"Now according to logic, all I have to do to prove God does not exist is to take ONE of those proofs and prove it factual."
Certainly you could turn the tables again on this argument, but I'd rather see you actually take my challenge then just trying to flip the tables and avoid the challenge... *PROVE* one of those proofs of God's non-existence!
And as far as flipping the tables... far too many precise things in the universe to be coincidence... consider these 4 possibilities (unless you've can think up any more) of time & eternity for the universe: (1) universe doesn't exist (need I try to argue such completely anti-scientific nonsense?) (2) the universe is eternal (same thing, nonsense) (3) universe is partially eternal & partially under the control of time (explain that one in view of science... how does something go from aging & decaying to being eternal, to being finite again & so on?) (4) universe is under the COMPLETE control of time... hence the universe has a definite age... what came before the universe then? certainly not another universe, because it would fall prey to the same 4 possibilities til you reached an ultimate starting point... *WHAT* came before the universe then? And you can't simply apply science to whom or what came before because you can't assume they'd be governed by the natural laws of our universe... big bang, evolution, and other so called theories fall short...
if you're still reading by now, even though this may not prove God 100% to you, it certainly rules out most other theories that rely 100% on this universe's natural laws & philosophies which are biased thereby. and there are much better proofs than this for God that are a whole lot harder to dispute, but this was just something for you to chew on (hopefully for more than 2 seconds, unless you'd prefer to just respond without actually considering what I've said)
Wow, you're pretty bold to make such a statement, but you seem to be limiting the scope of your argument, trying to limit God like this...
Of course, this means God is directly responsible for all the evil and horror extant in the world. Which means God must either be evil, or be capable of evil, which negates God's omnibenevolence.
Do you have kids? Even if you don't, I'm sure this argument is not hard to comprehend... Do parents/guardians keep their children from involving themselves in certain activities they believe to be evil when they're young? The obvious answer is yes. What happens when the kids reach a certain age (i.e. - teens, 20's & so on)? Again the obvious answer is the parents allow the kids to do what they want because there comes a point where even though the parent will continue to warn their child and try to curb certain beliefs & behaviors, they know the child must choose for themselves. Also, consider this: the Bible says those in Heaven won't sin, be sad, mad, etc., but it will be paradise for eternity... Why? because the evil influences have been removed... namely Satan and anyone who will heed what he (Satan) tempts them with.
This may start a religious debate, but I think religion has been swept under the rug by too many people for far too long... Either because they doubt God, or they're too afraid to offer a defense for God, which God has provided for them in the Bible
One last point I felt like throwing in for those who doubt God's existence and know how logic works... Imagine a circle that contains ALL the possible proofs of God's existence. Now according to logic, all I have to do to prove God exists is to take ONE of those proofs and prove it factual. Now conversely, any who want to prove God doesn't exist, has to prove ***EVERY*** one of those proofs is FALSE, thus making themselves God in their own eyes, since ONLY God could prove ALL of them true or false.
Persistent mem leaks -- it's not my biggest worry
on
Motorola Mocks-up MRAM
·
· Score: 1
Uhmm, what about having Windows on these chips... I'm not sure I trust MS having Windows install itself to one of these... you'd never get it off, so you'd have to make sure the chips were removable/replacable or whatever so you'd be free to use anything else
don't know if anyone has posted anything like what i'm about to say, but in any case:
Making a prequel like that is almost like topping a first date to Paris in a private jet and so on... There's only so much you can do to try and top that for a 2nd date. Give the guy a break, are slashdotters and all just that desperate for astounding visuals that just can't be topped? If they can't be topped, how can you enjoy anything new? Don't get me wrong, if they want to improve it, more power to them, but cut them some slack, I'm fine just seeing about the same quality visuals along with a good plot.
just my take on things though, so take it for what it's worth
I would so love to use Darwin on my iBook
with X support, along with gtk, gnome, gimp,
fvwm2 and whatever else my heart desires...
but I took it off before because the X
binaries for darwin only had static libraries
& not dynamic (*.so ? I believe) libraries.
Can anyone say with some assurance that if
I dl the X binaries for Darwin from xfree86's
site or a mirror that it will have the
dynamic libraries I need so much to compile
just about anything of value?
This new processor has all new SSE-4 for the ultimate gaming experience, you'll be able to finish your important assignments at work in record time, in short, it HAULS!
<fine print>Pentium VI speeds are achieved via a 75x multiplier. New Celeron III processor speeds are achieved via a multiplier in excess of 100x. And no, we still haven't increased the FSB from 66MHz, and no you can't have any more cache, that would cost too much for us to make and sell at a decent price. </fineprint>
I've gone to
loc.gov
sometimes & also things like
congress.gov
and you think this should be easy enough to drudge through to get the info I want... But I also seem to go through endless links here & there that
make it a nightmare... So having some 'obvious'
links that are simply state what they lead to
& also search engines that are geared for the
average American instead of endless links that
annoy you to the point of just giving up.
I guess for instance... If I go to some
commercial site to download their software,
demo or otherwise, I want a link that says
'Download' or 'Get it' and actually leads me
to the file with a dozen links in between or
that isn't really a download page at all.
I'm not sure whether this means the whole OS and its apps will have to be either one or the other, but it is a definite strongpoint IMHO.
Think about it this way... can Windows98 and beyond still run 16bit applications even though the OS itself is 32bit? The answer is yes. How so? Well consider the x86 model... you have protected mode with segmentation allowing for different 'segments' of memory to be marked '16-bit' or '32-bit' code... When you jump around to that code it looks in the descriptor tables for info on that code segment.
For what it's worth, sandpile.org has a lot of specs on existing x86 technology and the publicly available information on the upcoming x86-64 platform.
*cough* www.sandpile.org *cough* under x86-64, aka AA-64... hardly vaporware. Itanium maybe 64bit *IF* and when it ever comes out, but you cannot deny it will be a very slow process of making it accepted... First off, x86 has so much market share, it makes it hard to get anything else out there that will be easily accepted (without software to "emulate" or run x86 code at similar
speeds as the real thing). Even if Itanium is meant mainly for servers where x86 competes much more against other architectures, Itanium would have to compete against x86, Alphas, Sparcs, etc... Sledgehammer & derivatives have a higher chance of being accepted and sold in mass than Itanium.
I'm not sure of all the facts of where & how
& who started the internet, but I do have
this much to say:
If you want more Spanish on internet sites
& in tech jargon, then have more Spanish
speaking people &/or companies come up with
devices & give them Spanish names & slowly
let it infiltrate into mainstream tech
jargon.
To rant about how Spanish might be dying
out because of so much English tech jargon,
is crazy. You must adapt yourself to learn
the technological terms of those who
created the technology... I call a "Zip
Drive" a "Zip Drive" because that is the
name IOmega gave it, not me. And so what
if it happens to be in English, it was
developed by a corporation living in a
predominately English speaking country.
All this is akin to the following:
If you *live* in the U.S. you *NEED* to
learn English, not expect Americans to
learn Spanish, Japanese, French, German,
Italian, Hebrew, etc... We simply cannot
learn that many languages to accomodate
so many foreign cultures, but the
immigrants can afford to learn one
language if they choose to live here!
It's similar to what my university's career
center told those of us going to coop jobs.
Something to the effect of: "Write down
names because the people at work only have
one name to learn, you have all of their
names to learn."
And don't get me wrong, if I was going to
move to Canada, I'd probably brush up on
my french to the point of some fluency
in it. If I went to Mexico to *live*
there I'd learn Spanish. If I were to
live in Italy, I'd learn Italian. It's
really that simple. When you move to
another country, they aren't required to
adapt to you at all, but if you want to
have *ANY* hope of fitting in & making a
life for yourself, you *MUST* learn at
least their language & a lot of their
customs (as long as said customs don't
compromise your values).
And for any who might be lame enough to
say it, *NO*, learning a new language is
not compromising values.
So again, if tech jargon comes from English
speaking "techies" adapt. And if it bugs
you, convert the English words to Spanish
equivalents in the documentation for Spanish
OSes & when talking to other Spanish
speaking people, but do *NOT* complain to
any English speaking people if you start
saying the term in Spanish & they don't
know what in the world you are talking about.
In the words of John Stossel on the
news program 20/20... "Give me a break."
Well unless piggy back rides are examples
of molesting I think not...
Alas, poor Yorick, I knew him Horatio,
a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent
fancy, he hath bore me on his back a 1000
times, and now how abhorred in my imagination
it is, my gorge rises at it...
(I had to recite it for Soph. english in
high school:)
and for those who watch(ed) Animaniacs...
Woah, check out skullhead...
he gave me piggy back rides...
I think I'm gonna blow chunks...
that's about the size of it
I think the argument about how StarOffice
still doesn't handle all nuances of Word &
Excel... yet!
But at the same time I'm waiting for Quicktime, Real Player, DVD software and the like to mature
on FreeBSD (and I don't just mean running Linux
binaries on Linux, I mean FreeBSD binaries)
before I drop the bloatware that is Windoze.
And I think there will always be some
instances where you need M$ Windows for
something... whether college courses,
incompatibilities in document handling,
lack of features, etc.
For what it's worth magicsquid...
here, here!!
In an 'ideal' society that actually practiced
morals on a regular basis, Clinton would never
have become president, and been executed for
his more heinous crimes (and I don't mean
fornication & the like) while still governor...
And what about Gore? He'd be a joke if he
tried to run for office with the morals he
practices (notice - 'practice', not 'practiced').
But the U.S. has long since proved that many of
us have few if any moral values, not that any
of us are actually perfect 100% of the time,
but overall those with a conscious who make a
true effort to care about what's right.
And if you dare to express the importance of
moral values you're either a fanatic, or
labeled a hypocrite or someone who believes
themselves "high and mighty" rather than what
you really are... someone more concerned about
what's right than their image!
Ok, I'm done with my rant
speaking of which, i think it was some time last year that i heard the Univ. of Texas @ Austin came up with an artificial mouth that used some chemical sensors to "taste" food... it should be interesting to see if we can ever improve upon these enough, along with ai, to create our own androids, hehe
agreed... i wonder if interplay *COUGH* will
*COUGH* follow in the steps of Loki *COUGH*
to produce Descent I, II, III and all for
*BSD...
guess it's time to take some cough medicine;)
Slashdot Mirror
"Now according to logic, all I have to do to prove God does not exist is to take ONE of those proofs and prove it factual."
Certainly you could turn the tables again on this argument, but I'd rather see you actually take my challenge then just trying to flip the tables and avoid the challenge... *PROVE* one of those proofs of God's non-existence!
And as far as flipping the tables... far too many precise things in the universe to be coincidence... consider these 4 possibilities (unless you've can think up any more) of time & eternity for the universe: (1) universe doesn't exist (need I try to argue such completely anti-scientific nonsense?) (2) the universe is eternal (same thing, nonsense) (3) universe is partially eternal & partially under the control of time (explain that one in view of science... how does something go from aging & decaying to being eternal, to being finite again & so on?) (4) universe is under the COMPLETE control of time... hence the universe has a definite age... what came before the universe then? certainly not another universe, because it would fall prey to the same 4 possibilities til you reached an ultimate starting point... *WHAT* came before the universe then? And you can't simply apply science to whom or what came before because you can't assume they'd be governed by the natural laws of our universe... big bang, evolution, and other so called theories fall short...
if you're still reading by now, even though this may not prove God 100% to you, it certainly rules out most other theories that rely 100% on this universe's natural laws & philosophies which are biased thereby. and there are much better proofs than this for God that are a whole lot harder to dispute, but this was just something for you to chew on (hopefully for more than 2 seconds, unless you'd prefer to just respond without actually considering what I've said)
Wow, you're pretty bold to make such a statement, but you seem to be limiting the scope of your argument, trying to limit God like this...
Of course, this means God is directly responsible for all the evil and horror extant in the world. Which means God must either be evil, or be capable of evil, which negates God's omnibenevolence.
Do you have kids? Even if you don't, I'm sure this argument is not hard to comprehend... Do parents/guardians keep their children from involving themselves in certain activities they believe to be evil when they're young? The obvious answer is yes. What happens when the kids reach a certain age (i.e. - teens, 20's & so on)? Again the obvious answer is the parents allow the kids to do what they want because there comes a point where even though the parent will continue to warn their child and try to curb certain beliefs & behaviors, they know the child must choose for themselves. Also, consider this: the Bible says those in Heaven won't sin, be sad, mad, etc., but it will be paradise for eternity... Why? because the evil influences have been removed... namely Satan and anyone who will heed what he (Satan) tempts them with.
This may start a religious debate, but I think religion has been swept under the rug by too many people for far too long... Either because they doubt God, or they're too afraid to offer a defense for God, which God has provided for them in the Bible
One last point I felt like throwing in for those who doubt God's existence and know how logic works... Imagine a circle that contains ALL the possible proofs of God's existence. Now according to logic, all I have to do to prove God exists is to take ONE of those proofs and prove it factual. Now conversely, any who want to prove God doesn't exist, has to prove ***EVERY*** one of those proofs is FALSE, thus making themselves God in their own eyes, since ONLY God could prove ALL of them true or false.
Uhmm, what about having Windows on these chips... I'm not sure I trust MS having Windows install itself to one of these... you'd never get it off, so you'd have to make sure the chips were removable/replacable or whatever so you'd be free to use anything else
don't know if anyone has posted anything like what i'm about to say, but in any case:
Making a prequel like that is almost like topping a first date to Paris in a private jet and so on... There's only so much you can do to try and top that for a 2nd date. Give the guy a break, are slashdotters and all just that desperate for astounding visuals that just can't be topped? If they can't be topped, how can you enjoy anything new? Don't get me wrong, if they want to improve it, more power to them, but cut them some slack, I'm fine just seeing about the same quality visuals along with a good plot.
just my take on things though, so take it for what it's worth
I would so love to use Darwin on my iBook with X support, along with gtk, gnome, gimp, fvwm2 and whatever else my heart desires...
but I took it off before because the X binaries for darwin only had static libraries & not dynamic (*.so ? I believe) libraries.
Can anyone say with some assurance that if I dl the X binaries for Darwin from xfree86's site or a mirror that it will have the dynamic libraries I need so much to compile just about anything of value?
This new processor has all new SSE-4 for the ultimate gaming experience, you'll be able to finish your important assignments at work in record time, in short, it HAULS!
<fine print>Pentium VI speeds are achieved via a 75x multiplier. New Celeron III processor speeds are achieved via a multiplier in excess of 100x. And no, we still haven't increased the FSB from 66MHz, and no you can't have any more cache, that would cost too much for us to make and sell at a decent price. </fineprint>
I've gone to loc.gov sometimes & also things like congress.gov and you think this should be easy enough to drudge through to get the info I want... But I also seem to go through endless links here & there that make it a nightmare... So having some 'obvious' links that are simply state what they lead to & also search engines that are geared for the average American instead of endless links that annoy you to the point of just giving up.
I guess for instance... If I go to some commercial site to download their software, demo or otherwise, I want a link that says 'Download' or 'Get it' and actually leads me to the file with a dozen links in between or that isn't really a download page at all.
hrmm, hadn't heard that name before...
I'm not sure whether this means the whole OS and its apps will have to be either one or the other, but it is a definite strongpoint IMHO.
Think about it this way... can Windows98 and beyond still run 16bit applications even though the OS itself is 32bit? The answer is yes. How so? Well consider the x86 model... you have protected mode with segmentation allowing for different 'segments' of memory to be marked '16-bit' or '32-bit' code... When you jump around to that code it looks in the descriptor tables for info on that code segment.
For what it's worth, sandpile.org has a lot of specs on existing x86 technology and the publicly available information on the upcoming x86-64 platform.
*cough* www.sandpile.org *cough* under x86-64, aka AA-64... hardly vaporware. Itanium maybe 64bit *IF* and when it ever comes out, but you cannot deny it will be a very slow process of making it accepted... First off, x86 has so much market share, it makes it hard to get anything else out there that will be easily accepted (without software to "emulate" or run x86 code at similar speeds as the real thing). Even if Itanium is meant mainly for servers where x86 competes much more against other architectures, Itanium would have to compete against x86, Alphas, Sparcs, etc... Sledgehammer & derivatives have a higher chance of being accepted and sold in mass than Itanium.
I'm not sure of all the facts of where & how & who started the internet, but I do have this much to say:
If you want more Spanish on internet sites & in tech jargon, then have more Spanish speaking people &/or companies come up with devices & give them Spanish names & slowly let it infiltrate into mainstream tech jargon.
To rant about how Spanish might be dying out because of so much English tech jargon, is crazy. You must adapt yourself to learn the technological terms of those who created the technology... I call a "Zip Drive" a "Zip Drive" because that is the name IOmega gave it, not me. And so what if it happens to be in English, it was developed by a corporation living in a predominately English speaking country.
All this is akin to the following:
If you *live* in the U.S. you *NEED* to learn English, not expect Americans to learn Spanish, Japanese, French, German, Italian, Hebrew, etc... We simply cannot learn that many languages to accomodate so many foreign cultures, but the immigrants can afford to learn one language if they choose to live here!
It's similar to what my university's career center told those of us going to coop jobs. Something to the effect of: "Write down names because the people at work only have one name to learn, you have all of their names to learn."
And don't get me wrong, if I was going to move to Canada, I'd probably brush up on my french to the point of some fluency in it. If I went to Mexico to *live* there I'd learn Spanish. If I were to live in Italy, I'd learn Italian. It's really that simple. When you move to another country, they aren't required to adapt to you at all, but if you want to have *ANY* hope of fitting in & making a life for yourself, you *MUST* learn at least their language & a lot of their customs (as long as said customs don't compromise your values).
And for any who might be lame enough to say it, *NO*, learning a new language is not compromising values.
So again, if tech jargon comes from English speaking "techies" adapt. And if it bugs you, convert the English words to Spanish equivalents in the documentation for Spanish OSes & when talking to other Spanish speaking people, but do *NOT* complain to any English speaking people if you start saying the term in Spanish & they don't know what in the world you are talking about.
In the words of John Stossel on the news program 20/20... "Give me a break."
int WINAPI WinMain() ;)", 0);
{
MessageBox(0, "What do you mean being indoctrinated by MS?
return 0;
}
Well unless piggy back rides are examples of molesting I think not... Alas, poor Yorick, I knew him Horatio, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy, he hath bore me on his back a 1000 times, and now how abhorred in my imagination it is, my gorge rises at it... (I had to recite it for Soph. english in high school :)
and for those who watch(ed) Animaniacs...
Woah, check out skullhead...
he gave me piggy back rides...
I think I'm gonna blow chunks...
that's about the size of it
well put
I think the argument about how StarOffice still doesn't handle all nuances of Word & Excel... yet!
But at the same time I'm waiting for Quicktime, Real Player, DVD software and the like to mature on FreeBSD (and I don't just mean running Linux binaries on Linux, I mean FreeBSD binaries) before I drop the bloatware that is Windoze. And I think there will always be some instances where you need M$ Windows for something... whether college courses, incompatibilities in document handling, lack of features, etc.
That's my 1.5 cents on the subject.For what it's worth magicsquid... here, here!! In an 'ideal' society that actually practiced morals on a regular basis, Clinton would never have become president, and been executed for his more heinous crimes (and I don't mean fornication & the like) while still governor... And what about Gore? He'd be a joke if he tried to run for office with the morals he practices (notice - 'practice', not 'practiced'). But the U.S. has long since proved that many of us have few if any moral values, not that any of us are actually perfect 100% of the time, but overall those with a conscious who make a true effort to care about what's right. And if you dare to express the importance of moral values you're either a fanatic, or labeled a hypocrite or someone who believes themselves "high and mighty" rather than what you really are... someone more concerned about what's right than their image! Ok, I'm done with my rant
speaking of which, i think it was some time last year that i heard the Univ. of Texas @ Austin came up with an artificial mouth that used some chemical sensors to "taste" food... it should be interesting to see if we can ever improve upon these enough, along with ai, to create our own androids, hehe
agreed... i wonder if interplay *COUGH* will *COUGH* follow in the steps of Loki *COUGH* to produce Descent I, II, III and all for *BSD... guess it's time to take some cough medicine ;)