That's it right. Because religions is all about hate. So making comments about them will, obviously, draws the hate. When you talk about religion in any critical way, you can expect nothing else: only hate.
It never ceases to amaze me how Christians keep trying to coopt stuff. Now people can't even make posts on Dec 25th, because that date belongs to zombi-jesus. How probably never even existed. Issac Newton, on the other hand, certainly existed.
How odd. Someone posting as AC saying someone else is a coward. Typical religious apologist. Don't you have a clinic to bomb? Or maybe a soldier's funeral to picket?
There is a very good reason why we have such a huge English language reading market: if we want to read good books, we have to read in English. Unless you are talking Sidney Sheldon, Agatha Christie, or the latest Hollywood-is-making-a-blockbuster-movie-adaptation novel, you won't find it here. I mean, c'mon, even a good number of Stephen King books aren't available. How lame it that. Anyway, I rather read them in English anyway. Translations sometimes can destroy a book.
Ahh, thank you. I live in Brazil, and most of my books are in English. But I can understand your reasons for restricting the area. You, for once, have a good reason for it. Thank you. Hope we can eventually get it here.
What stops crime is not the severity of the punishment, but how likely the person is to be punished for it. Say the odds of being punished for a crime are 0.01%, people won't care if the punishment if a fine or 10 years in jail. So firing the officers won't solve it. Punishing them won't solve it. What need to happen is more people filming, so the odds of them being punished for whatever they do increases drastically.
If a cop is doing something wrong (or even right, hey, lets give some positive feedback also), when he looks around he should see several people filming it.
You are kidding, right? DEVELOPS Windows? Are you trying to shift the question for any particular reason? Do you even know what "ripping someone else's technology" mean?
The whole concept of Windows based interface was around with Apple, NEC, Xerox (which is also where the mouse comes from) and a couple others before Microsoft adopted it (and claimed they created it). Notice that Microsoft doesn't say they improved it, or "took it one step further". They claim to have created it.
And again Microsoft is ripping someone else's technology and saying it is their own invention. Take your pick: dos, windows, mouse... the list goes on and on.
Are these guys serious? This sounds like the city of Rio de Janeiro requiring a license before you can show the state of christ the redeemer on any video piece (advertisement, movies etc), which is tried to do (not sure if they passed the law or not). It is insane. These are public places. What's next, the FAA requiring a license before you can shoot a picture of the sky?
Sigh, when you make theories to fit your observations, of course they match.
And how, pray tell me, should we be making our theories, if not to fit our observations (facts and evidence)? The problem is when people try to distort (or ignore) facts to fit their theories. Or when people aren't willing to revise or discard their theories when presented with new facts.
Doesn't make them any more correct
Of course it does. More than that, that is the exact definition of a theory being correct: matching the facts. It is the the theory doesn't match the observations (facts and evidence) that it is incorrect, and needs to be revised or even discarded altogether. There is even the process where a theory gets revised so many times and it loses all credibility, even if not disproven in its entirety ("God of the gaps theory"), where you simply reverse the burden of proof and discard any validity based on preexistence and, since there is nothing to corroborate the theory, it goes the way of Russell's Teapot.
And no, if you run that backwards it doesn't work out that its all in the same place
I do take it with skepticism. I can also do basic math. Unless something changes, things tend to continue moving on the same direction. If the amount of paint residue on the oceans is increasing steadily, it will continue to increase (again, if nothing changes). So yeah, there is cause for worry, maybe even alarm. Panic? No. Panic will be when we start seeing large scale effects of this.
I both agree and disagree with you. On other hand, they are making the production company and NBC a ton of money. On the other hand, the writers are getting much less than the actors, and I think that at least 60% of the money being made by the show is because of the actors. The rationale, however, is that the writers are (in theory) easier to replace than the actor, because the public don't see them.
9.0.0.0/8 used to be allocated to IBM. They used it for internal routing like other companies use 10/8 addresses. Not sure how this A class network stands right now.
is the US climate and land conducive to growing sugar cane?
Mostly it is not, unless you somehow genetically engineer sugar cane for different climates (some groups are working on it). The reason our climate and land are so conductive to growing sugar cane gives Brazil an edge, and is perhaps the reason it is more successful than a few other countries that also have a huge alternative fuel program.
Corn based ethanol has less energy potential and is much more expensive. However, it is the only viable option available for the US right now. There are several studies involving kelp, sugar beat and castor beans that might benefit the US. Castor beans has a lot of potential. But it is much easier to pass laws and incentives for corn related programs in the US, for obvious reasons.
Brazil is considered one of the world leader in ethanol, the country with the most successful alternative fuel program, one of the cheaper (if not cheapest) ethanol technologies and, by using sugar cane, one of the most energy efficient. All cars here can easily handle up to E40, and most cars can handle any mix of gas and ethanol. Oh, and the flex fuel technology for any kind of mix? Mostly developed here also.
That all being said, I don't use pure ethanol. We are not able to find pure gas here, because of local laws (the government mandates the ethanol level), but I avoid it as much as I can. Even with everything we have in our favor here, it is still most expensive, and the overall car performance is not as good as with gas. For ethanol to be a cheaper option for the consumer, its price on the pump has to be no higher than 75% of gas.
There is, however, another side of the coin. Gas is a limited resource. We need to develop alternative fuel technologies, and right now ethanol is the best, if not only, viable option. The technology is getting cheaper everyday, and improving a lot. As someone who saw the so called birth of the car ethanol, in the 1980's, I can see how much that changed.
Last, but not least, gas with some ethanol in it does pollute less. I remember seeing some time ago some studies regarding E20(ish), and the number was impressive.
All told, it is an important technology, it is not a scam or a threat, but it is still improving. Luckly, we still have the luxury to choose, so we can say no. That won't last, tho.
Which is no reason to debate them. Specially since if anyone buy into their arguments, they are already beyond any ability to think critically or understanding logic, so trying to argue the merits of their argument is worse than useless.
Whenever you engage them as equals in a debate (like Bill Nye did), you are just giving them credibility they wouldn't otherwise have.
Lets just stop pretending these guys are worth listening to, and stop giving them an illusion of credibility, shall we?
Let them fade into obscurity and talk to their own flock. We don't give flatearthers this kind of attention. They are just making noise to promote themself. Like their site, which is featured prominently in this article (and which I'm sure a lot of people clicked on).
Slashdot Mirror
That's it right. Because religions is all about hate. So making comments about them will, obviously, draws the hate.
When you talk about religion in any critical way, you can expect nothing else: only hate.
Is that what you are saying?
It never ceases to amaze me how Christians keep trying to coopt stuff. Now people can't even make posts on Dec 25th, because that date belongs to zombi-jesus. How probably never even existed.
Issac Newton, on the other hand, certainly existed.
How odd. Someone posting as AC saying someone else is a coward.
Typical religious apologist.
Don't you have a clinic to bomb? Or maybe a soldier's funeral to picket?
Cutting North Korea's Internet access is just a trial run, the real objective is to cut Internet access to everyone in the U.S.A.
Isn't Comcast already doing exactly that?
Didn't the US say they were going to try and get North Korea's internet access cut?
There is a very good reason why we have such a huge English language reading market: if we want to read good books, we have to read in English. Unless you are talking Sidney Sheldon, Agatha Christie, or the latest Hollywood-is-making-a-blockbuster-movie-adaptation novel, you won't find it here. I mean, c'mon, even a good number of Stephen King books aren't available. How lame it that.
Anyway, I rather read them in English anyway. Translations sometimes can destroy a book.
Ahh, thank you.
I live in Brazil, and most of my books are in English.
But I can understand your reasons for restricting the area. You, for once, have a good reason for it.
Thank you. Hope we can eventually get it here.
Cheers,
And of course it would have country limitations.
In the information era, this is almost insulting, it is were not to be expected.
So, why is that? Is it the publishers that are forcing this? If so, care to name names?
What stops crime is not the severity of the punishment, but how likely the person is to be punished for it.
Say the odds of being punished for a crime are 0.01%, people won't care if the punishment if a fine or 10 years in jail.
So firing the officers won't solve it. Punishing them won't solve it. What need to happen is more people filming, so the odds of them being punished for whatever they do increases drastically.
If a cop is doing something wrong (or even right, hey, lets give some positive feedback also), when he looks around he should see several people filming it.
You are kidding, right? DEVELOPS Windows? Are you trying to shift the question for any particular reason?
Do you even know what "ripping someone else's technology" mean?
The whole concept of Windows based interface was around with Apple, NEC, Xerox (which is also where the mouse comes from) and a couple others before Microsoft adopted it (and claimed they created it). Notice that Microsoft doesn't say they improved it, or "took it one step further". They claim to have created it.
Do your homework, please.
And again Microsoft is ripping someone else's technology and saying it is their own invention. Take your pick: dos, windows, mouse... the list goes on and on.
Are these guys serious? This sounds like the city of Rio de Janeiro requiring a license before you can show the state of christ the redeemer on any video piece (advertisement, movies etc), which is tried to do (not sure if they passed the law or not). It is insane.
These are public places. What's next, the FAA requiring a license before you can shoot a picture of the sky?
Sigh, when you make theories to fit your observations, of course they match.
And how, pray tell me, should we be making our theories, if not to fit our observations (facts and evidence)?
The problem is when people try to distort (or ignore) facts to fit their theories. Or when people aren't willing to revise or discard their theories when presented with new facts.
Doesn't make them any more correct
Of course it does. More than that, that is the exact definition of a theory being correct: matching the facts.
It is the the theory doesn't match the observations (facts and evidence) that it is incorrect, and needs to be revised or even discarded altogether. There is even the process where a theory gets revised so many times and it loses all credibility, even if not disproven in its entirety ("God of the gaps theory"), where you simply reverse the burden of proof and discard any validity based on preexistence and, since there is nothing to corroborate the theory, it goes the way of Russell's Teapot.
And no, if you run that backwards it doesn't work out that its all in the same place
:citation needed:
I'm extremely happy with my TL-WR1043ND running OpenWRT.
Gigabit, Wireless N, USB port.
The USB port is particularly useful, since I use 3G as a backup connection, when my ADSL goes down.
I do take it with skepticism. I can also do basic math.
Unless something changes, things tend to continue moving on the same direction. If the amount of paint residue on the oceans is increasing steadily, it will continue to increase (again, if nothing changes).
So yeah, there is cause for worry, maybe even alarm. Panic? No. Panic will be when we start seeing large scale effects of this.
I both agree and disagree with you.
On other hand, they are making the production company and NBC a ton of money.
On the other hand, the writers are getting much less than the actors, and I think that at least 60% of the money being made by the show is because of the actors.
The rationale, however, is that the writers are (in theory) easier to replace than the actor, because the public don't see them.
"People have so many choices on TV now, so no one's asking for you to marry us. You can enjoy our show without a weekly appointment."
And that, my friends, and part of the reason people keep turning on to watch it.
9.0.0.0/8 used to be allocated to IBM. They used it for internal routing like other companies use 10/8 addresses. Not sure how this A class network stands right now.
Doesn't castor beans also grow pretty much everywhere? As far as I know, it is even better than switchgrass.
is the US climate and land conducive to growing sugar cane?
Mostly it is not, unless you somehow genetically engineer sugar cane for different climates (some groups are working on it). The reason our climate and land are so conductive to growing sugar cane gives Brazil an edge, and is perhaps the reason it is more successful than a few other countries that also have a huge alternative fuel program.
Corn based ethanol has less energy potential and is much more expensive. However, it is the only viable option available for the US right now. There are several studies involving kelp, sugar beat and castor beans that might benefit the US. Castor beans has a lot of potential. But it is much easier to pass laws and incentives for corn related programs in the US, for obvious reasons.
Brazil is considered one of the world leader in ethanol, the country with the most successful alternative fuel program, one of the cheaper (if not cheapest) ethanol technologies and, by using sugar cane, one of the most energy efficient. All cars here can easily handle up to E40, and most cars can handle any mix of gas and ethanol. Oh, and the flex fuel technology for any kind of mix? Mostly developed here also.
That all being said, I don't use pure ethanol. We are not able to find pure gas here, because of local laws (the government mandates the ethanol level), but I avoid it as much as I can. Even with everything we have in our favor here, it is still most expensive, and the overall car performance is not as good as with gas. For ethanol to be a cheaper option for the consumer, its price on the pump has to be no higher than 75% of gas.
There is, however, another side of the coin. Gas is a limited resource. We need to develop alternative fuel technologies, and right now ethanol is the best, if not only, viable option. The technology is getting cheaper everyday, and improving a lot. As someone who saw the so called birth of the car ethanol, in the 1980's, I can see how much that changed.
Last, but not least, gas with some ethanol in it does pollute less. I remember seeing some time ago some studies regarding E20(ish), and the number was impressive.
All told, it is an important technology, it is not a scam or a threat, but it is still improving. Luckly, we still have the luxury to choose, so we can say no. That won't last, tho.
6 digits? Barely.
And yes, thank you 5 digiters for making me feel young again...
Which is no reason to debate them. Specially since if anyone buy into their arguments, they are already beyond any ability to think critically or understanding logic, so trying to argue the merits of their argument is worse than useless.
Whenever you engage them as equals in a debate (like Bill Nye did), you are just giving them credibility they wouldn't otherwise have.
Right... because emacs is a dropin replacement for vim...
Might as well suggest MSWord, Libreoffice or LaTeX.
Lets just stop pretending these guys are worth listening to, and stop giving them an illusion of credibility, shall we?
Let them fade into obscurity and talk to their own flock. We don't give flatearthers this kind of attention. They are just making noise to promote themself. Like their site, which is featured prominently in this article (and which I'm sure a lot of people clicked on).
THIS is the kind of attention they want.