The point is, I was myself in such a 'delusion of grandeur' until someone brought me out of it. I am not speaking theory; I'm speaking of my own personal experience.
Thus I advocate doing the same for others. All your rhetoric cannot stop me, for I was personally retrieved from that kind of delusion by the grace of someone who loved me more than I could kill him.
Go look at my police record. On it, I am described as a terrorist, because once, I had the ability to kill people like you. Now I am a servant of Jesus Christ, and leave such judgment in his hands.
Two times in my life people have pointed guns at my head. The second one was on crack, and shot at me, after clubbing me on the head with the gun. We thought his gun had blanks in it because he missed us nine times at point-blank range. Later, we found where the bullets struck our vehicle, and realized the angels helped us.
Both times, I escaped unharmed because of prayer and angels. You can speak all you will, but it will not take away from the fact that love is the solution.
Come kill me. Just try it. I've survived a few of your pro-violence ways, I'll survive a few more.
As for me, I will hold firm to the angels who watch over me, in faith. You can take your New Age "Angels don't exist" crap to a different forum. There is ALWAYS room for hope.
What was true for your grandfather is true for you. Don't tell me about the Japanese in Mongolia when I can point to 2,500-degree napalm being dropped on innocent people in Vietnam, a largely agricultural country.
Be sick of people like me giving Christians a bad name. Call me a pompous bastard. Hell, come kill me, if you want. Won't stop Jesus Christ...
Muammar al-Qaddafi made the following statement to the Jamahiriya News Agency, Libya's official news source:
No matter what the political differences and conflicts with America were , such differneces should not stand as a psychological barrier in the way of renedring humanitarian assistance and help to the American citizens, and all people in America who were severely effected by these horrifying attacks, particularly after the American hospitals announced considerable shortges of blood needed by the victims.
We call on the International Red Cross, the Red Crescent and the Inetrnational Green Crescent and all international humanitarian organizations to speed-up humanitarian assistance regardless of political considerations or differences between America and the peoples of the world... We will not be hypocrits as to announce other than what we conceal... Irrespective of the conflict with America it is a human duty to show sympathy with the American people and be with them at these horrifying, and awesome events which are bound to awaken human conscience.
We must think of how to ensure that supplies be dispatched to the victims and those effected inspite of the difficult circumstances announced in America such as halting air flights and communications breakdown. The world should think about practical means to deliver supplies to the victims. We are awaiting an American announcement on how to secure that such humanitrian assistance reach its destination.
Everybody should work to make humanitarian considerations prevail over political stances and offer aid to the victims of this horrifying act.
If I see an intruder in my home and he's waving a gun at me, I know several things:
One, he had to get past the angels God posts at the door, for which reason I pray daily. God said he hears these prayers.
Two, if he got past the angels, it's because God trusts that I can handle the situation, by his grace, for which reason I pray daily, because I never know what's in store for me, but God does, and he can prepare me.
(I'm prepared to handle a person with a gun pointed at me. Last time, I didn't do so well, but I can never forget the words of my best friend calling out "I love you, man, put the gun away. I love you. You don't need a gun. I love you." in the moments before the gun was emptied at us. Now I know what to do when someone points a gun at me. Love him.)
Three, if he gets into my house with a gun (and here is where I don't have a gun, but if I did, I wouldn't use it anyway, unless it was a paperweight I needed) then it's up to me to be the one who brings him out of his delusion of grandeur. I need prayer, and a cup of tea would be rather helpful in the situation. What I DON'T need is a gun, which would only make things more complicated.
Ever since Lincoln was president, war is not necessary for self-defense. When enough of us who are committed to non-violence (not passive-aggressive non-violence like Gandhi taught, but pure non-violence like Jesus taught) are killed for our beliefs, the system which produces killers will grind to a halt.
By the way, before you mod me down, I am speaking as a former killer; I don't kill any more because I got the point, not because someone killed me. How much more I can serve God while alive, than dead.
This is what Jesus meant when he said the meek will inherit the earth: everybody else will kill each other off.
As for me, I'd rather die than kill. Need someone to kill? Come kill me. I won't hold it against you.
First, I need to be clear: It's not my page. It's a page I found while browsing the Internet for the concept, and found that it has the best information yet. For example, D G Leahy has some interesting work with trinary calculations, way over my head.
I'm clear to say that it is not my page for this reason: the engineer who commented on Chuck Moore's 'fanaticism' which made him uncomfortable (another post on this same topic), has exactly the kind of attitude that keeps true innovation from gaining ground. He uses the tools designed by fanatics only after they have become popular, yet actively expresses "discomfort" because of the work of a fanatic in process.
Associate a brilliant idea with a 'fanatic' and the idea will not be considered seriously for a long time. Yet where else do brilliant ideas come from?
That being said, I pointed people to trinary.cc because I find it interesting. Somebody named Steve Grubb seems to have put it together.
As to your other points; I see they are valid, and that the way to let other people consider a trinary system is not to rely on loaded words like "efficient."
As for me, I've been studying trinary logic in a form that has nothing to do with computers, and find it to be, in practice, more efficient and more stable than binary logic. Thus my attraction to the idea of building a trinary system in the first place. While the actual hardware (routing traces, whazzat?) is presently beyond me, the concept of thinking with three strands of thought rather than two is compelling to me.
For instance, I have been diagnosed as a person with bipolar illness. Given some thought, I realized that the name "bipolar" comes from a whole mindset that is itself bipolar, or categorical.
I prefer the term "tripolar" because it is more accurate in description--not only of my personal experience, but of what other people see me going through. Sometimes I'm manic. Other times I'm depressed. Is that all? No, actually, most of the time, I'm pretty 'normal' and that plateau is entirely lost in the nomenclature for "bipolar disorder."
I hope this helps explain what I mean by more efficient. It may require the same amount (or more) hardware to implement, but it will create an assembly language which is fundamentally different than binary systems.
Of course, we can overlay binary concepts on the trinary system, and I'm sure others will do that.
As for me, I'd like to start with the raw CPU you mentioned, built with a soldering iron, and design programming concepts upward from there, putting aside all binary concepts. I've a hunch we'll find that trinary systems are roughly the same as binary at the hardware level, but much more liberating at the software level. And that's what I'm interested in. I'll build my own hardware to get to that point, if I have to... and that's why I'll get to that point, even though I know little about hardware.
No. Why think about trinary systems with binary limitations? Use the third position to indicate something which is quality-based, instead of quantity-based. On, Off, and Vector. On, Off, and RSN. On, Off, and Quality. On, Off, and God. You can use your imagination to come up with ideas which are not limited to blacks and whites; give it some color, have more fun with it.
You may want to look again at trinary.cc; especially notice the accuracy of how a three-based counting system handles numbers bigger than 17.
Trinary calculations are more like nature, and the calculations of fractions are more accurate than binary. The problem with roundoff errors you mentioned is offset by the fact that you don't have to roundoff so much, because trinary is better with moving larger numbers than binary.
I didn't say it was the Windows of hardware design. I think it's fascinating, and something that real geeks might be interested in.
The decision to move to binary, made in the late 1940s, was made at a time when memory switches were the size of a grain of salt, and if you listened closely, you could hear them clicking on and off... Yeah, I suppose I would choose a simple structure then, too.
Looks like my question was too far out there to get moderated up. Perhaps it's a lame question. I believe it's a solid question, so I'll pose it again, maybe some of you have comments:
A trinary computer system is based on architecture which is much more efficient than binary, especially for moving large numbers around. Since you are designing your own processors, have you considered the possibility of building (and coding on) a trinary system? It seems like trinary eclipses the revolutionariness of even colorForth, by taking us into a whole nuther dimension of architecture...
-WP
Re:Change the rules, be realistic about conflict
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
Abraham Lincoln said it. When he became president, seven states had already seceded. He said in his inaugural address, "Look, we have no intention of attacking you. Put down your weapons and let us work this out like adults. But if you attack us, we will respond in defense, with force."
Who attacked first? And who won. There is a time for peace, and there is a time for war. When the two switch is in the hands of God, for if it were in the hands of man, we'd all be dead.
You've got a few minutes.
Jesus Christ died so you could live.
Re:What can be done? Nothing.
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
Do not listen to the man who is not willing to suffer with you.
Aye, you struck on the very essence of Christianity.
Jesus resurrected so we could all realize that standing there "being killed" was bearable. He did not tell people to do more than he did. He asks a lot--your heart broken, your spirit contrite... do you REALIZE what it takes to break a heart?
Lift up your cross. Otherwise, I will die for you, too. For I will not lift up that gun. A true Christian could never be convinced to drive a plane into a building. We would all rather be killed first.
With an ear that hears the crunching of bones in the footsteps you have tread, I respond:
The American "right" to meddle as you stated is no right, and we would do well to retreat to our own borders, which is where we were for well over a century. If you recall, we were 'isolationist' and reluctant to meddle in world affairs until World War One brought us out. It was difficult to retreat to our borders thereafter, but we did fairly well. Then World War II came, and we again reluctantly joined. I am not concerned with the secret plots which drew us into both wars, I am explaining why we are where we are in more general terms.
We Americans learned from the first war that, left to their own devices, the Europeans would start another war in a few years, and thus was born the Marshall Plan, one of the most brilliant strategies of all time; help rebuild even our enemies, and we can retreat back to our borders. Dispensing with the forces of paranoia released from Czarist Russia in 1918 took us another half-century beginning in 1950, but that has ended well. We are all a little more paranoid than before, but at least we get along with the Russians, thank God. Now, where were those Chinese folks we were chatting with before the wars began? Oh, there they are. Hmph. They're mad at us for some reason. Musta been all that opium...
Frankly, your typical American is similar to your typical Russian in that he has no interest in "meddling" with the affairs of other countries. These acts of meddling come about by the actions of influential minorities, which carry grudges and agendas that extend back far older than the United States. I seek not to join with them, and so when you accuse me along with them, I stand and deliver my dissenting opinion.
My point is that Americans are historically not meddlers; our history demonstrates that, from inception until recently, Americans sought actual justice, liberty, and a high standard of morality in all pursuits, mostly internally-designed, relying little upon the world around us. As that erodes because the world has drawn us into its agendas, our newborn innocence is dimmed, and our hope is blemished, but meddlers or not it still strides far ahead of the rest of the world. The Statue of Liberty, a gift from our brothers in France, is corroded, but not gone.
America is still the Standard Nation, and we did not come out of our quiet isolation specifically to cause trouble, but we were drawn out, carefully, calculatingly, by interests whose purpose was betrayal at the deepest levels of humanity. You know who they are, or you would not be so gentle in your speech. Blaming Americans for meddling is like blaming rattlesnake for biting you; what, did you not hear the rattle? It is like blaming child for making mistake; what, did you not teach me correctly? The United States was founded by people seeking a better way, who believed that God would provide, and he did. Now how can you move the nation off her foundation? You cannot but she will return.
We are not innocent, but neither are we inclined to meddle of our own nature. We Americans are curious.
What happens when you create a nation out of people who leave their homeland for something better? You create a nation of people who CANNOT TOLERATE a sad ending to a movie. Of the three hundred movies I saw in the past decade, I would estimate five or six had sad endings, and most of those were European imports. Two hundred ninety four had happy endings. The good guys won. And most often, the bad guys got blowed up but good in the course of things, but only after it was amply demonstrated they had plenty of time to mend their ways, and amply demonstrated that they were more evil than we realized at first.
Americans love happy endings; hold with us to the end, and you will see a happy ending.
And you folks all over the world who wish we would stop meddling... stop hating each other. Migrate to America, where the worst we do is meddle...
I love America, and I am so deeply American that I cannot comprehend any other way; I am eager to know what the rest of the world is doing, but all I see is people who prefer to stay in the dark ages. Give us more Gandhis. Quit boasting all the time; we're weary of your poseurs like Michel Fucoult, pretending to be sophisticated with stockings that match, when we can see your stockings don't match your honesty.
Show me how you are not uglier than the ugly American, and I will learn. Don't blame me for being spoiled by natural resources; come play in them with me. The invitation is open to you as it was to your ancestors, our brothers whom we left behind in search of something better. Accusing me of meddling just makes me neurotic, and having graduated from neurosis, I am seeking what of substance you have to bring.
Me, I bring curiousity. Mostly, I want to know what the Australians are doing, are you being responsible with the land you took from the Aborigines? We're just now figuring that one out...
-Jared
Re:Psychological; terrorism 2.0
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
I stopped at your warning, and read no further. The question I have is, if it is grisly and morally iffy, why do you populate your thoughts with it so strongly that it tumbles out in public forum?
Father, please kindly return this man to sanity. Thy will be done.
What makes this terrorism is that the citizens who were bombed were 'innocent.'
If we agree to bomb them back, we are no longer innocent. We will polarize the world in ways incomprehensible.
This is why Jesus said to turn the other cheek; thereby our innocence will last longer than the sting of death.
Who is inspired by violence? The violent. Who fears it? The fearful. We meek tolerate it, with eyes ever on more eternal things. There is always room for charity, all the way up to the throne room of God. Put charity first, and the things of this world will grow strangely dim.
Please do not attack back. Let us die, rather than kill. And that is the only thing worth dying for.
Father, help us be kind to the geeks who drive airplanes into buildings. Only a geek could be that single-minded. Help us find you.
Re:What can be done? Nothing.
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 1
They are extremely rational. They are some of the brightest, deep-thinking people on earth. They resort to terrorism because they feel they have no voice, and because they have not learned how to think through the long-term consequences of their actions. Most of us have that liability.
Let the terrorists kill each other. Some wear uniforms, some live in camps in the hills of Afghanistan. Some attack civilians, some don't. There is no need to join with terrorists; they will kill each other, given time.
You, and you alone, have the choice about what you do in your own life. Be no terrorist.
Jesus Christ resurrected. One point made by the resurrection was that even if you kill or are killed, your soul continues. Therefore don't kill or be killed, if you can help it.
Jesus Christ taught a simple doctrine: faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost. All else was in support of that doctrine. When he said, "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth," I understand him to mean "After all the bad guys kill each other off, the ones left standing will be the meek."
If we respond with violence to terrorism, we only justify their actions in the eyes of their friends. If, however, we respond with grace to terrorism, willing to die for the gift of liberty that we stand for, then we shine the light of injustice upon them, and the light of justice/mercy shines brighter and longer than any act of war or terror.
There is no state religion in the United States; it's prohibited in the Constitution, in several clauses. Yet our Creator is mentioned quite early in the document because the people who created this country were fit enough to submit themselves to God before setting about creating a nation.
By the way, the word 'shrink' has been out of vogue since the early 80s. Wake up, my friend. Xian, is that the X-Generation you refer to?
God is on the side of Open Source development. Don't get me wrong, God is big enough to fight for the good on both sides, what I'm saying here is that my personal opinion is that God is in favor of Open Source development over closed source development. This means that Microsoft and other proprietary developers can huff and puff all they want, Open Source will win out in the end. People who are afraid of hackers have no fear of God; fear God, and hackers don't faze ya.
It's not cryptic. It's actually graceful and very precise:
paraphrase: 'By distributing Broadcast 2000, we opened ourselves up to liability from someone who would claim that our software caused him expensive damage. So we stopped distributing it. Mainly because we didn't want to be blamed because somebody else took a stupid risk, used our software in the process, and was relying on attornies to look for anyone except themselves to blame.'
My guess is that someone specifically threatened them with this kind of lawsuit, and they withdrew their software, kind enough to write in a manner identifying that person, without identifying that person. That's the kind of thing that makes me write like that.
Linux is no longer the underdog. It is clear that Linux has a firm grip on the imagination of such battle-worn industrial giants as HP and IBM, that the battle is no longer in the hands of the geeks. The product has left our hands, and I for one, am delighted to see the Minuet link from earlier in the day. At least half the posts on that topic were mean-spirited, a stiff hill that Linus didn't have to climb in 1991.
The great work of Open Source is finished. Now the true geeks, return to working on obscure things that don't hit the news every six hours.
"Let your light so shine that men may see your good works and glorify your father in heaven."
Matthew 5:16. Nearby he talks about not hiding your light under a bushel, saying that Christians are the salt of the earth, given light which is not given to other beliefs, because of the unusually well-defined belief in an eternal (not cyclical) resurrection.
The point is that if you take the glory to yourself, that's all you get. But if you work in such a way that someone else is glorified, aye, now thats the heart of charity, service, and true love.
Slashdot Mirror
No sir. WAS delusioned.
The point is, I was myself in such a 'delusion of grandeur' until someone brought me out of it. I am not speaking theory; I'm speaking of my own personal experience.
Thus I advocate doing the same for others. All your rhetoric cannot stop me, for I was personally retrieved from that kind of delusion by the grace of someone who loved me more than I could kill him.
Go look at my police record. On it, I am described as a terrorist, because once, I had the ability to kill people like you. Now I am a servant of Jesus Christ, and leave such judgment in his hands.
Two times in my life people have pointed guns at my head. The second one was on crack, and shot at me, after clubbing me on the head with the gun. We thought his gun had blanks in it because he missed us nine times at point-blank range. Later, we found where the bullets struck our vehicle, and realized the angels helped us.
Both times, I escaped unharmed because of prayer and angels. You can speak all you will, but it will not take away from the fact that love is the solution.
Come kill me. Just try it. I've survived a few of your pro-violence ways, I'll survive a few more.
As for me, I will hold firm to the angels who watch over me, in faith. You can take your New Age "Angels don't exist" crap to a different forum. There is ALWAYS room for hope.
What was true for your grandfather is true for you. Don't tell me about the Japanese in Mongolia when I can point to 2,500-degree napalm being dropped on innocent people in Vietnam, a largely agricultural country.
Be sick of people like me giving Christians a bad name. Call me a pompous bastard. Hell, come kill me, if you want. Won't stop Jesus Christ...
-Jared
Muammar al-Qaddafi made the following statement to the Jamahiriya News Agency, Libya's official news source:
No matter what the political differences and conflicts with America were , such differneces should not stand as a psychological barrier in the way of renedring humanitarian assistance and help to the American citizens, and all people in America who were severely effected by these horrifying attacks, particularly after the American hospitals announced considerable shortges of blood needed by the victims.
We call on the International Red Cross, the Red Crescent and the Inetrnational Green Crescent and all international humanitarian organizations to speed-up humanitarian assistance regardless of political considerations or differences between America and the peoples of the world... We will not be hypocrits as to announce other than what we conceal... Irrespective of the conflict with America it is a human duty to show sympathy with the American people and be with them at these horrifying, and awesome events which are bound to awaken human conscience.
We must think of how to ensure that supplies be dispatched to the victims and those effected inspite of the difficult circumstances announced in America such as halting air flights and communications breakdown. The world should think about practical means to deliver supplies to the victims. We are awaiting an American announcement on how to secure that such humanitrian assistance reach its destination.
Everybody should work to make humanitarian considerations prevail over political stances and offer aid to the victims of this horrifying act.
If I see an intruder in my home and he's waving a gun at me, I know several things:
One, he had to get past the angels God posts at the door, for which reason I pray daily. God said he hears these prayers.
Two, if he got past the angels, it's because God trusts that I can handle the situation, by his grace, for which reason I pray daily, because I never know what's in store for me, but God does, and he can prepare me.
(I'm prepared to handle a person with a gun pointed at me. Last time, I didn't do so well, but I can never forget the words of my best friend calling out "I love you, man, put the gun away. I love you. You don't need a gun. I love you." in the moments before the gun was emptied at us. Now I know what to do when someone points a gun at me. Love him.)
Three, if he gets into my house with a gun (and here is where I don't have a gun, but if I did, I wouldn't use it anyway, unless it was a paperweight I needed) then it's up to me to be the one who brings him out of his delusion of grandeur. I need prayer, and a cup of tea would be rather helpful in the situation. What I DON'T need is a gun, which would only make things more complicated.
Ever since Lincoln was president, war is not necessary for self-defense. When enough of us who are committed to non-violence (not passive-aggressive non-violence like Gandhi taught, but pure non-violence like Jesus taught) are killed for our beliefs, the system which produces killers will grind to a halt.
By the way, before you mod me down, I am speaking as a former killer; I don't kill any more because I got the point, not because someone killed me. How much more I can serve God while alive, than dead.
This is what Jesus meant when he said the meek will inherit the earth: everybody else will kill each other off.
As for me, I'd rather die than kill. Need someone to kill? Come kill me. I won't hold it against you.
the original comment, now modded down to -1, was:
"prayer is the most effective way to lobby, although prayer without action is only wishful thinking."
it is marked as off-topic. it's entirely on topic. Perhaps it should be marked "different faith than mine?"
lobbying without prayer is like dreaming about having an effect on Congress.
An apology would mean that he didn't mean it. He meant it, or he wouldn't have said it.
It is you who have taken it out of context, misunderstood what he was saying, and demands an apology for something he did no wrong in doing.
I demand an apology from you.
:-)
First, I need to be clear: It's not my page. It's a page I found while browsing the Internet for the concept, and found that it has the best information yet. For example, D G Leahy has some interesting work with trinary calculations, way over my head.
I'm clear to say that it is not my page for this reason: the engineer who commented on Chuck Moore's 'fanaticism' which made him uncomfortable (another post on this same topic), has exactly the kind of attitude that keeps true innovation from gaining ground. He uses the tools designed by fanatics only after they have become popular, yet actively expresses "discomfort" because of the work of a fanatic in process.
Associate a brilliant idea with a 'fanatic' and the idea will not be considered seriously for a long time. Yet where else do brilliant ideas come from?
That being said, I pointed people to trinary.cc because I find it interesting. Somebody named Steve Grubb seems to have put it together.
As to your other points; I see they are valid, and that the way to let other people consider a trinary system is not to rely on loaded words like "efficient."
As for me, I've been studying trinary logic in a form that has nothing to do with computers, and find it to be, in practice, more efficient and more stable than binary logic. Thus my attraction to the idea of building a trinary system in the first place. While the actual hardware (routing traces, whazzat?) is presently beyond me, the concept of thinking with three strands of thought rather than two is compelling to me.
For instance, I have been diagnosed as a person with bipolar illness. Given some thought, I realized that the name "bipolar" comes from a whole mindset that is itself bipolar, or categorical.
I prefer the term "tripolar" because it is more accurate in description--not only of my personal experience, but of what other people see me going through. Sometimes I'm manic. Other times I'm depressed. Is that all? No, actually, most of the time, I'm pretty 'normal' and that plateau is entirely lost in the nomenclature for "bipolar disorder."
I hope this helps explain what I mean by more efficient. It may require the same amount (or more) hardware to implement, but it will create an assembly language which is fundamentally different than binary systems.
Of course, we can overlay binary concepts on the trinary system, and I'm sure others will do that.
As for me, I'd like to start with the raw CPU you mentioned, built with a soldering iron, and design programming concepts upward from there, putting aside all binary concepts. I've a hunch we'll find that trinary systems are roughly the same as binary at the hardware level, but much more liberating at the software level. And that's what I'm interested in. I'll build my own hardware to get to that point, if I have to... and that's why I'll get to that point, even though I know little about hardware.
Thanks for listening.
prayer is the most effective way to lobby, although prayer without action is only wishful thinking.
No. Why think about trinary systems with binary limitations? Use the third position to indicate something which is quality-based, instead of quantity-based. On, Off, and Vector. On, Off, and RSN. On, Off, and Quality. On, Off, and God. You can use your imagination to come up with ideas which are not limited to blacks and whites; give it some color, have more fun with it.
On, Off, Purple.
-wp
You may want to look again at trinary.cc; especially notice the accuracy of how a three-based counting system handles numbers bigger than 17.
Trinary calculations are more like nature, and the calculations of fractions are more accurate than binary. The problem with roundoff errors you mentioned is offset by the fact that you don't have to roundoff so much, because trinary is better with moving larger numbers than binary.
I didn't say it was the Windows of hardware design. I think it's fascinating, and something that real geeks might be interested in.
The decision to move to binary, made in the late 1940s, was made at a time when memory switches were the size of a grain of salt, and if you listened closely, you could hear them clicking on and off... Yeah, I suppose I would choose a simple structure then, too.
-wp
Advertisers do not finance services like /.
/. could operate on zero income.
/., and advertisers leech off them, convincing some of us that we should be grateful to them. And you let 'em?
They have convinced you they do, but in fact,
Think about it. It is possible.
Truly, passion drives the services like
As for me, I suffer, and am not grateful for people whose modus operandi is to convince you to sell out.
-WP
Probably similar to the reason I think it's very funny that YOUR post could accurately be applied to the content of many slashdot posters. :-)
Looks like my question was too far out there to get moderated up. Perhaps it's a lame question. I believe it's a solid question, so I'll pose it again, maybe some of you have comments:
A trinary computer system is based on architecture which is much more efficient than binary, especially for moving large numbers around. Since you are designing your own processors, have you considered the possibility of building (and coding on) a trinary system? It seems like trinary eclipses the revolutionariness of even colorForth, by taking us into a whole nuther dimension of architecture...
-WP
Abraham Lincoln said it. When he became president, seven states had already seceded. He said in his inaugural address, "Look, we have no intention of attacking you. Put down your weapons and let us work this out like adults. But if you attack us, we will respond in defense, with force."
Who attacked first? And who won. There is a time for peace, and there is a time for war. When the two switch is in the hands of God, for if it were in the hands of man, we'd all be dead.
You've got a few minutes.
Jesus Christ died so you could live.
Do not listen to the man who is not willing to suffer with you.
Aye, you struck on the very essence of Christianity.
Jesus resurrected so we could all realize that standing there "being killed" was bearable. He did not tell people to do more than he did. He asks a lot--your heart broken, your spirit contrite... do you REALIZE what it takes to break a heart?
Lift up your cross. Otherwise, I will die for you, too. For I will not lift up that gun. A true Christian could never be convinced to drive a plane into a building. We would all rather be killed first.
-Jared and Jesus
Torpor:
With an ear that hears the crunching of bones in the footsteps you have tread, I respond:
The American "right" to meddle as you stated is no right, and we would do well to retreat to our own borders, which is where we were for well over a century. If you recall, we were 'isolationist' and reluctant to meddle in world affairs until World War One brought us out. It was difficult to retreat to our borders thereafter, but we did fairly well. Then World War II came, and we again reluctantly joined. I am not concerned with the secret plots which drew us into both wars, I am explaining why we are where we are in more general terms.
We Americans learned from the first war that, left to their own devices, the Europeans would start another war in a few years, and thus was born the Marshall Plan, one of the most brilliant strategies of all time; help rebuild even our enemies, and we can retreat back to our borders. Dispensing with the forces of paranoia released from Czarist Russia in 1918 took us another half-century beginning in 1950, but that has ended well. We are all a little more paranoid than before, but at least we get along with the Russians, thank God. Now, where were those Chinese folks we were chatting with before the wars began? Oh, there they are. Hmph. They're mad at us for some reason. Musta been all that opium...
Frankly, your typical American is similar to your typical Russian in that he has no interest in "meddling" with the affairs of other countries. These acts of meddling come about by the actions of influential minorities, which carry grudges and agendas that extend back far older than the United States. I seek not to join with them, and so when you accuse me along with them, I stand and deliver my dissenting opinion.
My point is that Americans are historically not meddlers; our history demonstrates that, from inception until recently, Americans sought actual justice, liberty, and a high standard of morality in all pursuits, mostly internally-designed, relying little upon the world around us. As that erodes because the world has drawn us into its agendas, our newborn innocence is dimmed, and our hope is blemished, but meddlers or not it still strides far ahead of the rest of the world. The Statue of Liberty, a gift from our brothers in France, is corroded, but not gone.
America is still the Standard Nation, and we did not come out of our quiet isolation specifically to cause trouble, but we were drawn out, carefully, calculatingly, by interests whose purpose was betrayal at the deepest levels of humanity. You know who they are, or you would not be so gentle in your speech. Blaming Americans for meddling is like blaming rattlesnake for biting you; what, did you not hear the rattle? It is like blaming child for making mistake; what, did you not teach me correctly? The United States was founded by people seeking a better way, who believed that God would provide, and he did. Now how can you move the nation off her foundation? You cannot but she will return.
We are not innocent, but neither are we inclined to meddle of our own nature. We Americans are curious.
What happens when you create a nation out of people who leave their homeland for something better? You create a nation of people who CANNOT TOLERATE a sad ending to a movie. Of the three hundred movies I saw in the past decade, I would estimate five or six had sad endings, and most of those were European imports. Two hundred ninety four had happy endings. The good guys won. And most often, the bad guys got blowed up but good in the course of things, but only after it was amply demonstrated they had plenty of time to mend their ways, and amply demonstrated that they were more evil than we realized at first.
Americans love happy endings; hold with us to the end, and you will see a happy ending.
And you folks all over the world who wish we would stop meddling... stop hating each other. Migrate to America, where the worst we do is meddle...
I love America, and I am so deeply American that I cannot comprehend any other way; I am eager to know what the rest of the world is doing, but all I see is people who prefer to stay in the dark ages. Give us more Gandhis. Quit boasting all the time; we're weary of your poseurs like Michel Fucoult, pretending to be sophisticated with stockings that match, when we can see your stockings don't match your honesty.
Show me how you are not uglier than the ugly American, and I will learn. Don't blame me for being spoiled by natural resources; come play in them with me. The invitation is open to you as it was to your ancestors, our brothers whom we left behind in search of something better. Accusing me of meddling just makes me neurotic, and having graduated from neurosis, I am seeking what of substance you have to bring.
Me, I bring curiousity. Mostly, I want to know what the Australians are doing, are you being responsible with the land you took from the Aborigines? We're just now figuring that one out...
-Jared
I stopped at your warning, and read no further. The question I have is, if it is grisly and morally iffy, why do you populate your thoughts with it so strongly that it tumbles out in public forum?
Father, please kindly return this man to sanity. Thy will be done.
What makes this terrorism is that the citizens who were bombed were 'innocent.'
If we agree to bomb them back, we are no longer innocent. We will polarize the world in ways incomprehensible.
This is why Jesus said to turn the other cheek; thereby our innocence will last longer than the sting of death.
Who is inspired by violence? The violent. Who fears it? The fearful. We meek tolerate it, with eyes ever on more eternal things. There is always room for charity, all the way up to the throne room of God. Put charity first, and the things of this world will grow strangely dim.
Please do not attack back. Let us die, rather than kill. And that is the only thing worth dying for.
Father, help us be kind to the geeks who drive airplanes into buildings. Only a geek could be that single-minded. Help us find you.
They are extremely rational. They are some of the brightest, deep-thinking people on earth. They resort to terrorism because they feel they have no voice, and because they have not learned how to think through the long-term consequences of their actions. Most of us have that liability.
Let the terrorists kill each other. Some wear uniforms, some live in camps in the hills of Afghanistan. Some attack civilians, some don't. There is no need to join with terrorists; they will kill each other, given time.
You, and you alone, have the choice about what you do in your own life. Be no terrorist.
The meek will inherit the earth.
-Jared
Jesus Christ resurrected. One point made by the resurrection was that even if you kill or are killed, your soul continues. Therefore don't kill or be killed, if you can help it.
Jesus Christ taught a simple doctrine: faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost. All else was in support of that doctrine. When he said, "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth," I understand him to mean "After all the bad guys kill each other off, the ones left standing will be the meek."
If we respond with violence to terrorism, we only justify their actions in the eyes of their friends. If, however, we respond with grace to terrorism, willing to die for the gift of liberty that we stand for, then we shine the light of injustice upon them, and the light of justice/mercy shines brighter and longer than any act of war or terror.
There is no state religion in the United States; it's prohibited in the Constitution, in several clauses. Yet our Creator is mentioned quite early in the document because the people who created this country were fit enough to submit themselves to God before setting about creating a nation.
By the way, the word 'shrink' has been out of vogue since the early 80s. Wake up, my friend. Xian, is that the X-Generation you refer to?
I dwell upon the rock of salvation.
Thank you, God.
God is on the side of Open Source development. Don't get me wrong, God is big enough to fight for the good on both sides, what I'm saying here is that my personal opinion is that God is in favor of Open Source development over closed source development. This means that Microsoft and other proprietary developers can huff and puff all they want, Open Source will win out in the end. People who are afraid of hackers have no fear of God; fear God, and hackers don't faze ya.
Just another God fearin' perl hacker rant
It's not cryptic. It's actually graceful and very precise:
paraphrase: 'By distributing Broadcast 2000, we opened ourselves up to liability from someone who would claim that our software caused him expensive damage. So we stopped distributing it. Mainly because we didn't want to be blamed because somebody else took a stupid risk, used our software in the process, and was relying on attornies to look for anyone except themselves to blame.'
My guess is that someone specifically threatened them with this kind of lawsuit, and they withdrew their software, kind enough to write in a manner identifying that person, without identifying that person. That's the kind of thing that makes me write like that.
Fourth and fifth post!
Linux is no longer the underdog. It is clear that Linux has a firm grip on the imagination of such battle-worn industrial giants as HP and IBM, that the battle is no longer in the hands of the geeks. The product has left our hands, and I for one, am delighted to see the Minuet link from earlier in the day. At least half the posts on that topic were mean-spirited, a stiff hill that Linus didn't have to climb in 1991.
The great work of Open Source is finished. Now the true geeks, return to working on obscure things that don't hit the news every six hours.
-Water Paradox
"Let your light so shine that men may see your good works and glorify your father in heaven."
Matthew 5:16. Nearby he talks about not hiding your light under a bushel, saying that Christians are the salt of the earth, given light which is not given to other beliefs, because of the unusually well-defined belief in an eternal (not cyclical) resurrection.
The point is that if you take the glory to yourself, that's all you get. But if you work in such a way that someone else is glorified, aye, now thats the heart of charity, service, and true love.
you asked.