It takes two to tango. If only one party thinks that religions can co-exist, what good will that do? Both parties need to be in agreement. Yes, us tree-hugging Westerners may think that we can all live happily together, but Muslims don't feel the same way.
Okay, when you talk about how an entirely group of people feels as if they all feel the same way, you're obviously talking out your ass and know it, but just to let you know, as someone who's spent a lot of time talking to a lot of people from a lot of different religions, the substantial majority of Muslims I know do feel the way you say they don't, and a substantial number of Westerners I've spoken to don't feel the way you say they do.
Sounds exactly like assimilation to me. After all, you're saying they're behaving exactly the same as the Italians, the Polish, the Irish, and every other previous group of immigrants who came to America behaved when they arrived. They all wanted to keep their culture, too. And they all did, in fact. "Assimilation" into to America has never meant not keeping your culture, it's always been making your culture a part of America. It's also always been the case that the first generation never really fully plugs into things like language -- wasn't too long ago where you had to speak to your friend Tony's dad through him unless you knew Italian. And so on. I don't doubt all the things you said are true, the only false statement is the part where you say "Unlike previous waves of American immigrants" rather than "Exactly like all the previous waves of American immigrants".
As for your border policy, I think that kinda sucks. Border policy should be pretty simple: is this guy a known criminal? If so, deny entry or arrest and extradite him. If not, let him go to whichever side of the fence he wants, because the government has no right to restrict the liberty of any person barring criminal behavior. What bizarre value system gives government to right to dictate the movements of supposedly free people? Doesn't make any sense to me.
Agreed. The Ubuntu website is the amateurish one that breaks the rules. For example, it is fixed width and doesn't flow to fit the screen, and it fails validation (Debian's site passes validation and flows). I also feel it just isn't as functional as the simpler, cleaner Debian site.
Like most people, you're confusing two different concepts here: skillful vs. professional. Debian's site is clearly more skillfully done, and wins on technical merit. Ubuntu's site is clearly more professional; people are more likely to pay for a site like that. Debian's site is both technically superior and more amateurish. The very qualities you mention as signs Ubuntu's site is "more amateurish" are common and even to some degree desired in many professional web designs (fixed-width, for example, is required to accurately control precise layout, a common client requirement). If the Debian developers were trying to sell the site design, it'd look more like Ubuntu's, which is to say, more professional, albeit not as good in many ways.
Never confuse "professional" with "better" or "amateur" with "worse". The first terms relate to the compensation for the activity, the second refer to subjective criteria which are usually utterly unrelated to that.
That's customer service! lol. Think about it, the data is probably required for the customer's business process. So saying 'no' is tantamount to 'you can't run your business', and the customer will become an ex-customer just like that.
Um, no. Actually think about it. The customer is already in business and has been for some time without being able to do this. It is therefore an immediately obvious fact that it is not required for the customer's business process.
Just to nitpick, you don't need to be religious to view abortion as murder. Just as some religious people are ok with it.
Depends on how you define "religious belief". In a narrow sense, you're right. People can have a firm belief on when person-hood begins without it having been dictated to them by religion. But a lot of people use the term "religious belief" is a broader sense, to mean anytime one has a firm believe based on faith rather than evidence. In that broader sense, the view that abortion is murder is definitely a "religious belief". (In this broader sense of the term, even atheists can have religious beliefs -- indeed, true atheists [as opposed to agnostics] are defined by an essentially religious belief.)
... But you have to wonder if, as a species, we're ready for this....
I personally believe we don't yet have the wisdom or foresight necessary to manipulate our genes. Until we can reach some sort of ethical consensus on the how, why and when of human genome manipulation we should collectively say no.
In other words, you believe with should never do it, ever. There's no possible way for us to gain the wisdom and foresight we need if we eschew heading down the path, and it would utterly unprecedented in the history of mankind for us to reach a consensus on any medical issue before it becomes either commonplace and obviously not harmful, or results in significant tragedy. We must proceed if we are ever to gain that consensus. Making reaching a consensus a prerequisite it just a stealth way of saying, "No, not now, not ever."
No more or less so than a white blood cell. But we don't define cutting yourself as mass murder.
The relevant question is whether it's a "person", not whether it's technically alive or technically human. The embryo has substantially less claim to being a "person" than does a brain-dead body.
One of my best friend's mother used to do JCL at a major insurance company before she retired. She has an utter hatred of coding. Perhaps this will illustrate why:
This is the JCL equivalent to the DOS batch command "copy OLDFILE NEWFILE".
Some of the complexity is due to poor design - in the early 1980s the US General Accounting Office estimated that the poor design of OS JCL was costing the US economy about $1 billion per year in wasted labor and computer processing costs.
I thought he got the artificial heart after he was shot through the heart by Aaron Burr (who was, as Vice Presidents go, a much better marksman than Dick Cheney).
And why should they? It works. It does precisely the job it was designed to do, and continues to do it at at least the level of ability it originally had, often better if the hardware underneath has been upgraded. Something only truly becomes obsolete when it no longer satisfies today's needs. A well designed, task-specific system could theoretically never become obsolete.
An unmanned automated airship would be the best candidate for such a thing.
Yes, unmanned. We certainly wouldn't want to risk people in an airship if the lifting gas cells were filled with a flammable gas. That'd be as irresponsible as risking passengers in an airplane after filling its wings with a flammable liquid. Oh, wait...
Well, this ruins GMail's major argument. nNw all they have left is "You get 2 GB of storage".
Huh? What argument are you refering to, and how does this ruin it?
The only "argument" I can think you might be refering to is that, by using Gmail, you avoid having to see a lot of spam due to their excellent spam filterings. This doesn't ruin that argument in any way. In fact, since it primary impacts sites like Yahoo and Hotmail (who will see more spam if they continue to whitelist Gmail), it strengthens it. You're now see even less spam using Gmail, comparatively speaking.
I'd like to see whether people can actually identify the 30-bit image at a rate significantly greater than chance...
Viewing the whole image at once, indeed looking at the two side by side? Probably not. But ask me to sit down in front of each for 5 minutes and do some real work in the GIMP or Photoshop, and I guarentee you I'll be able to tell you which is which with 100% accuracy. 24-bits of color is not sufficient to exceed my ability to distinguish when I'm focused on the tiny details.
It's a common myth. I've seen it repeated any number of times, even in print. I think it comes from the fact that that's approximately how many colors you can get out of a television signal, and thus the 21-bit/2million colors figure becomes the standard number used by people telling us how many colors we can see. It's how many colors we can see on TV.:)
You can tell when someone repeats the myth that they've never really worked in graphics.
And again, you're in the wrong. The reason why there was a big stir was because usually such monitors are 24 bits, so the 18 bit Apple displays were glaringly obvious to the millions of us using true 24 LCD displays on our desktop. Trust me -- it was *immediately* obvious to me that my MacBook's display was only 18 bits with dithering, rather than true 24-bits like my desktop LCD monitors.
Of course I'm generalizing from a small sample, but in my experience, true 24-bit LCD displays are common on the desktop. Of course, it should also be noted that every monitor I've ever used has cost in the US$400-$800 range, and I'm the one who determined what monitors we were buying at work last time we put in a big order. Nothing outside of a few laptops have 18-bit displays there.:)
You probably can't distinguish the two colours placed side by side
Depends on the two colors. I can't see the border between a patch of #010101 and #020202, but invert the same image and I can easily see the border between the patch of #FEFEFE and #FDFDFD.
My auto-pilot is a tad borked. It's been known to come to a stop sign and wait to it to turn green. Eventually, when this doesn't happen over a long period of time, some sort of exception is thrown and my conscious attention is brought to bear on the situation, at which point I realize my subconscious is stupid. But I'm somewhat mollified by the fact that at least sitting at a stop sign is fairly safe.
I do also have the experience of arriving at destinations that aren't where I meant to go, simply because my mind was elsewhere and the autopilot figures it knows the way.
The movie seems to be designed to be family friendly, too. I think the target audience is not merely people in their forties, but factoring in that many of these people now have kids of their own.
So htf did he build the muscles and learn the skills to take out the ninjas they show later?
Racing will definitely build up your muscles, at least your upper body strength. It ain't like steering your consumer car with power steering at 60mph, people.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, when you talk about how an entirely group of people feels as if they all feel the same way, you're obviously talking out your ass and know it, but just to let you know, as someone who's spent a lot of time talking to a lot of people from a lot of different religions, the substantial majority of Muslims I know do feel the way you say they don't, and a substantial number of Westerners I've spoken to don't feel the way you say they do.
Sounds exactly like assimilation to me. After all, you're saying they're behaving exactly the same as the Italians, the Polish, the Irish, and every other previous group of immigrants who came to America behaved when they arrived. They all wanted to keep their culture, too. And they all did, in fact. "Assimilation" into to America has never meant not keeping your culture, it's always been making your culture a part of America. It's also always been the case that the first generation never really fully plugs into things like language -- wasn't too long ago where you had to speak to your friend Tony's dad through him unless you knew Italian. And so on. I don't doubt all the things you said are true, the only false statement is the part where you say "Unlike previous waves of American immigrants" rather than "Exactly like all the previous waves of American immigrants".
As for your border policy, I think that kinda sucks. Border policy should be pretty simple: is this guy a known criminal? If so, deny entry or arrest and extradite him. If not, let him go to whichever side of the fence he wants, because the government has no right to restrict the liberty of any person barring criminal behavior. What bizarre value system gives government to right to dictate the movements of supposedly free people? Doesn't make any sense to me.
Like most people, you're confusing two different concepts here: skillful vs. professional. Debian's site is clearly more skillfully done, and wins on technical merit. Ubuntu's site is clearly more professional; people are more likely to pay for a site like that. Debian's site is both technically superior and more amateurish. The very qualities you mention as signs Ubuntu's site is "more amateurish" are common and even to some degree desired in many professional web designs (fixed-width, for example, is required to accurately control precise layout, a common client requirement). If the Debian developers were trying to sell the site design, it'd look more like Ubuntu's, which is to say, more professional, albeit not as good in many ways.
Never confuse "professional" with "better" or "amateur" with "worse". The first terms relate to the compensation for the activity, the second refer to subjective criteria which are usually utterly unrelated to that.
Um, no. Actually think about it. The customer is already in business and has been for some time without being able to do this. It is therefore an immediately obvious fact that it is not required for the customer's business process.
There is no such implication. What's implied by the world "evolution" is that progression occurs in bits and pieces over time.
You're aware that Charles Darwin didn't invent the word, right?
Most things that evolve do so by design.
Which one? I've seen several different OS file dialogs under Windows.
Depends on how you define "religious belief". In a narrow sense, you're right. People can have a firm belief on when person-hood begins without it having been dictated to them by religion. But a lot of people use the term "religious belief" is a broader sense, to mean anytime one has a firm believe based on faith rather than evidence. In that broader sense, the view that abortion is murder is definitely a "religious belief". (In this broader sense of the term, even atheists can have religious beliefs -- indeed, true atheists [as opposed to agnostics] are defined by an essentially religious belief.)
... But you have to wonder if, as a species, we're ready for this.In other words, you believe with should never do it, ever. There's no possible way for us to gain the wisdom and foresight we need if we eschew heading down the path, and it would utterly unprecedented in the history of mankind for us to reach a consensus on any medical issue before it becomes either commonplace and obviously not harmful, or results in significant tragedy. We must proceed if we are ever to gain that consensus. Making reaching a consensus a prerequisite it just a stealth way of saying, "No, not now, not ever."
No more or less so than a white blood cell. But we don't define cutting yourself as mass murder.
The relevant question is whether it's a "person", not whether it's technically alive or technically human. The embryo has substantially less claim to being a "person" than does a brain-dead body.
One of my best friend's mother used to do JCL at a major insurance company before she retired. She has an utter hatred of coding. Perhaps this will illustrate why:
This is the JCL equivalent to the DOS batch command "copy OLDFILE NEWFILE".
From JCL on Wikipedia.
I thought he got the artificial heart after he was shot through the heart by Aaron Burr (who was, as Vice Presidents go, a much better marksman than Dick Cheney).
Bah. There's no problem there. If you want to know which ship is Theseus's, just go ask the Athenian Port Authority. :)
And why should they? It works. It does precisely the job it was designed to do, and continues to do it at at least the level of ability it originally had, often better if the hardware underneath has been upgraded. Something only truly becomes obsolete when it no longer satisfies today's needs. A well designed, task-specific system could theoretically never become obsolete.
Yes, unmanned. We certainly wouldn't want to risk people in an airship if the lifting gas cells were filled with a flammable gas. That'd be as irresponsible as risking passengers in an airplane after filling its wings with a flammable liquid. Oh, wait...
Huh? What argument are you refering to, and how does this ruin it?
The only "argument" I can think you might be refering to is that, by using Gmail, you avoid having to see a lot of spam due to their excellent spam filterings. This doesn't ruin that argument in any way. In fact, since it primary impacts sites like Yahoo and Hotmail (who will see more spam if they continue to whitelist Gmail), it strengthens it. You're now see even less spam using Gmail, comparatively speaking.
Viewing the whole image at once, indeed looking at the two side by side? Probably not. But ask me to sit down in front of each for 5 minutes and do some real work in the GIMP or Photoshop, and I guarentee you I'll be able to tell you which is which with 100% accuracy. 24-bits of color is not sufficient to exceed my ability to distinguish when I'm focused on the tiny details.
It's a common myth. I've seen it repeated any number of times, even in print. I think it comes from the fact that that's approximately how many colors you can get out of a television signal, and thus the 21-bit/2million colors figure becomes the standard number used by people telling us how many colors we can see. It's how many colors we can see on TV. :)
You can tell when someone repeats the myth that they've never really worked in graphics.
And again, you're in the wrong. The reason why there was a big stir was because usually such monitors are 24 bits, so the 18 bit Apple displays were glaringly obvious to the millions of us using true 24 LCD displays on our desktop. Trust me -- it was *immediately* obvious to me that my MacBook's display was only 18 bits with dithering, rather than true 24-bits like my desktop LCD monitors.
Of course I'm generalizing from a small sample, but in my experience, true 24-bit LCD displays are common on the desktop. Of course, it should also be noted that every monitor I've ever used has cost in the US$400-$800 range, and I'm the one who determined what monitors we were buying at work last time we put in a big order. Nothing outside of a few laptops have 18-bit displays there. :)
I am so happy that I have no idea what you're talking about. :)
Depends on the two colors. I can't see the border between a patch of #010101 and #020202, but invert the same image and I can easily see the border between the patch of #FEFEFE and #FDFDFD.
My auto-pilot is a tad borked. It's been known to come to a stop sign and wait to it to turn green. Eventually, when this doesn't happen over a long period of time, some sort of exception is thrown and my conscious attention is brought to bear on the situation, at which point I realize my subconscious is stupid. But I'm somewhat mollified by the fact that at least sitting at a stop sign is fairly safe.
I do also have the experience of arriving at destinations that aren't where I meant to go, simply because my mind was elsewhere and the autopilot figures it knows the way.
That is interesting. They missed a golden opportunity to embrace and extend.
10 REM BAI BAI^M^DINIT HELLO
The movie seems to be designed to be family friendly, too. I think the target audience is not merely people in their forties, but factoring in that many of these people now have kids of their own.
Racing will definitely build up your muscles, at least your upper body strength. It ain't like steering your consumer car with power steering at 60mph, people.