And getting together with your co-workers after work just so you can bond? Fuck that. If it happens, it happens. But do NOT try to institutionalize it. All you'll do is end up with a bunch of people waiting for the first person to leave so they can all go home to their families.
New York-based Sony BMG, a joint venture of Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG, declined to elaborate on the suit. Sony BMG is home to names such as Bruce Springsteen, Carrie Underwood and Modest Mouse.
Modest Mouse Worms. vs Birds
Self pity me, it's so pitiful You can see that birds and worms don't get along Self-righteous me, it's so wrong and You can see that we don't have to get along Self pity me, it's so pitifull You can see that birds and worms do not agree And we will crawl (Will crawl) Sony = Bird DRM = Worm
New York-based Sony BMG, a joint venture of Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG, declined to elaborate on the suit. Sony BMG is home to names such as Bruce Springsteen, Carrie Underwood and Modest Mouse.
Modest Mouse Worms. vs Birds
Self pity me, it's so pitiful You can see that birds and worms don't get along Self-righteous me, it's so wrong and You can see that we don't have to get along Self pity me, it's so pitifull You can see that birds and worms do not agree And we will crawl (Will crawl)
Speaking of past debates, this is a tidally locked planet with conclusive proof of water vapor. I remember a few months back when Gilese 581c was talked about here there was a rather large debate on whether a tidally locked planet was likely to have an atmosphere with water.
Being that this new planet is also tidally locked, I guess we have our answer.
The idea that there is a net benefit for a group from the collective selfish actions of individual actors is closer to what this article is describing as swarm theory.
Actually, the article doesn't say anything about the collective selfish actions of anybody. In fact, in almost all the examples given, the actors are behaving unselfishly.
You are assuming the actors are the individuals, where the selfish actors are the genes. In social insects specific genetic relationships cause altruistic behavior in individuals because it is in the genes best interest for propagation to behave in such a way due to their unusual genetics. Applying, such social systems to human social systems would not be advised. Now applying ant routing mechanisms to route trucks, as in the article, that's a little more sensible.
It isn't. From the article, the guy right now has nothing and plans to implement what the entire AI field has been trying to do for years and years. He doesn't mention any new or innovative techinques he is applying to the problem -- only a boatload of unfounded confidence.
That's not it. Those acroymns in the quote are uncommon. DVR is more common than PVR and in actual discourse most people call all PVR's and DVR's "Tivo's," much like everyone is calling every mp3 player an "iPod" now, even if it isn't one. VOD is also widely unused. People just say "Video On Demand," or "On Demand."
Seriously, I remember buying a power glove when it came out. I mean, I was probably 15 at the time and lured by commercials. I just remember when I got it, the thing really was useless and clunky. I ended up returning it shortly thereafter.
>I'd take exception to that. Here are a few things to keep in mind...
I take exception to your exception.:-P
* The Big Bang -- including the fact that time began at the same instant as all the matter and energy in the universe, and the fact that the laws of physics and the physical constants were set at that time (or about 10^-40 seconds after) to values within extremely narrow ranges that would permit the possibility of any life at any time or place in the universe.
This is not a good arguement for anything. This is because you first don't know that life would not be possible under alternative cosmologies. Even if it was not, however, you don't know that the current cosmology didn't just happen on its own because of properties of the universe itself, rather than a god willing it so.
* Biochemical design -- there are literal motors inside cells! They have all the parts of man-made motors. Yet humans have not even come close to replicating these naturally created motors in efficiency, and cannot even come close to producing this kind of motor at a micrometer level. Paley's watchmaker argument, anyone?
I agree that cells are extremely complex and have the machinery you describe. However, evolution explains how this machinery came to be without any need to recourse to a god or gods. I'd recommend the book The Blind Watchmaker, by Richard Dawkins which takes Paley's arguement head-on and refutes it.
* Encoded information -- cells contain coded information using "letters" and "words" telling it how to do things. Only certain combinations of "letters" form valid "words". Furthermore, this information is "translated" to another form of code as it is carried from the nucleus to the part of the cell that carries out the work. Information always comes from intelligence, and this translation effect really adds to the argument.
The reason these cells' DNA/RNA work the way they do is because of the physical properties of the universe and evolution. Again, no need to recourse to gods or goddesses.
* Naturalistic impossibility of the origins of life. Life appeared too shortly after the Late Heavy Bombardment, too quickly, and in a too complex state for naturalism. The earth went from an abiotic state to fully functioning life in only 10 to 50 million years, in the hostile environments of early earth, in the complete absence of prebiotic soup.
This is true. Life did spring up rather rapidly on earth, albeit in a basic form. There are, however, numerious explanations why it might have done so, again, without recourse to a god. One possibly is that lower forms of life are common in the universe and the early earth was seeded by these (known as the Panspermia Hypothesis). Another possiblity is that certain building blocks of life, such as amino acids, were formed by the conditions of early earth. These building blocks, came together to form a very crude initial replicator. This was a very small object, related to RNA, but even more basic and lacking a cell wall. This replicators physical properties caused it to create copies of itself and all you need is a single replicator for all of evolution to take place. There are some rather interesting and plausible theories in this regard. I should note, this is an area where science doesn't have all the answers yet. However, the answers we do have make more sense than positing a creator. Indeed, the arguement is basically either that a creator made a basic replicator or that the physical universe though its own properties did. If the creator made the replicator, you have to ask how the creator came to be, which is harder problem than where the first replicator came from, which seems to at least have some plausible solutions that don't vex mythical.
* There are numerous factors that need to be met before a planet can be suitable for
Main Entry: evangelize Pronunciation: i-'van-j&-"lIz Function: verb Inflected Form(s): -lized; -lizing transitive verb 1 : to preach the gospel to 2 : to convert to Christianity intransitive verb : to preach the gospel
Main Entry: 1gospel Pronunciation: 'gäs-p&l Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gOdspel (translation of Late Latin evangelium), from gOd good + spell tale -- more at SPELL 1 a often capitalized : the message concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation b capitalized : one of the first four New Testament books telling of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ; also : a similar apocryphal book c : an interpretation of the Christian message 2 capitalized : a lection from one of the New Testament Gospels 3 : the message or teachings of a religious teacher 4 : something accepted or promoted as infallible truth or as a guiding principle or doctrine 5 : gospel music
This is the only sane Christian position on the issue and I applaud you for holding it.
That being said, there is no reason to believe in the existence of dieties of any sort. Richard Dawkins gives a nice short explanation of this in his documentary, The Root of all Evil.
Of course. However, in the 19th century there was room to doubt evolution. In the 21st century we have so much evidence for it that it is a fact in the same way that gravity is a fact.
Ah...I see. Someone moded the post I replied to -1, so its off the radar. I thought I had lost it for a minute. Can you guys mod the parent up to at least 1? This is a commonly held belief by many people and I would like to see it refuted.
This is weird, but now my post is under a completely different post than I replied to and the orginal vanished. Weird.
The original parent claimed that no mutations (rather than recombinations) caused beneficial effects in organisms and challenged anyone to find a paper that said otherwise. So weird...it just vanished.
Evolution of a new enzymatic function by recombination within a gene.
Hall BG, Zuzel T, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1980 Jun 77:6 3529-33
Abstract: "Mutations that alter the ebgA gene so that the evolved beta-galactosidase (ebg) enzyme of Escherichia coli can hydrolyze lactose fall into two classes: class I mutants use only lactose, whereas class II mutants use lactulose as well as lactose..." (Obviously, in a lactose-rich environment, this makes E. coli more fit.)
Now that I pointed you to the paper will you give up your unfounded belief?
I'd also suggest reading this to start and maybe this to learn a bit more about evolution.
I hear sentiments like this frequently from people. It is clear to me these people haven't deeply studied physics or evolutionary biology.
First get this in your head. At this point in history, evolutionary biology is a certainty in the way that gravity is a certainty. We may reconceptualize certain parts of it from time to time, but it is clear and obvious that it is there and happening.
The big bang is NOTHING like this. This is because, unlike in biology, in physics at the moment we have massive unknowns (dark matter, dark energy, no clue what the elementary building material of the universe is, no way to connect quatum mechanics to relativity). At this point the best we can say is all clues seem to hint toward a big bang and that seems the most likely explanation to explain currently observed phenomena.
Big difference!
P.S.: Most Christian fundimentalists don't actually understand the difference between evolution and the big bang. They often see the two in their own heads as linked and think by argueing against one, they are arguing against the other as well. See Kent Hovind and his crazyness, for example.
While many still use mp3's in 2010 lossless music is starting to really catch on. Everyone has connections with a good amount more bandwidth, so downloading the much larger files isn't that much of a hassle anymore. Apples' iTunes started the trend around 2008 by heavily promoting its lossless codec and making the majority of its tracks available in it. It will even transcode from lossless to mp3 for your iPod. I have a feeling in a few more years mp3 is going to feel like tapes in respect to CD's.
Oh, and if anyone is curious about me, I work in law enforcement. I was sent back on the case of one of the most wanted time-criminals of 2010, John Titor.
Slashdot Mirror
And getting together with your co-workers after work just so you can bond? Fuck that. If it happens, it happens. But do NOT try to institutionalize it. All you'll do is end up with a bunch of people waiting for the first person to leave so they can all go home to their families.
Obviously, you hold their families hostage at an undisclosed location until the conclusion of the bonding is complete.
The whore my karma pattern.
Wait that could work! While the Zune of course was an utter flop, I actually like brown mugs.
--
Non-profit and Business Grant Writing Professionals.
New York-based Sony BMG, a joint venture of Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG, declined to elaborate on the suit. Sony BMG is home to names such as Bruce Springsteen, Carrie Underwood and Modest Mouse.
Modest Mouse
Worms. vs Birds
Self pity me, it's so pitiful
You can see that birds and worms don't get along
Self-righteous me, it's so wrong and
You can see that we don't have to get along
Self pity me, it's so pitifull
You can see that birds and worms do not agree
And we will crawl
(Will crawl)
Sony = Bird
DRM = Worm
No, scratch that.
Sony = Bird
You = Worm
Much better.
___
Expert Grant Writing for Non-profits and Businesses
New York-based Sony BMG, a joint venture of Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG, declined to elaborate on the suit. Sony BMG is home to names such as Bruce Springsteen, Carrie Underwood and Modest Mouse.
Modest Mouse
Worms. vs Birds
Self pity me, it's so pitiful
You can see that birds and worms don't get along
Self-righteous me, it's so wrong and
You can see that we don't have to get along
Self pity me, it's so pitifull
You can see that birds and worms do not agree
And we will crawl
(Will crawl)
Speaking of past debates, this is a tidally locked planet with conclusive proof of water vapor. I remember a few months back when Gilese 581c was talked about here there was a rather large debate on whether a tidally locked planet was likely to have an atmosphere with water.
Being that this new planet is also tidally locked, I guess we have our answer.
___
Expert Grant Writing for Non-profits and Businesses.
The idea that there is a net benefit for a group from the collective selfish actions of individual actors is closer to what this article is describing as swarm theory.
Actually, the article doesn't say anything about the collective selfish actions of anybody. In fact, in almost all the examples given, the actors are behaving unselfishly.
You are assuming the actors are the individuals, where the selfish actors are the genes. In social insects specific genetic relationships cause altruistic behavior in individuals because it is in the genes best interest for propagation to behave in such a way due to their unusual genetics. Applying, such social systems to human social systems would not be advised. Now applying ant routing mechanisms to route trucks, as in the article, that's a little more sensible.
It isn't. From the article, the guy right now has nothing and plans to implement what the entire AI field has been trying to do for years and years. He doesn't mention any new or innovative techinques he is applying to the problem -- only a boatload of unfounded confidence.
Firefox has finally sucumbed to the Safari tab style.
That's not it. Those acroymns in the quote are uncommon. DVR is more common than PVR and in actual discourse most people call all PVR's and DVR's "Tivo's," much like everyone is calling every mp3 player an "iPod" now, even if it isn't one. VOD is also widely unused. People just say "Video On Demand," or "On Demand."
I agree. The Mac Pro is a horribly ugly, grey, utilibrarian machine.
However, the PowerMac G5 is an beautiful, silver, understatehood work of art.
They both come with built in native spell-check for all major applications.
Seriously, I remember buying a power glove when it came out. I mean, I was probably 15 at the time and lured by commercials. I just remember when I got it, the thing really was useless and clunky. I ended up returning it shortly thereafter.
Anyone know why Churchill ordered it destroyed? I don't quite understand the purpose of doing so.
I take exception to your exception. :-P
* The Big Bang -- including the fact that time began at the same instant as all the matter and energy in the universe, and the fact that the laws of physics and the physical constants were set at that time (or about 10^-40 seconds after) to values within extremely narrow ranges that would permit the possibility of any life at any time or place in the universe.
This is not a good arguement for anything. This is because you first don't know that life would not be possible under alternative cosmologies. Even if it was not, however, you don't know that the current cosmology didn't just happen on its own because of properties of the universe itself, rather than a god willing it so.
* Biochemical design -- there are literal motors inside cells! They have all the parts of man-made motors. Yet humans have not even come close to replicating these naturally created motors in efficiency, and cannot even come close to producing this kind of motor at a micrometer level. Paley's watchmaker argument, anyone?
I agree that cells are extremely complex and have the machinery you describe. However, evolution explains how this machinery came to be without any need to recourse to a god or gods. I'd recommend the book The Blind Watchmaker, by Richard Dawkins which takes Paley's arguement head-on and refutes it.
* Encoded information -- cells contain coded information using "letters" and "words" telling it how to do things. Only certain combinations of "letters" form valid "words". Furthermore, this information is "translated" to another form of code as it is carried from the nucleus to the part of the cell that carries out the work. Information always comes from intelligence, and this translation effect really adds to the argument.
The reason these cells' DNA/RNA work the way they do is because of the physical properties of the universe and evolution. Again, no need to recourse to gods or goddesses.
* Naturalistic impossibility of the origins of life. Life appeared too shortly after the Late Heavy Bombardment, too quickly, and in a too complex state for naturalism. The earth went from an abiotic state to fully functioning life in only 10 to 50 million years, in the hostile environments of early earth, in the complete absence of prebiotic soup.
This is true. Life did spring up rather rapidly on earth, albeit in a basic form. There are, however, numerious explanations why it might have done so, again, without recourse to a god. One possibly is that lower forms of life are common in the universe and the early earth was seeded by these (known as the Panspermia Hypothesis). Another possiblity is that certain building blocks of life, such as amino acids, were formed by the conditions of early earth. These building blocks, came together to form a very crude initial replicator. This was a very small object, related to RNA, but even more basic and lacking a cell wall. This replicators physical properties caused it to create copies of itself and all you need is a single replicator for all of evolution to take place. There are some rather interesting and plausible theories in this regard. I should note, this is an area where science doesn't have all the answers yet. However, the answers we do have make more sense than positing a creator. Indeed, the arguement is basically either that a creator made a basic replicator or that the physical universe though its own properties did. If the creator made the replicator, you have to ask how the creator came to be, which is harder problem than where the first replicator came from, which seems to at least have some plausible solutions that don't vex mythical.
* There are numerous factors that need to be met before a planet can be suitable for
Main Entry: evangelize
Pronunciation: i-'van-j&-"lIz
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -lized; -lizing
transitive verb
1 : to preach the gospel to
2 : to convert to Christianity
intransitive verb : to preach the gospel
Main Entry: 1gospel
Pronunciation: 'gäs-p&l
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gOdspel (translation of Late Latin evangelium), from gOd good + spell tale -- more at SPELL
1 a often capitalized : the message concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation b capitalized : one of the first four New Testament books telling of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ; also : a similar apocryphal book c : an interpretation of the Christian message
2 capitalized : a lection from one of the New Testament Gospels
3 : the message or teachings of a religious teacher
4 : something accepted or promoted as infallible truth or as a guiding principle or doctrine
5 : gospel music
Thus, I am not.
That being said, there is no reason to believe in the existence of dieties of any sort. Richard Dawkins gives a nice short explanation of this in his documentary, The Root of all Evil.
For a longer an more detailed explanation I'd recommend The Blind Watchmaker.
I'd suggest reading The Blind Watchmaker, by Richard Dawkins. You may find it interesting.
Of course. However, in the 19th century there was room to doubt evolution. In the 21st century we have so much evidence for it that it is a fact in the same way that gravity is a fact.
Ah...I see. Someone moded the post I replied to -1, so its off the radar. I thought I had lost it for a minute. Can you guys mod the parent up to at least 1? This is a commonly held belief by many people and I would like to see it refuted.
This is weird, but now my post is under a completely different post than I replied to and the orginal vanished. Weird.
The original parent claimed that no mutations (rather than recombinations) caused beneficial effects in organisms and challenged anyone to find a paper that said otherwise. So weird...it just vanished.
I'm not looking for intelligent discussion. I'm merely hoping to dredge some people out of their 19th century worldview.
Evolution of a new enzymatic function by recombination within a gene. Hall BG, Zuzel T, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1980 Jun 77:6 3529-33
Abstract: "Mutations that alter the ebgA gene so that the evolved beta-galactosidase (ebg) enzyme of Escherichia coli can hydrolyze lactose fall into two classes: class I mutants use only lactose, whereas class II mutants use lactulose as well as lactose..." (Obviously, in a lactose-rich environment, this makes E. coli more fit.)
Now that I pointed you to the paper will you give up your unfounded belief?
I'd also suggest reading this to start and maybe this to learn a bit more about evolution.
First get this in your head. At this point in history, evolutionary biology is a certainty in the way that gravity is a certainty. We may reconceptualize certain parts of it from time to time, but it is clear and obvious that it is there and happening.
The big bang is NOTHING like this. This is because, unlike in biology, in physics at the moment we have massive unknowns (dark matter, dark energy, no clue what the elementary building material of the universe is, no way to connect quatum mechanics to relativity). At this point the best we can say is all clues seem to hint toward a big bang and that seems the most likely explanation to explain currently observed phenomena.
Big difference!
P.S.: Most Christian fundimentalists don't actually understand the difference between evolution and the big bang. They often see the two in their own heads as linked and think by argueing against one, they are arguing against the other as well. See Kent Hovind and his crazyness, for example.
While many still use mp3's in 2010 lossless music is starting to really catch on. Everyone has connections with a good amount more bandwidth, so downloading the much larger files isn't that much of a hassle anymore. Apples' iTunes started the trend around 2008 by heavily promoting its lossless codec and making the majority of its tracks available in it. It will even transcode from lossless to mp3 for your iPod. I have a feeling in a few more years mp3 is going to feel like tapes in respect to CD's.
Oh, and if anyone is curious about me, I work in law enforcement. I was sent back on the case of one of the most wanted time-criminals of 2010, John Titor.
Actually, a lot of recent evidence suggests that the pyramids where not built by slaves, but rather by paid workers. See below:
m l
http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/070391.ht
__
Elephant Essays - Custom Research Papers