Gore won the popular vote and that's all that should matter. Structuring the votes via electoral college to suppress the voice of populated states and amplify the voice of the less popular states represents an obviously inaccurate view of majority. This is in no way fair.
This article should be required reading by all participants in any discussion of reforming the Electoral College.
The article mentioned that people have changed their desired automobile equipment due to terrorism. They say that communication is what's now important. How does that have anything to do with terrorism? The example that they call "more telling" is that people want the air bag notification system, which "sends a signal to a central office when a car's air bag is deployed" so emergency services can be dispatched.
That doesn't have to do with terrorism. That's a safety issue. I just don't see anything in this article that would lead me to believe that people are thinking of terrorism when they consider options for their car.
I think you misunderstand me. The point of my argument was not whether or not embryonic stem cell research is wrong. It was to simply say that belief one way or the other does not necessarily make one not a Christian.
Ah. I see where you're coming from now. I think that's fair. I happen to disagree, but there's logic in your words. What you're basically saying is that you believe that ensoulment happens at uteral implantation, rather than conception.
I disagree, but I can respect your viewpoint.
I believe that saying that conception that doesn't involve a womb isn't "conception" per se is splitting hairs a bit too finely. Considering the value that Christ, God, and Holy Spirit place on Life, I find it hard to believe that They would make that distinction. To me, it sounds too much like the old argument that the black slaves in the American south were not "human," thus property laws could apply to them. Or the Aryans saying that only their genetic stock was "human." Considering how precious Life is, we have to err on the side of protecting it in all possible forms.
Here's an interesting intellectual game to play. I believe that sometime in the next ten years, scientists will produce an artificial womb. Some news sources say that this is very close to happening. That is, they will show that it's possible to take sperm and egg, conceive a zygote, and bring it to term without ever emplanting it in a woman's womb. Would a child "born" from such technology be human? Would it have Life?
Obviously such a situation would be rather rare, but our answer helps shed light more precisely on our thoughts on the matter.
Then we have a basis to continue discussion - that of the definition of sin. Forgiveness is certainly an important issue, and a primary one when considering one's relationship with Christ. But let's just talk the consideration of sin - those conscious actions which separate the sinner from God.
I'll go one step and ask if you believe that the taking of human life is a sin. Because that's the basis of the argument against embryonic stem cell research. There is a large body of scripture that directly contradicts the argument that "personhood" or "ensoulment" begins at birth or even the beginning of the third trimester. At the risk of providing too much, I'll point to http://www.christianliferesources.com/home/pdf/scr ipref98.pdf
Thus, it is precisely because I choose to follow your #2 that I believe that opposition to embryonic stem cell research direct consequence of being a Christian.
1. Faith in God 2. Believing that God sent His only son, Jesus, to die on a cross for our sin.
Now tell me, where does stem cell research fit in there???
If you are arguing that stem cell research does not fit in there, then I would argue that you cannot place any action in there. If being a Christian is purely one of faith, then it matters not what behavior we have. Prayer? Not important. Fasting? Fooolery. Alms giving? Whistling past the graveyard.
Christ taught otherwise. He gave very specific instructions about how we are to treat our fellow man. Your #2 above would suggest that we follow His teachings and the scripture that His teachings are rooted in.
I sincerely hope you believe that your actions and behavior have an effect on your relationship with Christ.
(It is futile to contine and make the Christian argument against stem cell research and the destruction of a human embryo without the moral basis outlined above.)
Planned Parenthood is an organization that employs doctors who perform abortions. However, doctors who perform abortions are employed by institutions other than Planned Parenthood. Saying "family planning doctor" might actually be more accurate, as it encompasses a larger group of people.
An opposition to abortion does not necessarily have to be a religious one. There is a lot of purely scientific evidence to suggest that a fetus (depending on the gestational age) has brain functionality identical to a newborn baby, sees, smells, thinks, reacts, lives in the same way that you or I do.
The scientist Carl Sagan, definitely not a religious figure by any stretch of the imagination, wrote an essay looking at this from a scientific point of view. His conclusion is somewhere in the middle, that it doesn't make sense to say that a conceived zygote is a human, but that it does make sense to say that a third-trimester fetus is.
Consequently, one may believe that abortion (especially late term) is murder purely from a scientific and medical viewpoint.
It is also interesting that the Fedora Steering Committee has transferred Fedora Core 1 into the Fedora Legacy Project.
Really? I'd love to know where the source of that information is. I see no mention of it on the Fedora Legacy Project site. In fact, the fedora legacy download site only has up to RHL9.
Well, it was because/. keeps losing my login, and that post accidentally went in as AC. I had to make a change for the database to accept a second post.
Locking down graphics settings and views and such is all well and good.
However, if ID is relying on a shared library for their OpenGL implementation, then they're ultimately playing a losing game. There are a number of software projects that can swap out the OpenGL shared library at runtime and intercept all of the gl and wgl calls. With this functionality, you can make the graphics look however you want them to. Remove shadows, change fov, even change the viewpoint entirely!
Most adults run IE and Word. And that's about it. I read a report once that showed that users of home computers use on average something like 1.6 applications. That's it! Obviously, the business world is much different.
So merely saying "Applications" does not explain the prevelance of Windows, especially with Mozilla and OpenOffice around. It explains many IT departments, but not home users.
That's true. Though lately I've noticed that I don't care so much about who in particular is saying what. Dunno if that's a good thing, just something I've noticed.
Well, go hook a Wacom table to an OS X macintosh and see how well it recognizes your handwriting. Apple has new software in place already for this. I have pretty crappy handwriting, and Inkwell recognizes it a lot better than the Newton ever did.
It was designated "Protect As Restricted Data" (PARD), which is not a classified designation. The government retroactively classified it to prosecute him.
PARD is never intended to be a permanent marking. All PARD must be properly identified and marked with the appropriate level of classification in relatively short order.
Why do you believe that marking Wen Ho Lee's PARD as "classified" (SRD, presumably) was out of line? What is "retroactive" about the normal procedure of handling PARD?
I've been reading a lot of posts to this article which claim that there is no free version of Qt for Windows. If so, then what's this?
I don't program on Windows, so I can't tell definitively, but that web page reads right. It sounds like there's a GPL version for Windows that lets you write non-commercial software without paying a dime to Trolltech. It's based on version 2.3, but it is Qt.
While your comment might have been meant in jest, I disagree. I would fire someone like that in a heartbeat. It's cheaper for me to fire him, hire someone new, and rewrite the code than it is for me to retain a crappy programmer who intentionally obfuscates code.
Slashdot Mirror
Gore won the popular vote and that's all that should matter. Structuring the votes via electoral college to suppress the voice of populated states and amplify the voice of the less popular states represents an obviously inaccurate view of majority. This is in no way fair.
This article should be required reading by all participants in any discussion of reforming the Electoral College.
I wish USAians would get over this terror thing.
The article mentioned that people have changed their desired automobile equipment due to terrorism. They say that communication is what's now important. How does that have anything to do with terrorism? The example that they call "more telling" is that people want the air bag notification system, which "sends a signal to a central office when a car's air bag is deployed" so emergency services can be dispatched.
That doesn't have to do with terrorism. That's a safety issue. I just don't see anything in this article that would lead me to believe that people are thinking of terrorism when they consider options for their car.
I think you misunderstand me. The point of my argument was not whether or not embryonic stem cell research is wrong. It was to simply say that belief one way or the other does not necessarily make one not a Christian.
Ah. I see where you're coming from now. I think that's fair. I happen to disagree, but there's logic in your words. What you're basically saying is that you believe that ensoulment happens at uteral implantation, rather than conception.
I disagree, but I can respect your viewpoint.
I believe that saying that conception that doesn't involve a womb isn't "conception" per se is splitting hairs a bit too finely. Considering the value that Christ, God, and Holy Spirit place on Life, I find it hard to believe that They would make that distinction. To me, it sounds too much like the old argument that the black slaves in the American south were not "human," thus property laws could apply to them. Or the Aryans saying that only their genetic stock was "human." Considering how precious Life is, we have to err on the side of protecting it in all possible forms.
Here's an interesting intellectual game to play. I believe that sometime in the next ten years, scientists will produce an artificial womb. Some news sources say that this is very close to happening. That is, they will show that it's possible to take sperm and egg, conceive a zygote, and bring it to term without ever emplanting it in a woman's womb. Would a child "born" from such technology be human? Would it have Life?
Obviously such a situation would be rather rare, but our answer helps shed light more precisely on our thoughts on the matter.
Then we have a basis to continue discussion - that of the definition of sin. Forgiveness is certainly an important issue, and a primary one when considering one's relationship with Christ. But let's just talk the consideration of sin - those conscious actions which separate the sinner from God.
r ipref98.pdf
I'll go one step and ask if you believe that the taking of human life is a sin. Because that's the basis of the argument against embryonic stem cell research. There is a large body of scripture that directly contradicts the argument that "personhood" or "ensoulment" begins at birth or even the beginning of the third trimester. At the risk of providing too much, I'll point to http://www.christianliferesources.com/home/pdf/sc
Thus, it is precisely because I choose to follow your #2 that I believe that opposition to embryonic stem cell research direct consequence of being a Christian.
1. Faith in God
2. Believing that God sent His only son, Jesus, to die on a cross for our sin.
Now tell me, where does stem cell research fit in there???
If you are arguing that stem cell research does not fit in there, then I would argue that you cannot place any action in there. If being a Christian is purely one of faith, then it matters not what behavior we have. Prayer? Not important. Fasting? Fooolery. Alms giving? Whistling past the graveyard.
Christ taught otherwise. He gave very specific instructions about how we are to treat our fellow man. Your #2 above would suggest that we follow His teachings and the scripture that His teachings are rooted in.
I sincerely hope you believe that your actions and behavior have an effect on your relationship with Christ.
(It is futile to contine and make the Christian argument against stem cell research and the destruction of a human embryo without the moral basis outlined above.)
Sounds like you would love Deus Ex.
Planned Parenthood is an organization that employs doctors who perform abortions. However, doctors who perform abortions are employed by institutions other than Planned Parenthood. Saying "family planning doctor" might actually be more accurate, as it encompasses a larger group of people.
An opposition to abortion does not necessarily have to be a religious one. There is a lot of purely scientific evidence to suggest that a fetus (depending on the gestational age) has brain functionality identical to a newborn baby, sees, smells, thinks, reacts, lives in the same way that you or I do.
The scientist Carl Sagan, definitely not a religious figure by any stretch of the imagination, wrote an essay looking at this from a scientific point of view. His conclusion is somewhere in the middle, that it doesn't make sense to say that a conceived zygote is a human, but that it does make sense to say that a third-trimester fetus is.
Consequently, one may believe that abortion (especially late term) is murder purely from a scientific and medical viewpoint.
Front page news.
:-)
I see. Thanks for the pointer.
I hope someone tells the fedoralegacy.org people about this.
It is also interesting that the Fedora Steering Committee has transferred Fedora Core 1 into the Fedora Legacy Project.
Really? I'd love to know where the source of that information is. I see no mention of it on the Fedora Legacy Project site. In fact, the fedora legacy download site only has up to RHL9.
More info, please!
Well, it was because /. keeps losing my login, and that post accidentally went in as AC. I had to make a change for the database to accept a second post.
Locking down graphics settings and views and such is all well and good.
However, if ID is relying on a shared library for their OpenGL implementation, then they're ultimately playing a losing game. There are a number of software projects that can swap out the OpenGL shared library at runtime and intercept all of the gl and wgl calls. With this functionality, you can make the graphics look however you want them to. Remove shadows, change fov, even change the viewpoint entirely!
Most adults run IE and Word. And that's about it. I read a report once that showed that users of home computers use on average something like 1.6 applications. That's it! Obviously, the business world is much different.
So merely saying "Applications" does not explain the prevelance of Windows, especially with Mozilla and OpenOffice around. It explains many IT departments, but not home users.
That's true. Though lately I've noticed that I don't care so much about who in particular is saying what. Dunno if that's a good thing, just something I've noticed.
Turn off sigs. /. becomes a lot less annoying that way, at least in my experience.
Only on slashdot can an article about a cool robot be turned into a harangue about religion.
Uh, okay. It's hard to find a site that has more substance than groklaw. I mean, what more do you want than the actual court documents?
It's certainly your right to desire less editorializing. But to claim that there is no substance to groklaw is just trolling.
[A]re there any 'demoronizer' type utilities that can reasonably create ascii version of html email?
Sure. I use lynx -dump -stdin all the time.
It's spelled "rendez-vous".
No it isn't. It comes from the French rendez vous, but a hyphen is not involved.
Well, go hook a Wacom table to an OS X macintosh and see how well it recognizes your handwriting. Apple has new software in place already for this. I have pretty crappy handwriting, and Inkwell recognizes it a lot better than the Newton ever did.
It was designated "Protect As Restricted Data" (PARD), which is not a classified designation. The government retroactively classified it to prosecute him.
PARD is never intended to be a permanent marking. All PARD must be properly identified and marked with the appropriate level of classification in relatively short order.
Why do you believe that marking Wen Ho Lee's PARD as "classified" (SRD, presumably) was out of line? What is "retroactive" about the normal procedure of handling PARD?
I've been reading a lot of posts to this article which claim that there is no free version of Qt for Windows. If so, then what's this?
I don't program on Windows, so I can't tell definitively, but that web page reads right. It sounds like there's a GPL version for Windows that lets you write non-commercial software without paying a dime to Trolltech. It's based on version 2.3, but it is Qt.
If I'm wrong here, please educate me.
While your comment might have been meant in jest, I disagree. I would fire someone like that in a heartbeat. It's cheaper for me to fire him, hire someone new, and rewrite the code than it is for me to retain a crappy programmer who intentionally obfuscates code.
If you think it would make any difference, you might try emailing timothy (or daddypants@slashdot.org) and see if they'll remove the link.
Just a thought...
You're right, you certainly wouldn't hit on it by accident. You'd have to start with it.
But I disagree that it's "so complex." Maybe I'm daft, but it doesn't look complex to me.
Here's the pattern.
Looks like a series of 5 dots, with predefined angles between the central dot and the other 4. That should be able to be specified rather simply.