I've always been Christian first. Yes, that wound up precluding a full active duty career. But it was more bureaucracy in general than anything military-specific that drove me forth. Also, I was an overly-righteous, angry young creep. Took a while to grow up.
So it sounds like the marketing pitch is that you want gadgets, just not so integrated that you can't understand/repair them.
Not everything needs to be optimized to a fare-thee-well, with "an app for that".
Nobody buys a 'Toast Decorator'. They buy a 'Toast Decorator Factory'. If you don't pick the right framework, you're never going to be more than an HTML coder.
Her goal is similar to other neoliberals like Cameron to reduce state influnce[sic] as much as possible.
Which probably explains why Merkel is moving at a breakneck pace to put a referendum on EU membership in front of German voters.
Oh, wait: she isn't. Probably because she's kind of a statist tool, like the rest of the Eurocrats.
I never would expect to you to accept any contradiction to your upbringing as 'superior'. That just won't happen. All challenges will be demolished!
I'm sincerely seeking the ultimate truth. I've laughed at your pure "Argument Clinic" approach before. I mean, if you've actually got the ultimate truth, trot it out, man! The worst question I have for you is "Why?", which any ultimate truth should absorb handily.
Which do you prefer, the fiction of wishful thinking and longing for a past that exists only 19th century novels, or the facts of the here and now and ensuring your children will be better off than you are?
A new claim! What 19th century novels, exactly, am I living in? Is it Dickens?
*sigh* It's always about ME, isn't it? It really never is about you. I'd cheerfully trade up from the faith I have to a superior offering.
But all we get from you is snide insinuations of inferiority. It's as if you were just s theological Three Card Monty dealer, or something.
Progress is expanding to meet the needs of expanding Progress.
If you're not Loyal to the Group of 17, and conforming to Correct Thought, then your disharmony will be modified with an eye toward perfecting it.
In that context, the question is whether you can stand at the registers of the computer, watching the gates flip, and confirm/deny the presence of an operating system.
He's pointing out the lack of Darwinian evidence. In a way, this A/C reply criticizes itself, as it didn't put much effort into discovering Nagel's argument.
Slashdot Mirror
I've always been Christian first. Yes, that wound up precluding a full active duty career. But it was more bureaucracy in general than anything military-specific that drove me forth. Also, I was an overly-righteous, angry young creep. Took a while to grow up.
I'm actually retired from the military, and you're just off the mark, boss.
So it sounds like the marketing pitch is that you want gadgets, just not so integrated that you can't understand/repair them.
Not everything needs to be optimized to a fare-thee-well, with "an app for that".
Nice, but seriously. Programming is about creativity. Managing large wads of people, e.g. the military, is about crushing creativity.
Nobody buys a 'Toast Decorator'. They buy a 'Toast Decorator Factory'. If you don't pick the right framework, you're never going to be more than an HTML coder.
I think there is merit to Agile's overarching observation that "people don't scale".
Old and busted: anthropormphism.
The new hotness: gynomorphism.
Was that an African or European velociraptor?
As long as you can just guess the correct answer 100% of the time, why bother with calculations?
Call it "The God Optimization".
Right. #2 applies.
You're incorrect.
Not his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti?
My dual-citizen wife confirms you point on zero referenda.
"The state exists to serve man."
FTFY
Her goal is similar to other neoliberals like Cameron to reduce state influnce[sic] as much as possible.
Which probably explains why Merkel is moving at a breakneck pace to put a referendum on EU membership in front of German voters.
Oh, wait: she isn't. Probably because she's kind of a statist tool, like the rest of the Eurocrats.
There is no technological solution to the insider threat.
Lot of effort and $ in trying to minimize it, though.
Not strictly true.
I never would expect to you to accept any contradiction to your upbringing as 'superior'. That just won't happen. All challenges will be demolished!
I'm sincerely seeking the ultimate truth. I've laughed at your pure "Argument Clinic" approach before. I mean, if you've actually got the ultimate truth, trot it out, man! The worst question I have for you is "Why?", which any ultimate truth should absorb handily.
Which do you prefer, the fiction of wishful thinking and longing for a past that exists only 19th century novels, or the facts of the here and now and ensuring your children will be better off than you are?
A new claim! What 19th century novels, exactly, am I living in? Is it Dickens?
Your religion is entirely subjective
*sigh* It's always about ME, isn't it? It really never is about you. I'd cheerfully trade up from the faith I have to a superior offering.
But all we get from you is snide insinuations of inferiority. It's as if you were just s theological Three Card Monty dealer, or something.
When did I equate these? You continue to astound with your sudden insights into things that I never remember doing. Must've been my Evil Twin Skippy.
I mean, when you're as utterly correct as I am, there's no need to get all jerky-boy about it, is there? :-)
Progress is expanding to meet the needs of expanding Progress.
If you're not Loyal to the Group of 17, and conforming to Correct Thought, then your disharmony will be modified with an eye toward perfecting it.
Why stop at crushing the soul? How can we believe that a mind exists, either? Are we not all mere pillars of molecules?
In that context, the question is whether you can stand at the registers of the computer, watching the gates flip, and confirm/deny the presence of an operating system.
What evidence does he provide?
He's pointing out the lack of Darwinian evidence. In a way, this A/C reply criticizes itself, as it didn't put much effort into discovering Nagel's argument.