It's evil because it usually kills the baby seal (or at best leaves it with the worst headache of its life.
Here's the broken link in the chain.
I would say that it's evil because it's unnecessary for a human to behave in such a way in order to survive.
Hence, it's not evil when a polar bear does it.
In a similar way, most people wouldn't consider a person who steals bread out of hunger to be evil... but a person who steals bread from a starving person just for the enjoyment of stealing would qualify. It's stealing bread in both cases, right?
And no, it's not a case of whoosh; I just expect more subtlety in my humor.
"This is also true regarding the fantasy that anything more than a minority of the world's population can live anything like the "American lifestyle" without environmental consequences."
what percentage of adults are religious? Answer: 100%. Everyone's picked something to be religious about.
Yes, because the belief that the length of the longest side of a right triangle is equal to the square root of the sum of the squares of the other sides' lengths is exactly like having an imaginary friend who will make you immortal immediately after you die.
After all, the mathematician is taking it on faith that no right triangle exists in defiance of the Pythagorean Theorem, and the other fellow is taking it on faith that all the evidence of his senses is false.
The idea that all leaps of faith are equivalent is ridiculous. Beliefs that are comforting, such as one's personal immortality or the superiority of one's tribe, must be scrutinized with extra rigor.
There's also the question of what a jailbreak does and doesn't do. In the case of the iPhone, it allows for fairly significant functionality, like installing Flash. Legally this is called a "substantial non-infringing use" and hence is a DMCA exemption. The 360 hack? Does it do anything other than let you play copied games? If not or if the uses are only superficial, then it probably isn't legal.
Granted, I would be getting better value for that $5, with automatic updates, automatic install and configure and the ability to easily play the game on more than one computer as long as I only played on one at a time.
Not only that, but they protect you from cheaters even on during LAN play by requiring additional purchased copies for each computer. No other game delivery service can claim that*. Wotta bargain!;)
Strangely, they also seem to require their employees to say, "Have a blessed day." at the end of each purchase. It smacks of moneychangers in the temple to me, but it is the 2nd best chicken sandwich franchise. I've always wondered if there's a lawsuit waiting to happen there.
What's the best, you ask? A little chain called Big Chick in the dirty south puts them to shame. Amusingly, they require their employees (who are mostly rotund females) to wear shirts featuring the franchise name.
I purchased the classic controller, and was dismayed to find that, on many Virtual Console titles, the A and B buttons are mapped in alphabetical order, rather than the classic "b to the left of a" layout, as seen on the authentic NES controller*. How Nintendo could have screwed this up is a question that keeps me awake nights... of course they provide no option to remap the buttons, either.
End result: Even after I pay the nintendo tax (buy the Classic controller, re-purchase Super Mario Bros. 3), I still get worse results than playing Super Mario Bros. 3 on the wii port of FCEU.
Also, while I have no complaints with the d-pad on the classic controller, the all-convex buttons are an absolute downgrade from the "x and y concave, b and a convex" scheme found on the original SNES controller, which allows greater tactile feedback.
*-Yes, I know the classic controller is labeled the same as the SNES controller, but lo and behold, when you boot the Virtual Console version of SMB3, you have to hold 'A' to run and press 'B' to jump. An abomination!
The worst part is the controllers, since I just know any I'd get now wouldn't quite feel right...
You fool! You sold the controllers? My well-maintained NES MAX is my oldest possession, and I have every plan to be buried with it. Having lost everything else in a fire, I have managed to preserve the controller.
In truth, its touch is as comforting as an old friend's voice, and I am considering shelling out for a NES-USB adapter. After all, we seem to be in the dark age of video game controllers, when the d-pad has become forgotten technology from a golden age. Curse you, decalibrated analog joysticks and blind spots in 3d camera systems.
Thanks for 25 great years, NES. Oh, and also for being my friend when I was growing up in the bible belt in the 80's and was too strange for any carbon-based life form to befriend.;)
As for you, you controller-seller... I can think of no punishment more fitting than contemplating what you've already lost.
If you are willing to admit that one-third and.333... are the same thing, it would seem to follow that.999... has to equal one, since it equals.333... times 3.
Also, many Professors are collecting commissions by requiring students enrolled in online classes to sign up for third party "course websites", which cost additional fees above and beyond registering and enrolling with the school (which usually has it's own course website).
My friend just got pegged for $150 on top of all other fees because the instructor insisted on running the class through ThinkWell, even though the school has its own website for online classes.
I would say that making school attendance optional would be the best way to improve things.
At present, there is a miniscule minority of students who are interested in learning anything at all. This fraction grows smaller as the majority ridicules them for their interest.
It is impossible to teach an unwilling student, and they only serve to disrupt those who are interested in receiving knowledge. If school attendance were optional, the kids who don't want to be in school could go somewhere else and leave those who do to their studies.
In a complementary fashion, once it became apparent to kids who "opt-out" that jobs are hard to come by for illiterate miscreants, they might enjoy a renewed interest in education.
As a side effect, class sizes could only go down.
Of course, this ignores that the real purpose served by public schools in the U.S. is to babysit kids who would otherwise be unattended while their parents are at work. Seen in that light, making attendance optional would defeat the purpose of having schools in the first place.
I seldom see it recommended anywhere, but blitz makes a line of programming environments for the basic language that include directx and opengl support, as well as support for linux, mac, and windows. (The latter portion of the previous sentence was to address any concerns that they are not recommended due to platform lock-in...)
They come with informative documentation and tutorials, and I would advise anyone who knows nothing about programming to try out Blitz3D. I can't see how any more complexity could have been hidden from the user without sacrificing utility.
Caveats: I hear blitz programs don't run reliably on vista. I am not yet forced to interact with vista, so I can't comment on that. Also, make sure you have the most up to date help documents, as the most recent version is much more comprehensive than older versions.
I've heard that the problem with charity foundations (such as the Gates Foundation) is that they invest their capital and operate on the interest/dividends thereby generated, which results in the bulk of the money often being invested in organizations that operate at cross-purposes to the original charity, which then have to undo the harm done by the organizations in question with pennies on the dollar.
Hope that wasn't too twisty to follow. It shows that throwing money at a problem can sometimes make it worse, though.
And if it is faith that you truly take exception to and believe that science and faith cannot mix, then you must take exception to atheist scientist as well. The only truly faith-less statement that can be made about the existence of God is an agnostic one.
So do you fight so vehemently against the mixing of atheism and science? If not do you think that may point to an inconstancy/bias on your part?
No, because agnostics are just neutered atheists.
I don't just disbelieve in the existence of god, I also disbelieve in the tooth fairy, santa claus, and all the other fictional creatures that doubtless lend a sense of wonder and magic to your existence.
Atheism is not a religion and requires no further faith beyond the requirements of science itself: Namely, the faith that the universe can be understood using only rational thought.
No matter how much lipstick you put on that pig, ultimately faith means believing in something without proof, even if it's the assurance of someone who has proof that really has (honest!), he just happens to be unable to show you. As seen here, for example.
Allow me map out your circular logic with a dialog:
A: What evidence do you have for God's existence? B: Why, this holy book, of course. A: Well, what evidence do you have of the holy book's authenticity? B: It was written by none other than God himself!
The false moral superiority from religious people is ridiculous. They seem to think that the only reason people can behave themselves is if there's a promise of a reward in the afterlife. Who is the better person: The one who does good for its own sake, or the person who does good because they will be paid for it?
Conversely, if you thought there was no god, would you immediately begin stealing, killing, raping, and in general being a hoodlum?
Since you asked, I perform moral evaluations based mainly on this criteria:
"What would happen if everyone did this?"
This is in contrast to the golden rule promulgated by religions,
"Love thy neighbor as thyself."
The problem with the latter is that my neighbor might not enjoy the same things as me. The golden rules also fails to explain why littering, speeding, living off welfare illegitimately, and other "victimless crimes" are immoral. My alternative does not fail in such cases.
Numerous intelligent, LOGICAL people have turned to Christianity because of his works. So, don't you think there's something you might be... missing?
Nope, the Emperor still looks naked to me.
In general, I feel sorry for you*. You're missing out on the feeling of living in a world where you are responsible for your actions, not a host of demons and angels. It is both exhilarating and liberating- on the one hand, you lose the pretense of immortality, but on the other, you don't have to account for your behavior to an imaginary parent.
*my pity would be fortified if history wasn't chock full of people having religion forced on them at gun/sword/club point.
Slashdot Mirror
It's evil because it usually kills the baby seal (or at best leaves it with the worst headache of its life.
Here's the broken link in the chain.
I would say that it's evil because it's unnecessary for a human to behave in such a way in order to survive.
Hence, it's not evil when a polar bear does it.
In a similar way, most people wouldn't consider a person who steals bread out of hunger to be evil... but a person who steals bread from a starving person just for the enjoyment of stealing would qualify. It's stealing bread in both cases, right?
And no, it's not a case of whoosh; I just expect more subtlety in my humor.
Edit: I forgot to add,
"This is also true regarding the fantasy that anything more than a minority of the world's population can live anything like the "American lifestyle" without environmental consequences."
what percentage of adults are religious? Answer: 100%. Everyone's picked something to be religious about.
Yes, because the belief that the length of the longest side of a right triangle is equal to the square root of the sum of the squares of the other sides' lengths is exactly like having an imaginary friend who will make you immortal immediately after you die.
After all, the mathematician is taking it on faith that no right triangle exists in defiance of the Pythagorean Theorem, and the other fellow is taking it on faith that all the evidence of his senses is false.
The idea that all leaps of faith are equivalent is ridiculous. Beliefs that are comforting, such as one's personal immortality or the superiority of one's tribe, must be scrutinized with extra rigor.
What if they're somehow playing on a split-screen?
Should I have ponied up for three extra copies of Mario Kart and Goldeneye, too?
There's also the question of what a jailbreak does and doesn't do. In the case of the iPhone, it allows for fairly significant functionality, like installing Flash. Legally this is called a "substantial non-infringing use" and hence is a DMCA exemption. The 360 hack? Does it do anything other than let you play copied games? If not or if the uses are only superficial, then it probably isn't legal.
I don't own a 360, much less a hacked one, but I understand that Microsoft requires 360 owners to pay twice to access netflix, unlike the console offerings from Sony or Nintendo. If the device could be made to access Netflix "for free", that would seem both substantial and non-infringing.
Granted, I would be getting better value for that $5, with automatic updates, automatic install and configure and the ability to easily play the game on more than one computer as long as I only played on one at a time.
Not only that, but they protect you from cheaters even on during LAN play by requiring additional purchased copies for each computer. No other game delivery service can claim that*. Wotta bargain! ;)
*Except those that can.
Strangely, they also seem to require their employees to say, "Have a blessed day." at the end of each purchase. It smacks of moneychangers in the temple to me, but it is the 2nd best chicken sandwich franchise. I've always wondered if there's a lawsuit waiting to happen there.
What's the best, you ask? A little chain called Big Chick in the dirty south puts them to shame. Amusingly, they require their employees (who are mostly rotund females) to wear shirts featuring the franchise name.
I purchased the classic controller, and was dismayed to find that, on many Virtual Console titles, the A and B buttons are mapped in alphabetical order, rather than the classic "b to the left of a" layout, as seen on the authentic NES controller*. How Nintendo could have screwed this up is a question that keeps me awake nights... of course they provide no option to remap the buttons, either.
End result: Even after I pay the nintendo tax (buy the Classic controller, re-purchase Super Mario Bros. 3), I still get worse results than playing Super Mario Bros. 3 on the wii port of FCEU.
Also, while I have no complaints with the d-pad on the classic controller, the all-convex buttons are an absolute downgrade from the "x and y concave, b and a convex" scheme found on the original SNES controller, which allows greater tactile feedback.
*-Yes, I know the classic controller is labeled the same as the SNES controller, but lo and behold, when you boot the Virtual Console version of SMB3, you have to hold 'A' to run and press 'B' to jump. An abomination!
The worst part is the controllers, since I just know any I'd get now wouldn't quite feel right...
You fool! You sold the controllers? My well-maintained NES MAX is my oldest possession, and I have every plan to be buried with it. Having lost everything else in a fire, I have managed to preserve the controller.
In truth, its touch is as comforting as an old friend's voice, and I am considering shelling out for a NES-USB adapter. After all, we seem to be in the dark age of video game controllers, when the d-pad has become forgotten technology from a golden age. Curse you, decalibrated analog joysticks and blind spots in 3d camera systems.
Thanks for 25 great years, NES. Oh, and also for being my friend when I was growing up in the bible belt in the 80's and was too strange for any carbon-based life form to befriend. ;)
As for you, you controller-seller... I can think of no punishment more fitting than contemplating what you've already lost.
1/3 = .333...
1/3 * 3 = 1 .333... * 3 = .999... = 1
If you are willing to admit that one-third and .333... are the same thing, it would seem to follow that .999... has to equal one, since it equals .333... times 3.
Also, many Professors are collecting commissions by requiring students enrolled in online classes to sign up for third party "course websites", which cost additional fees above and beyond registering and enrolling with the school (which usually has it's own course website).
My friend just got pegged for $150 on top of all other fees because the instructor insisted on running the class through ThinkWell, even though the school has its own website for online classes.
I wish I knew of some recourse...
I would say that making school attendance optional would be the best way to improve things.
At present, there is a miniscule minority of students who are interested in learning anything at all. This fraction grows smaller as the majority ridicules them for their interest.
It is impossible to teach an unwilling student, and they only serve to disrupt those who are interested in receiving knowledge. If school attendance were optional, the kids who don't want to be in school could go somewhere else and leave those who do to their studies.
In a complementary fashion, once it became apparent to kids who "opt-out" that jobs are hard to come by for illiterate miscreants, they might enjoy a renewed interest in education.
As a side effect, class sizes could only go down.
Of course, this ignores that the real purpose served by public schools in the U.S. is to babysit kids who would otherwise be unattended while their parents are at work. Seen in that light, making attendance optional would defeat the purpose of having schools in the first place.
Amen:
3DTV with no broadcast programming yet: $2000-3000
Watching your wall-eyed toddler walk into plainly visible obstacles: Priceless.
Neither America nor Africa are adjectives.
I believe he neglected to append "hat" to "black", which makes for a demographic that can be slandered without fear of consequences.
Hm, I must not have been paying attention. I thought they were popular because they candy-coated said annoying things.
I seldom see it recommended anywhere, but blitz makes a line of programming environments for the basic language that include directx and opengl support, as well as support for linux, mac, and windows. (The latter portion of the previous sentence was to address any concerns that they are not recommended due to platform lock-in...)
They come with informative documentation and tutorials, and I would advise anyone who knows nothing about programming to try out Blitz3D. I can't see how any more complexity could have been hidden from the user without sacrificing utility.
Caveats: I hear blitz programs don't run reliably on vista. I am not yet forced to interact with vista, so I can't comment on that. Also, make sure you have the most up to date help documents, as the most recent version is much more comprehensive than older versions.
Sounds like a job for javascript. Classes are available at your community college. Free tutorials available by searching google.
What you describe is relatively trivial. About half as trivial as it was 18 months ago. ;)
I've heard that the problem with charity foundations (such as the Gates Foundation) is that they invest their capital and operate on the interest/dividends thereby generated, which results in the bulk of the money often being invested in organizations that operate at cross-purposes to the original charity, which then have to undo the harm done by the organizations in question with pennies on the dollar.
Hope that wasn't too twisty to follow. It shows that throwing money at a problem can sometimes make it worse, though.
In my haste to defend my original reply against the fundamentalist hordes, your post was collateral damage.
We actually seem to agree. My mistake.
And if it is faith that you truly take exception to and believe that science and faith cannot mix, then you must take exception to atheist scientist as well. The only truly faith-less statement that can be made about the existence of God is an agnostic one.
So do you fight so vehemently against the mixing of atheism and science? If not do you think that may point to an inconstancy/bias on your part?
No, because agnostics are just neutered atheists.
I don't just disbelieve in the existence of god, I also disbelieve in the tooth fairy, santa claus, and all the other fictional creatures that doubtless lend a sense of wonder and magic to your existence.
Atheism is not a religion and requires no further faith beyond the requirements of science itself: Namely, the faith that the universe can be understood using only rational thought.
Already addressed earlier in the thread.
No matter how much lipstick you put on that pig, ultimately faith means believing in something without proof, even if it's the assurance of someone who has proof that really has (honest!), he just happens to be unable to show you. As seen here, for example.
Allow me map out your circular logic with a dialog:
A: What evidence do you have for God's existence?
B: Why, this holy book, of course.
A: Well, what evidence do you have of the holy book's authenticity?
B: It was written by none other than God himself!
Repeat ad nauseam.
There's no evidence that an omniscient and all-powerful God doesn't exist...
It is impossible to prove a negative, such as God's non-existence (or Santa Claus's, for that matter.)
That's why the burden of proof rests on those who claim that God exists.
We have something like it in the U.S. - it's called the presumption of innocence, or "innocent until proven guilty".
By your logic, everyone would have to prove that they DIDN'T commit a crime or face sentencing.
The false moral superiority from religious people is ridiculous. They seem to think that the only reason people can behave themselves is if there's a promise of a reward in the afterlife. Who is the better person: The one who does good for its own sake, or the person who does good because they will be paid for it?
Conversely, if you thought there was no god, would you immediately begin stealing, killing, raping, and in general being a hoodlum?
Since you asked, I perform moral evaluations based mainly on this criteria:
"What would happen if everyone did this?"
This is in contrast to the golden rule promulgated by religions,
"Love thy neighbor as thyself."
The problem with the latter is that my neighbor might not enjoy the same things as me. The golden rules also fails to explain why littering, speeding, living off welfare illegitimately, and other "victimless crimes" are immoral. My alternative does not fail in such cases.
Numerous intelligent, LOGICAL people have turned to Christianity because of his works. So, don't you think there's something you might be ... missing?
Nope, the Emperor still looks naked to me.
In general, I feel sorry for you*. You're missing out on the feeling of living in a world where you are responsible for your actions, not a host of demons and angels. It is both exhilarating and liberating- on the one hand, you lose the pretense of immortality, but on the other, you don't have to account for your behavior to an imaginary parent.
*my pity would be fortified if history wasn't chock full of people having religion forced on them at gun/sword/club point.
How about when research in /funding for a particular area is dropped to placate religious constituents?
I want my homebrew angels with gills, dagnabit.
You underestimate the willingness of those mired in ignorance to be left behind.