 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.37 (Unix) mod_perl/1.29
SLASH_LOG_DATA: shtml
X-Powered-By: Slash 2.005000175
X-Bender: They're tormenting me with uptempo singing and dancing!
Cache-Control: private
Pragma: private
Vary: User-Agent,Accept-Encoding
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Wow, when you learn how to handle all that in your router/firewall then you will /really/ be cool, and won't have to crawl around unplugging and plugging cables.
When I need a computer to stay off the internet, guess what I don't have to fuck with? That's right, ethernet cables.
I only want to ask about one part of your comment:
They obviously think it will work and they know more than you.
Why on Earth would you make an assumption like that, that's not only unfounded, but in my own estimation likely just plain wrong? You assume MS knows more than the GP because... what?
Sorry; I was too busy sleeping during the lectures in High School.