Oh wait, I think it was talking about OpenSource and Red Hat and the legalities surrounding unfair business practices. Oh yes, now I remember, it was in the article from Forbes ASAP publication regarding AOL's unfair employment of 'volunteers' to monitor their BBoards and build community on AOL. Slashdot was mentioned regarding a blurb on Red Hat taking Linux mainstream and selling it even though it was OpenSource. It did give a positive slant to Red Hat saying that RH continues to work for the OpenSource community. So you see, posting to Slashdot can be good!
I would have to contend that Slashdot, while somewhat obscure, has made a difference. My most recent issue of Forbes magazine mentioned Slashdot in one of the articles, so it must have some sway in the US at least. At least more than just nerds and geeks know it exists. I believe the article was in reference to YRO or file-sharing or DeCSS or something like that. If anyone can enlighten me I'd appreciate it.
I should be able to put MY dvd into MY microwave and make a nice coaster for MY table.
Taking the 'code is art' argument from above and applying this argument to making a piece of art out of your DVD by nukin' it, it seems to me that either is a valid use of the DVD that you purchased. Obviously you cannot buy a DVD, reproduce it, then sell it for profit, but you can do whatever you want with it once you've purchased it. And if YOU damage or destroy it, and need to buy a new one, well that's your responsibility to go spend money to purchase another DVD. Also, if you paid the money to buy the DVD, then want to use a DeCSS code to drop it to your computer for replication for your own personal use, so be it. If you want to buy a painted canvas of art and use it as a coaster, so be it. Warn the customer that a DVD should not be used as a coaster or it won't work, fine, but don't tell us that we are specifically forbidden from using it that way. It's our own damn fault if we pay for the movie, copy it, and give it to our friends for free. After all, you then become the sucker that paid for the thing while everyone else got it for free.
So the above code would be considered abstract art and departing from the 'norm'. I may hate that art where people throw paint on a giant canvas, but it is art. And some people pay tens of thousands of dollars for what I consider crap. So, this counts as art.
Wow, that would be cool to see a sub blow all it's tanks and come shooting out of the water at supersonic speeds! That would be a rough landing for the crew though. And watch out all ye Japanese fishing boats!
I would say that the demise of trading used games and collecting hard to find video games vie FuncoLand was FuncoLand's problem, not the used game industry in general. I used to work there, and how shall I say this... it sucked. It was shady and those in charge of the stores were not very bright to begin with or even had a clue about gaming. That's where it went wrong.
But to answer the guy's question: I have a couple dozen Atari 7800 games, SuperNES, and a bunch of old computer games on CD (and 5.25 floppy!) if you're interested.;)
First Mate: Whaddya think of this Mexican gold cap'n?
Cap'n Blackbeard: Argh! It's fine gold it tis. When we get back to Spain, remind me to pay 'em fer all this fine gold. Arrrggghhh!
You make a good point about RIAA's "protection". Which means that for a regular band, to get their songs distributed to a large audience, they pretty much have to go with one of the record label companies that is part of RIAA. Which would indicate to me a monopoly which is also against the law. Some abstract thinking for you, but yet another reason I find the RIAA's argument's so ridiculous. Each side, in a way, is breaking the law in clever end-runs around the law. So why should either side be considered the 'champion of justice' here?
That being said, I still side with those opposed to the RIAA's arguments against file sharing.
Well then I would say there is a correlation to automobiles as mentioned above. There is that 10% (usually teenagers who have had little experience driving) that are clueless drivers. Sorry to flame teenagers as there are many responsible ones out there, but the inexperience thing is an issue nonetheless. I've even heard someone tell me that their sister put her car on cruise control, took her hands off the wheel, and thought the car would just drive itself and promptly wrecked it! Or you hear the horror stories about people not realizing they needed to have their oil changed until after their engine locked up and they ruined it. So to all the geeks out there, prosper and take advantage of your knowledge! Pretty soon, you will be the white-collar mechanics of the world! (At which point you'll be able to tell Joe Shmoe that he needs a new IRCbetarizer for his NIC Network Interface Spelunker and that it will only cost him $300.00).
While I agree that this will give them more ammo, it will be quite hilarious in the mean time. Imagine a court brief stating that: "The file name scrambling technique known to be used by AIMster in renaming copyright protected songs for use on the Napster file sharing service is known to use Pig Latin as it's name scrambling technique. This language has been around for decades and cannot be construed as a valid file name encryption scheme..." I mean, how funny is that?! The only way to stop this nonsense is going to be to vote for leaders that aren't swayed by campaign contributions or kickbacks, or to make craploads of money yourself and go contribute to the campaigns of 'dirty' politicians. After all, America is a republic, not a democracy.
The RIAA may be a bunch of greedy corp.'s, but that doesn't detract from their pull in government. If you want to fight the system you're going to have to play by the rules. And right now the rule seems to be: 'Those with the most money win.'
While I agree with you that the previous guy was not thinking about Sealand's ability to 'defend' itself, I think this goes to show the state of the world as we know it. Here in America, corporate money and giant lobby groups (usually backed by international corps.) usually have an influence in lawmakers and politicians both federally and locally. Not that every politician is guilty of taking corporate contributions, but I would have to say that the real rulers of government have always been those with the most money. The RIAA is a consortium of record labels, right? Well, it makes sense that by using their money and power to sway the leaders of any particular country they could in effect urge a nation to go and 'commandeer', aka attack, Sealand.
Well then I would say that new media, be it TV, internet, IRC, OR email would be considered powerful, not just the email itself. The email was just a conduit for beginning the conversation. Word spread to most everyone else via all the other 'channels'.
Can I mod down Macrovision for trolling on the issue of 'protecting copyright'? Has Slashdot developed a moderation system for moderating websites?:)
Yet another troll technology that will probably be a lame attempt to protect those with money like *cough* DeCSS *cough*. Oops, I meant, tried to protect the rich...
I thought NASA built a six-legged version of this bot first, it just wasn't very self directed. (Required a human to operate it). And it sounds like the really big challenges are still how to get the thing to move mechanically, not intelligently. After all, the article does mention that small wheeled robots have already made big strides in 'intelligent' movement processes. Please enlighten me on where I can find info again on the NASA project, as I thought their walker was much more functional on a mechanical level than this one.
And if you take into account the 99.99998% of money having been made off of a copyright (as mentioned in the above article) you're basically only left with works like the Bible, Korhan (sp?), and other books, songs, and other works that have been copied, translated, and reused so many times that their authors and/or companies couldn't stop their being copied if someone so wished to do so. For instance, everyone sings the Happy Birthday song each year without paying royalties for doing so. And no amount of money will be able to hire enough people to enforce paying those royalties. So this current copyright law is out of control. I hope more 'open source' projects like this take flight and flourish.
Well, you do realize that despite all the flames posted to/., M$ is still a multi-billion dollar company. If doing what you describe nets them an extra half a billion, well, then, they've just recouped their costs and made more money in the process. I'm sure a hundred million won't set them back much if it means making another billion in the long run.
But if you read about the serious overclockers, they're buy P4's and Thunderbirds and cranking 'em up even further than the current fastest running production chips. Sure there's computer rice boys out there, just like their street side brethren, but don't discount O/C'ing just because of some ricers. Besides, the article mentions that the $100 it took the guy to O/C his 500Mhz computer to 1Ghz well outweighed the costs of buying a PIII 1Ghz chip (at the time). He needed extra performance. Geo Metro owners don't *need* extra performance, so they would be considered ricey. Also, I'm sure the guy learned a lot about the computer's inner workings in the process of doing so.
Yes, non-compete agreements can restrict a person, but usually they're geared towards keeping copyrights and business practices in-house. You can still take your skills and use them in the same type of job elsewhere. Companies just don't want you taking your programming knowledge of their in-house software to another company, but I doubt they would have a problem with you going elsewhere to program on a different companies' software. (Just don't give the other company advice on how to duplicate the design of your previous companies software).
Re:To debunk some of the myths on this debate...
on
Growing New Cartilage
·
· Score: 1
I am simply stating that the Evolutionary theory is simply taken on faith just as Creation theory is. Neither of us was there to witness the 'birth' of humanity, be it sudden creation or a gradual evolution out of an ape-like stage of development. Therefore neither one of us can say, I saw it happen, I have a formula to reproduce this phenomenon, and so it must be true. You missed the whole point of my arguement, and once again, like every other Troll, flamed me for it.
Evolution OR Creation/= science -- that's all I'm saying so quit flaming people for their beliefs. And no, scientists have not witnessed the evolutionary process happening, they have only refined over and over, their theories about how evolution could occur and then jump to the conclusion that it is fact. Digging up fossils and carbon dating them is not expirementing, it's documenting history. (BTW - Carbon dating has been shown to be inaccurate, especially when sudden changes to the environment change the carbon composition of something such as a fossil. I highly doubt that over 1 million years something significant did not happen to change the environment of the earth or even certain environments on it.)
I hope that everyone understands that Bible freaks, like me, can also be very open to listening to others here on slashdot. Seeing other viewpoints makes me think about my own convictions and ideas about life. I like that. Sorry this is so far off topic...
But to drag it back on topic, as for rebooting the world, if anything we'll just experience a long period of time of stagnancy. The Dark Ages were basically an oppressive time for the masses due to state instuted churches which were corrupt. During this time, technology was just stagnant, it didn't really go backwards to dancing in the trees and hunting fish all day. So losing all our computers would certainly be a slowdown for technology, but the eventual revival of computing technologies would come whether we would want it or not. (Or whether the government would want it or not).
First, I realize I am a bit late posting to this discussion, and I'm risking no one reading this, but for once I have a great, very well thought out opinion on this one (at least I think so:) ).
First off, I have noticed two things in particular regarding this debate.:
1. This sort of thing has been done before with ears on mice, shark cartilage being used as 'donor' cartilage, etc., so why is this a big deal.
2. The ever popular Creationist vs. Evolutionist argument. Maybe we shouldn't mess with this sort of bio-engineering because it was created this way vs. evolution has not caught up yet with some of our advanced medicine and/or advanced medicine is part of our 'evolution'. (I generalize these arguments, but you'll see my point later.)
Now I have specific, real-life experience on this subject. I have had two knee surgeries involving ACL repair (one of which I am 5 weeks into recovering from right now), and some cartilage damage and repair on the other knee (which I had surgery on 2 yrs ago at the age of 22). Now, I style myself a pretty strict Biblical Creationist, but I also advocate scientific, technological, and medical research, and really love studying it, as evidenced by my daily reading of slashdot. Having had two knee surgeries, and injury to the cartilage, I think I am well qualified to comment on the two points above. First, I was thinking just yesterday about how great it would be to have my own cartilage regrown using some of the techniques described in this article. There are two sections of cartilage on either side of your knee between the two bones of your leg. On my one leg that was operated on 2 yrs ago, I damaged those two sets of cartilage, and when they repaired it, they had to completely remove one side because it was too damaged to do any good. Thus, my knee still gives me aches and pains from time to time. I would therefore really love to have them go back in and put good cartilage back in, I would think it would definitely help my joints and allow more physical activity on my part with fewer aches and pains (and hopefully less chance of arthritis later in life).
As for the Creation vs. Evolution argument, let me say that I am all for medical research. I'm not even sure I'm totally opposed to cloning humans, but I know I wouldn't want another me running around:). Cloning my own cartilage would be great! But, some of the evolutionary arguments I saw above are rather flawed. During my physical therapy, I have seen plenty of people well under the age of 30 (including myself - 24 yrs old). A previous person mentioned that due to our 30-40 yr life spans in our 'prehistoric age', cartilage didn't need to last 70+ yrs and so evolution just hasn't 'caught up' with us yet. Well, buddy, according to the Bible, it actually details people living well over 500 yrs after the creation of man, and a cap of 120 yrs was put on man after the Biblical flood. So from a creationist standpoint, that cartilage should last MUCH longer than 30 yrs to match up with a Creationist's beliefs. It just so happens that a Creationist would say that cartilage was not designed to have significant repairative properties. I would think this would be so because if cartilage did receive a strong blood supply, areas of our body, ie. ears, nose, knees, and other high use joints, would be too prone to injury and therefore would limit us in our daily activities more than having them be non-repairative. Just my theory, but I would ask a doctor for a better explanation of why cartilage is that way.
Another argument has been put forth stating that Creationists, religious folk, etc. are so backwards in their way of thinking that they are too stupid to realize the benefits of medicical research. I think I just showed that although I may not believe in Evolution (or special evolution, general evolution, whatever you want to argue about what to call it), that I whole-heartedly endorse science, and for purpose of this discussion, medical science. I have nothing wrong about learning about how our bodies work, and trying to make them work better, more efficiently, and longer. I see no harm in that. I also see no harm in choosing to believe in Evolution or Creation either way. Either choice is a belief. I, of course, believe that there is more evidence to support Creation. Others may believe there is more evidence to support Evolution. Please do not base your judgement of what kind of person a Creationist, or Evolutionist, religious, or atheist person is, without listening to them and really searching for facts, rather than just accepting popular belief.
Take electrical engineering. Definitely a difficult route to take, and I am no where near dilligent enough to do it, but those guys make boatloads of moola! If you can finish an EE degree, you can basically have your pick of jobs.
Yeah, I could try out 20 different scams at $5 a pop, maybe even recoup some costs from other idiots I scam, or I could just throw all $99 right down the toilet into a web scam musuem. That makes sense!
I would call Mormonism more of a cult than a church due to the secretive nature of some their religious practices. (Not to mention the polygamist marriage practices that do happen out there). That's the reason I wouldn't move to Utah, despite any laws that may be on the books there. Sorry if I offend any Mormons on/., but that would be my reasoning for not wanting a job in Utah.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh wait, I think it was talking about OpenSource and Red Hat and the legalities surrounding unfair business practices. Oh yes, now I remember, it was in the article from Forbes ASAP publication regarding AOL's unfair employment of 'volunteers' to monitor their BBoards and build community on AOL. Slashdot was mentioned regarding a blurb on Red Hat taking Linux mainstream and selling it even though it was OpenSource. It did give a positive slant to Red Hat saying that RH continues to work for the OpenSource community. So you see, posting to Slashdot can be good!
I would have to contend that Slashdot, while somewhat obscure, has made a difference. My most recent issue of Forbes magazine mentioned Slashdot in one of the articles, so it must have some sway in the US at least. At least more than just nerds and geeks know it exists. I believe the article was in reference to YRO or file-sharing or DeCSS or something like that. If anyone can enlighten me I'd appreciate it.
Taking the 'code is art' argument from above and applying this argument to making a piece of art out of your DVD by nukin' it, it seems to me that either is a valid use of the DVD that you purchased. Obviously you cannot buy a DVD, reproduce it, then sell it for profit, but you can do whatever you want with it once you've purchased it. And if YOU damage or destroy it, and need to buy a new one, well that's your responsibility to go spend money to purchase another DVD. Also, if you paid the money to buy the DVD, then want to use a DeCSS code to drop it to your computer for replication for your own personal use, so be it. If you want to buy a painted canvas of art and use it as a coaster, so be it. Warn the customer that a DVD should not be used as a coaster or it won't work, fine, but don't tell us that we are specifically forbidden from using it that way. It's our own damn fault if we pay for the movie, copy it, and give it to our friends for free. After all, you then become the sucker that paid for the thing while everyone else got it for free.
So the above code would be considered abstract art and departing from the 'norm'. I may hate that art where people throw paint on a giant canvas, but it is art. And some people pay tens of thousands of dollars for what I consider crap. So, this counts as art.
Wow, that would be cool to see a sub blow all it's tanks and come shooting out of the water at supersonic speeds! That would be a rough landing for the crew though. And watch out all ye Japanese fishing boats!
But to answer the guy's question: I have a couple dozen Atari 7800 games, SuperNES, and a bunch of old computer games on CD (and 5.25 floppy!) if you're interested. ;)
First Mate: Whaddya think of this Mexican gold cap'n?
Cap'n Blackbeard: Argh! It's fine gold it tis. When we get back to Spain, remind me to pay 'em fer all this fine gold. Arrrggghhh!
That being said, I still side with those opposed to the RIAA's arguments against file sharing.
Well then I would say there is a correlation to automobiles as mentioned above. There is that 10% (usually teenagers who have had little experience driving) that are clueless drivers. Sorry to flame teenagers as there are many responsible ones out there, but the inexperience thing is an issue nonetheless. I've even heard someone tell me that their sister put her car on cruise control, took her hands off the wheel, and thought the car would just drive itself and promptly wrecked it! Or you hear the horror stories about people not realizing they needed to have their oil changed until after their engine locked up and they ruined it. So to all the geeks out there, prosper and take advantage of your knowledge! Pretty soon, you will be the white-collar mechanics of the world! (At which point you'll be able to tell Joe Shmoe that he needs a new IRCbetarizer for his NIC Network Interface Spelunker and that it will only cost him $300.00).
While I agree that this will give them more ammo, it will be quite hilarious in the mean time. Imagine a court brief stating that: "The file name scrambling technique known to be used by AIMster in renaming copyright protected songs for use on the Napster file sharing service is known to use Pig Latin as it's name scrambling technique. This language has been around for decades and cannot be construed as a valid file name encryption scheme..." I mean, how funny is that?! The only way to stop this nonsense is going to be to vote for leaders that aren't swayed by campaign contributions or kickbacks, or to make craploads of money yourself and go contribute to the campaigns of 'dirty' politicians. After all, America is a republic, not a democracy.
The RIAA may be a bunch of greedy corp.'s, but that doesn't detract from their pull in government. If you want to fight the system you're going to have to play by the rules. And right now the rule seems to be: 'Those with the most money win.'
While I agree with you that the previous guy was not thinking about Sealand's ability to 'defend' itself, I think this goes to show the state of the world as we know it. Here in America, corporate money and giant lobby groups (usually backed by international corps.) usually have an influence in lawmakers and politicians both federally and locally. Not that every politician is guilty of taking corporate contributions, but I would have to say that the real rulers of government have always been those with the most money. The RIAA is a consortium of record labels, right? Well, it makes sense that by using their money and power to sway the leaders of any particular country they could in effect urge a nation to go and 'commandeer', aka attack, Sealand.
Well then I would say that new media, be it TV, internet, IRC, OR email would be considered powerful, not just the email itself. The email was just a conduit for beginning the conversation. Word spread to most everyone else via all the other 'channels'.
Yet another troll technology that will probably be a lame attempt to protect those with money like *cough* DeCSS *cough*. Oops, I meant, tried to protect the rich...
I thought NASA built a six-legged version of this bot first, it just wasn't very self directed. (Required a human to operate it). And it sounds like the really big challenges are still how to get the thing to move mechanically, not intelligently. After all, the article does mention that small wheeled robots have already made big strides in 'intelligent' movement processes. Please enlighten me on where I can find info again on the NASA project, as I thought their walker was much more functional on a mechanical level than this one.
And if you take into account the 99.99998% of money having been made off of a copyright (as mentioned in the above article) you're basically only left with works like the Bible, Korhan (sp?), and other books, songs, and other works that have been copied, translated, and reused so many times that their authors and/or companies couldn't stop their being copied if someone so wished to do so. For instance, everyone sings the Happy Birthday song each year without paying royalties for doing so. And no amount of money will be able to hire enough people to enforce paying those royalties. So this current copyright law is out of control. I hope more 'open source' projects like this take flight and flourish.
When will will it be the other way around so that I can run all the Windows apps like Office and games under Linux (without dual booting)?
Well, you do realize that despite all the flames posted to /., M$ is still a multi-billion dollar company. If doing what you describe nets them an extra half a billion, well, then, they've just recouped their costs and made more money in the process. I'm sure a hundred million won't set them back much if it means making another billion in the long run.
But if you read about the serious overclockers, they're buy P4's and Thunderbirds and cranking 'em up even further than the current fastest running production chips. Sure there's computer rice boys out there, just like their street side brethren, but don't discount O/C'ing just because of some ricers. Besides, the article mentions that the $100 it took the guy to O/C his 500Mhz computer to 1Ghz well outweighed the costs of buying a PIII 1Ghz chip (at the time). He needed extra performance. Geo Metro owners don't *need* extra performance, so they would be considered ricey. Also, I'm sure the guy learned a lot about the computer's inner workings in the process of doing so.
Yes, non-compete agreements can restrict a person, but usually they're geared towards keeping copyrights and business practices in-house. You can still take your skills and use them in the same type of job elsewhere. Companies just don't want you taking your programming knowledge of their in-house software to another company, but I doubt they would have a problem with you going elsewhere to program on a different companies' software. (Just don't give the other company advice on how to duplicate the design of your previous companies software).
Evolution OR Creation /= science -- that's all I'm saying so quit flaming people for their beliefs. And no, scientists have not witnessed the evolutionary process happening, they have only refined over and over, their theories about how evolution could occur and then jump to the conclusion that it is fact. Digging up fossils and carbon dating them is not expirementing, it's documenting history. (BTW - Carbon dating has been shown to be inaccurate, especially when sudden changes to the environment change the carbon composition of something such as a fossil. I highly doubt that over 1 million years something significant did not happen to change the environment of the earth or even certain environments on it.)
I hope that everyone understands that Bible freaks, like me, can also be very open to listening to others here on slashdot. Seeing other viewpoints makes me think about my own convictions and ideas about life. I like that. Sorry this is so far off topic...
But to drag it back on topic, as for rebooting the world, if anything we'll just experience a long period of time of stagnancy. The Dark Ages were basically an oppressive time for the masses due to state instuted churches which were corrupt. During this time, technology was just stagnant, it didn't really go backwards to dancing in the trees and hunting fish all day. So losing all our computers would certainly be a slowdown for technology, but the eventual revival of computing technologies would come whether we would want it or not. (Or whether the government would want it or not).
First off, I have noticed two things in particular regarding this debate.:
1. This sort of thing has been done before with ears on mice, shark cartilage being used as 'donor' cartilage, etc., so why is this a big deal.
2. The ever popular Creationist vs. Evolutionist argument. Maybe we shouldn't mess with this sort of bio-engineering because it was created this way vs. evolution has not caught up yet with some of our advanced medicine and/or advanced medicine is part of our 'evolution'. (I generalize these arguments, but you'll see my point later.)
Now I have specific, real-life experience on this subject. I have had two knee surgeries involving ACL repair (one of which I am 5 weeks into recovering from right now), and some cartilage damage and repair on the other knee (which I had surgery on 2 yrs ago at the age of 22). Now, I style myself a pretty strict Biblical Creationist, but I also advocate scientific, technological, and medical research, and really love studying it, as evidenced by my daily reading of slashdot. Having had two knee surgeries, and injury to the cartilage, I think I am well qualified to comment on the two points above. First, I was thinking just yesterday about how great it would be to have my own cartilage regrown using some of the techniques described in this article. There are two sections of cartilage on either side of your knee between the two bones of your leg. On my one leg that was operated on 2 yrs ago, I damaged those two sets of cartilage, and when they repaired it, they had to completely remove one side because it was too damaged to do any good. Thus, my knee still gives me aches and pains from time to time. I would therefore really love to have them go back in and put good cartilage back in, I would think it would definitely help my joints and allow more physical activity on my part with fewer aches and pains (and hopefully less chance of arthritis later in life).
As for the Creation vs. Evolution argument, let me say that I am all for medical research. I'm not even sure I'm totally opposed to cloning humans, but I know I wouldn't want another me running around :). Cloning my own cartilage would be great! But, some of the evolutionary arguments I saw above are rather flawed. During my physical therapy, I have seen plenty of people well under the age of 30 (including myself - 24 yrs old). A previous person mentioned that due to our 30-40 yr life spans in our 'prehistoric age', cartilage didn't need to last 70+ yrs and so evolution just hasn't 'caught up' with us yet. Well, buddy, according to the Bible, it actually details people living well over 500 yrs after the creation of man, and a cap of 120 yrs was put on man after the Biblical flood. So from a creationist standpoint, that cartilage should last MUCH longer than 30 yrs to match up with a Creationist's beliefs. It just so happens that a Creationist would say that cartilage was not designed to have significant repairative properties. I would think this would be so because if cartilage did receive a strong blood supply, areas of our body, ie. ears, nose, knees, and other high use joints, would be too prone to injury and therefore would limit us in our daily activities more than having them be non-repairative. Just my theory, but I would ask a doctor for a better explanation of why cartilage is that way.
Another argument has been put forth stating that Creationists, religious folk, etc. are so backwards in their way of thinking that they are too stupid to realize the benefits of medicical research. I think I just showed that although I may not believe in Evolution (or special evolution, general evolution, whatever you want to argue about what to call it), that I whole-heartedly endorse science, and for purpose of this discussion, medical science. I have nothing wrong about learning about how our bodies work, and trying to make them work better, more efficiently, and longer. I see no harm in that. I also see no harm in choosing to believe in Evolution or Creation either way. Either choice is a belief. I, of course, believe that there is more evidence to support Creation. Others may believe there is more evidence to support Evolution. Please do not base your judgement of what kind of person a Creationist, or Evolutionist, religious, or atheist person is, without listening to them and really searching for facts, rather than just accepting popular belief.
Take electrical engineering. Definitely a difficult route to take, and I am no where near dilligent enough to do it, but those guys make boatloads of moola! If you can finish an EE degree, you can basically have your pick of jobs.
Yeah, I could try out 20 different scams at $5 a pop, maybe even recoup some costs from other idiots I scam, or I could just throw all $99 right down the toilet into a web scam musuem. That makes sense!
I would call Mormonism more of a cult than a church due to the secretive nature of some their religious practices. (Not to mention the polygamist marriage practices that do happen out there). That's the reason I wouldn't move to Utah, despite any laws that may be on the books there. Sorry if I offend any Mormons on /., but that would be my reasoning for not wanting a job in Utah.