I don't find these issues to be unexplainable or unsupported in the least. The idea that these events are unexplainable "phenomena" is nothing more than a direct consequence of a limitation resulting from an individual's chosen belief system.
Where in the article did the word "unexplainable" come up?
Oh, it didn't? This was just a poor excuse to post some religious-looking stuff?
I make posts on religion all the time, but only when it comes up. Try it.
As another related question...why is it more expensive to be poor than rich?
Actually, it's more expensive to be rich. Most people incur expenses that are outside their ability to afford, and they do it roughly proportional to their incomes. As a function of dollars per capita, it's much more expensive to be rich.
(Note: "Poor" = 15,000-30,000 gross income, "Rich" = 60,000-500,000 gross income. People who make more or less than that skew the results.)
Burning karma here, but ffs why are you putting an apostrophe on cds?
He's talking about the Live CDs' ownership of "really shine," whatever that is. It sounds like some kind of Japanese product.
"Buy our CDs! They have Really Shine (TM)!"
Of course, "This is one area where Live CD's really shine" is now a sentence fragment, and the apostrophe should have gone after the s. I guess some people just can't win...
Is there a way to use the quantum computer for TSP?
Nobody knows, as far as I know.
TSP is NP-complete. As nifty as Shor's algorithm is, it only solves an NP problem in polynomial time. That implies either 1) nothing about solving other NP problems in polynomial time, 2) that it might be possible to solve other NP problems, or 3) that integer factorization is not NP - it's either P or some other computational class we haven't discovered yet.
Thank god I cant remember my login, cause i feel dirty saying this but.......
funny. she could just lie there.....maybe she could be in necro-porn......no expression on her face....pretend to be dead......then they could "re-animte" her and she would just look all confused.......
ewww. My soul is dirty now.
Can somebody mod this down to oblivion? He's talking about another poster's autistic sister doing porn. How is this insightful?
Ah well, Christian Logic is not something I'll ever wrap my head around.
You're not trying very hard, that's why.
(New International Version)
John 8:58: "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
And they immediately tried to stone him for blasphemy. Why? "I am" is one of the names of God in the Old Testament. More specifically, it's a name-title, which means that whether Jesus was claiming to be God himself or not (and whether you interpret this from a trinitarian viewpoint or not), he was certainly claiming the same authority.
Now, on to your quotations. First, realize that the aim of the CEV is to make the Bible easy to understand orally. It's not exactly renowned for its exactness in translation. The further you get from the source, the more ideas and context you lose.
(KJV)
Deuteronomy 4:2: Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Well, that's certainly different, isn't it? So who can't add or take away? You. Israel. Man. Jesus, as God or with God's authority, can. Well, shucks. That argument went out the window.
Context!
Numbers 15:15: One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the LORD.
First, there's a little ambiguity over what's "for ever." Is it the ordinance, or the fact that strangers (non-Israelites) should observe the law of Moses when living in Israel? If it's the latter, no problem. If it's the former - see above. Jesus had the authority to revoke it.
In the scriptures, God says quite often that he doesn't change. His people, on the other hand, do. Christians live in different circumstances than Israelites. The final sacrifice has already been made - by Jesus. Why would we sacrifice animals, when that ordinance was supposed to help Israel "remember" something that hadn't happened yet? That's the logic behind the removal of it.
So case in point, the relationship was screwed regardless. If she was cheating it was done. In this case she wasn't but the trust eroded on both ends and it was done anyway.
That's great if there aren't any children involved. If there are, I'd expect a responsible person to try to save the relationship.
"I don't know why, really, but I didn't feel like I could trust her anymore" doesn't fly when you've got a five-year-old son wondering why he doesn't get to live with his daddy anymore.
Had we ended it when it first popped up, we would have saved ourselves a bit of time, and several thousand dollars (i.e. wedding deposits that don't get returned).
Or, maybe, had you dealt with it.
This "I'm gonna give up now because it just got difficult" attitude really worries me. How do we, your fellow members of society, trust that you're going to put any effort into saving your marriage when something like this happens to it? And yes, we do have a vested interest in the answer to that question.
Heisenberg was driving down the road, and a policeman pulled him over. He asked, "do you know how fast you were going?" Heisenberg replied, "no, but I can tell you where I am."
Gotta love nerd humor.
There's a little cottage in a tiny town in Germany with a plaque on the door which reads:
And with RSA & friends no longer usable, how do you propose to distribute your AES etc. keys?
Pick a one-way trapdoor function whose inverse is known to be NP-complete instead of just NP? That'd be a start.
Nobody in quantum computation knows whether quantum computers are capable of solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time, but most strongly suspect that they aren't.
I wish people wouldn't bring up this lie. It's not that we're stingy with our aid that people are starving. In fact, at some point, the more aid we give, the worse the situation gets. It undercuts local businesses, driving them away, and making the ones that stay incapable of producing. In the long term, that ruins an economy.
(Please note that I am not against giving aid altogether.)
One problem Theatetus didn't address is subsidies. When we subsidize our own agriculture too much, it drives the prices down for us - and also for other, poorer countries. Again, not good for local businesses in those countries. Just something to chew on.
Find the countries with mass starvation on the map, and notice that, in general, they are not free. Also notice that those that produce terrorists are not free.
If you want to help world hunger (and simultaneously end terrorism), support spreading freedom - whether it's Bush, Blair, Howard, or Iranian student protesters.
Satisfying in the sense that i feel accomplished for having read the bill, written my congressment and raised a stink about the issues and taken the time to analyze it. You on the otherhand seem to get satisfaction out of debunking the issue because you can.
O Mr. High and Mighty! I bow before your extreme involvement in the law making process!
Did it occur to you that he's defending it because he actually thinks it's a good idea? Personally, I don't want some idiot driving around Utah with four DUIs in other states. Got it?
If that turns out to be the case, then PS2 programming is a hint towards how it'll work. On the PS2, you generally configured the DMA controller to upload mini programs to the vector units, then DMA-chained data as streams from RAM through the just-uploaded program and onto the destination (usually the GS which rasterised the display).
Sounds a lot like pixel/vertex shaders. Is this how we're going to get around all our bandwidth problems now? Slice up our programs into little independent fragments and upload them to the CPU to run concurrently?
Hence forth, all space boddies will be known as "thingies".
Good point.
The grandparent is missing the fact that speaking and understanding is a fuzzy form of dictionary compression. "Planet" has information value, and so does "star." "Thingies" has hardly any: it just means "not the empty void." The only contextual inference I can make is that it's probably interesting.
What's a table? What's a chair? I could certainly come up with bunches of examples of objects between the two if I wanted, and if I were really clever, I could come up with a template that allowed a continuum of objects. If they ever did get popular, we'd have to find some way to classify them. We can only process so many words at a time, so having one short word helps in decompression.
Besides shortening our speaking patterns (which is good, because otherwise we'd be like Ents), classifications allow us to reason about objects. Would you like to do linear algebra without the matrix classification "invertible?" If nobody had tried to classify those kinds of matrices in the first place, linear algebra never would have progressed beyond an infant stage. As it is, "invertible" is shorthand for at least 30 matrix properties, most of which have to do with the matrix's interaction with other objects with certain other properties. Knowing them can make solving some problems much, much easier.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't find these issues to be unexplainable or unsupported in the least. The idea that these events are unexplainable "phenomena" is nothing more than a direct consequence of a limitation resulting from an individual's chosen belief system.
Where in the article did the word "unexplainable" come up?
Oh, it didn't? This was just a poor excuse to post some religious-looking stuff?
I make posts on religion all the time, but only when it comes up. Try it.
I'd say that the biggest flaw is the majority of web pages have a column layout, yet there is no way of *easily* creating columns in CSS2.
I can't think of anything more annoying than reading a web page laid out in columns.
Blinking columns, maybe.
Your sig:
I want peace on earth and good will toward men.
We are the United States Government. We don't do that sort of thing.
So...not that you're inherently biased or anything, right?
As another related question...why is it more expensive to be poor than rich?
Actually, it's more expensive to be rich. Most people incur expenses that are outside their ability to afford, and they do it roughly proportional to their incomes. As a function of dollars per capita, it's much more expensive to be rich.
(Note: "Poor" = 15,000-30,000 gross income, "Rich" = 60,000-500,000 gross income. People who make more or less than that skew the results.)
Probably more servers being shipped, people with an agenda (like MS) tend to use tricky language. Look at the GOP
Let's talk about Kerry's "misery index," next, okay? Just to make it fair.
I can't believe this is modded up.
Q: How do you identify a KDE programmer? :-)
A: He's swapped the functionality of the 'k' and space bar keys
Ikdon'tk nowkwhatkyou'rektalkingkabout.
Burning karma here, but ffs why are you putting an apostrophe on cds?
He's talking about the Live CDs' ownership of "really shine," whatever that is. It sounds like some kind of Japanese product.
"Buy our CDs! They have Really Shine (TM)!"
Of course, "This is one area where Live CD's really shine" is now a sentence fragment, and the apostrophe should have gone after the s. I guess some people just can't win...
Is there a way to use the quantum computer for TSP?
Nobody knows, as far as I know.
TSP is NP-complete. As nifty as Shor's algorithm is, it only solves an NP problem in polynomial time. That implies either 1) nothing about solving other NP problems in polynomial time, 2) that it might be possible to solve other NP problems, or 3) that integer factorization is not NP - it's either P or some other computational class we haven't discovered yet.
That would make an excellent April Fool's joke.
Had the Academie been in place for 10,000 years, frenchmen would still be grunting.
I think you can leave off the conditional.
Thank god I cant remember my login, cause i feel dirty saying this but.......
funny. she could just lie there.....maybe she could be in necro-porn......no expression on her face....pretend to be dead......then they could "re-animte" her and she would just look all confused.......
ewww. My soul is dirty now.
Can somebody mod this down to oblivion? He's talking about another poster's autistic sister doing porn. How is this insightful?
Ah well, Christian Logic is not something I'll ever wrap my head around.
You're not trying very hard, that's why.
(New International Version)
John 8:58: "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
And they immediately tried to stone him for blasphemy. Why? "I am" is one of the names of God in the Old Testament. More specifically, it's a name-title, which means that whether Jesus was claiming to be God himself or not (and whether you interpret this from a trinitarian viewpoint or not), he was certainly claiming the same authority.
Now, on to your quotations. First, realize that the aim of the CEV is to make the Bible easy to understand orally. It's not exactly renowned for its exactness in translation. The further you get from the source, the more ideas and context you lose.
(KJV)
Deuteronomy 4:2: Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Well, that's certainly different, isn't it? So who can't add or take away? You. Israel. Man. Jesus, as God or with God's authority, can. Well, shucks. That argument went out the window.
Context!
Numbers 15:15: One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the LORD.
First, there's a little ambiguity over what's "for ever." Is it the ordinance, or the fact that strangers (non-Israelites) should observe the law of Moses when living in Israel? If it's the latter, no problem. If it's the former - see above. Jesus had the authority to revoke it.
In the scriptures, God says quite often that he doesn't change. His people, on the other hand, do. Christians live in different circumstances than Israelites. The final sacrifice has already been made - by Jesus. Why would we sacrifice animals, when that ordinance was supposed to help Israel "remember" something that hadn't happened yet? That's the logic behind the removal of it.
So case in point, the relationship was screwed regardless. If she was cheating it was done. In this case she wasn't but the trust eroded on both ends and it was done anyway.
That's great if there aren't any children involved. If there are, I'd expect a responsible person to try to save the relationship.
"I don't know why, really, but I didn't feel like I could trust her anymore" doesn't fly when you've got a five-year-old son wondering why he doesn't get to live with his daddy anymore.
Had we ended it when it first popped up, we would have saved ourselves a bit of time, and several thousand dollars (i.e. wedding deposits that don't get returned).
Or, maybe, had you dealt with it.
This "I'm gonna give up now because it just got difficult" attitude really worries me. How do we, your fellow members of society, trust that you're going to put any effort into saving your marriage when something like this happens to it? And yes, we do have a vested interest in the answer to that question.
Heisenberg was driving down the road, and a policeman pulled him over. He asked, "do you know how fast you were going?" Heisenberg replied, "no, but I can tell you where I am."
Gotta love nerd humor.
There's a little cottage in a tiny town in Germany with a plaque on the door which reads:
"Heisenberg may have lodged here."
And with RSA & friends no longer usable, how do you propose to distribute your AES etc. keys?
Pick a one-way trapdoor function whose inverse is known to be NP-complete instead of just NP? That'd be a start.
Nobody in quantum computation knows whether quantum computers are capable of solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time, but most strongly suspect that they aren't.
...if the values in the array are distributed randomly (or a reasonable approximation thereof). If they're not, you might just be screwed.
Bravo!
I wish people wouldn't bring up this lie. It's not that we're stingy with our aid that people are starving. In fact, at some point, the more aid we give, the worse the situation gets. It undercuts local businesses, driving them away, and making the ones that stay incapable of producing. In the long term, that ruins an economy.
(Please note that I am not against giving aid altogether.)
One problem Theatetus didn't address is subsidies. When we subsidize our own agriculture too much, it drives the prices down for us - and also for other, poorer countries. Again, not good for local businesses in those countries. Just something to chew on.
But what I really wanted to get to was this:
Map of Freedom 2004
Find the countries with mass starvation on the map, and notice that, in general, they are not free. Also notice that those that produce terrorists are not free.
If you want to help world hunger (and simultaneously end terrorism), support spreading freedom - whether it's Bush, Blair, Howard, or Iranian student protesters.
No kidd'ing. He should at least tr'y for consist'ncy.
Maybe I should rename myself to "gramm'ar fashist."
Satisfying in the sense that i feel accomplished for having read the bill, written my congressment and raised a stink about the issues and taken the time to analyze it. You on the otherhand seem to get satisfaction out of debunking the issue because you can.
O Mr. High and Mighty! I bow before your extreme involvement in the law making process!
Did it occur to you that he's defending it because he actually thinks it's a good idea? Personally, I don't want some idiot driving around Utah with four DUIs in other states. Got it?
I'm still upset about the buggy whip manufacturers.
If that turns out to be the case, then PS2 programming is a hint towards how it'll work. On the PS2, you generally configured the DMA controller to upload mini programs to the vector units, then DMA-chained data as streams from RAM through the just-uploaded program and onto the destination (usually the GS which rasterised the display).
Sounds a lot like pixel/vertex shaders. Is this how we're going to get around all our bandwidth problems now? Slice up our programs into little independent fragments and upload them to the CPU to run concurrently?
Amazing...no kidding. Look at the "Apollo 11 First Man" panorama. My first thought was, "You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought..."
Hence forth, all space boddies will be known as "thingies".
Good point.
The grandparent is missing the fact that speaking and understanding is a fuzzy form of dictionary compression. "Planet" has information value, and so does "star." "Thingies" has hardly any: it just means "not the empty void." The only contextual inference I can make is that it's probably interesting.
What's a table? What's a chair? I could certainly come up with bunches of examples of objects between the two if I wanted, and if I were really clever, I could come up with a template that allowed a continuum of objects. If they ever did get popular, we'd have to find some way to classify them. We can only process so many words at a time, so having one short word helps in decompression.
Besides shortening our speaking patterns (which is good, because otherwise we'd be like Ents), classifications allow us to reason about objects. Would you like to do linear algebra without the matrix classification "invertible?" If nobody had tried to classify those kinds of matrices in the first place, linear algebra never would have progressed beyond an infant stage. As it is, "invertible" is shorthand for at least 30 matrix properties, most of which have to do with the matrix's interaction with other objects with certain other properties. Knowing them can make solving some problems much, much easier.
After that, they can write a better text editor.
And after that, a new window manager! They could call it HURDMaker.
I'm quivering with anticipation already.
I normally associate DNF with 'Did Not Finish', which is displayed instead of a time in motorsport races on TV. Quite appropriate really :)
You are not a true geek. (Motorsport races?) DNF stands for "Disjunctive Normal Form."
There's a joke in there, somewhere.