But even so it is amusing to see people disregard the possibility of God and then offer no "proven" alternative
The poster talked about proofs that include God as part of the proof. For you to turn that into "disregarding the possibility" is disingenuous. There is an ocean of difference between disregarding a possibility and not seeing sufficient evidence to persuade.
If no one offers you a "proven" alternative then feel free to not believe them. But for you to offer that as evidence for a God is illogical. You're probably a very logical person in everyday issues. You also, for whatever reason, want to believe in God. That desire clouds your ability to approach it logically (this is not unique to you or this issue - it happens to everybody).
I happen to be, for whatever reason, predisposed to not expecting a God at the end of the tunnel. However, don't get me wrong, I'm pulling for you! I of course hope you're right. I just don't think you are.
"some time in the future" sounds to me like "if I can't sell it to somebody first"
-1, Overly Cynical
Re:It was a question designed to expose stupidity
on
Switch Different
·
· Score: 1
The person I was replying to said that someone didn't "Want enough" when they said their PC did everything they wanted. Now, don't you think it's fair to actually ask them what the hell they mean? What is it the PC user isn't wanting? What is it they can't do on a Mac.
I didn't say you could necessarily do it on a Mac. What I said was that if your computer does everything you want then your desires are rather limited. For instance, I want mine to understand plain English. It can't. So my computer doesn't do everything I want.
That said, on a more mundane level your computer, if it's not running OS X, is probably inferior in its abilities. There may be other drawbacks (cost, lack of freedom, general Steve-ness) but that's not part of what you want it to do (rather than be).
but I don't really see the point in paying 2x the price (on the screen) to get a smaller footprint.
More desk space, much cheaper to run, less eye strain, if the power goes out the UPS lasts a lot longer, easier to relocate, and of course it just makes you look more important.
FUD = Fear (Windows was too hard to use) Uncertainty (I couldn't figure it out) Doubt (I gave up and tried something else).
Except they are aiming that at people who already use Windows. If what the ad says doesn't ring true than the ad is not going to be effective. But if the person watching says something like "yeah, that effin' computer is always screwed up," then no FUD is involved, as the user already knows it to be true, and is now being presented with an alternative.
Before this test there was criticism that the Japanese don'thave enough aerospace experience to be building commercial jet airliners, let alone (b)leading edge supersonics.
That's because they waste all that time doing that silly math n' stuff. If they would only have hired the Rocket Man, who doesn't bother with those things, then everything would have been OK.
Apple owners are, by and large, the type of nancy who gets the vapors trying to figure out which end of the screwdriver to use.
If they're using it on you I suggest the thick end.
Re:The best browser is ... MSIE 5.1.5 --- WHY?
on
MSIE Security Updates
·
· Score: 1
Mozilla and IE 5.2.1 are too slow to
play Blitz.
I'm in a high-latency area so I thought it was my connection. I didn't realize the slowness was inherent.
And they crash after
playing a few games.
They don't crash for me. When I don't run into the (I presume) thread deadlock, I can play for hours. The browser itself doesn't crash, though.
Re:The best browser is ... MSIE 5.1.5 --- WHY?
on
MSIE Security Updates
·
· Score: 1
I play yahoo chess using Mozilla - in fact it's one of only two thing for which I use Mozilla - for everything else I use OmniWeb.
I don't find IE any more stable for yahoo chess. Yes, IE handles the scrolling properly, but in Mozilla that only affects the main window so that I can't reach the bottom chat line. This is no big deal to me. Both IE and Mozilla mysteriously hang from time to time. I'm guessing it's a threading bug on Yahoo's part that just happens to not surface under Windows. All the other windows are responsive except the one that's hung. It always happens during a drag.
Plus it says it rained 40 days and covered the highest mountain. That's about 20,000 feet. 40 days is 960 hours. That's a rainfall of over 20 feet per hour. Ask your son how long even his modern ship would survive that. By comparison, think of the hardest rainfall you've ever encountered. You probably couldn't see more than a few feet, and the sheer force of the water was beating you. And that was probably a rate of six inches per hour.
There's only one 25 hour day every year: when you roll back your clock for daylight savings
There are two, then. The legit one, and the one where you're supposed to change it the other way, but instead show up late for work saying "Oh man, I thought it was spring back."
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps this explanation will help you to understand.
The poster talked about proofs that include God as part of the proof. For you to turn that into "disregarding the possibility" is disingenuous. There is an ocean of difference between disregarding a possibility and not seeing sufficient evidence to persuade.
If no one offers you a "proven" alternative then feel free to not believe them. But for you to offer that as evidence for a God is illogical. You're probably a very logical person in everyday issues. You also, for whatever reason, want to believe in God. That desire clouds your ability to approach it logically (this is not unique to you or this issue - it happens to everybody).
I happen to be, for whatever reason, predisposed to not expecting a God at the end of the tunnel. However, don't get me wrong, I'm pulling for you! I of course hope you're right. I just don't think you are.
"I've got principles...hang on, what's that? $50? Sold!"
If that's the case, then why isn't it version 1.2 instead of 10.2?
Yes. It is the logical equivalent of the "?" step that ends with "3: Profit!"
-1, Overly Cynical
I didn't say you could necessarily do it on a Mac. What I said was that if your computer does everything you want then your desires are rather limited. For instance, I want mine to understand plain English. It can't. So my computer doesn't do everything I want.
That said, on a more mundane level your computer, if it's not running OS X, is probably inferior in its abilities. There may be other drawbacks (cost, lack of freedom, general Steve-ness) but that's not part of what you want it to do (rather than be).
Maybe the problem is that you don't want enough.
And so you think that more click-of-a-button options automatically means a better interface?
Heck, then why not just put wheels on a keyboard?
Yes there is. There's lots of doubt about it. It's not slamming at all. Weasely, perhaps, but not slamming.
If it's something from far away, then unless it were going really fast it wouldn't get here yet.
Who cares what it likes!?? Just blow the damn thing up! You pointy-headed nerds kill me.
More desk space, much cheaper to run, less eye strain, if the power goes out the UPS lasts a lot longer, easier to relocate, and of course it just makes you look more important.
Modded down as flamebait. Heh. That'll teach you to clearly and unequivocally support your argument.
Your days are easily made, apparently.
type this:
<a href = http://www.slashdot.org> Descriptive Text Goes Here</a>
Which makes a link that looks like this:
Descriptive Text Goes Here
Except they are aiming that at people who already use Windows. If what the ad says doesn't ring true than the ad is not going to be effective. But if the person watching says something like "yeah, that effin' computer is always screwed up," then no FUD is involved, as the user already knows it to be true, and is now being presented with an alternative.
That's because they waste all that time doing that silly math n' stuff. If they would only have hired the Rocket Man, who doesn't bother with those things, then everything would have been OK.
If they're using it on you I suggest the thick end.
I'm in a high-latency area so I thought it was my connection. I didn't realize the slowness was inherent.
And they crash after playing a few games.
They don't crash for me. When I don't run into the (I presume) thread deadlock, I can play for hours. The browser itself doesn't crash, though.
I don't find IE any more stable for yahoo chess. Yes, IE handles the scrolling properly, but in Mozilla that only affects the main window so that I can't reach the bottom chat line. This is no big deal to me. Both IE and Mozilla mysteriously hang from time to time. I'm guessing it's a threading bug on Yahoo's part that just happens to not surface under Windows. All the other windows are responsive except the one that's hung. It always happens during a drag.
Plus it says it rained 40 days and covered the highest mountain. That's about 20,000 feet. 40 days is 960 hours. That's a rainfall of over 20 feet per hour. Ask your son how long even his modern ship would survive that. By comparison, think of the hardest rainfall you've ever encountered. You probably couldn't see more than a few feet, and the sheer force of the water was beating you. And that was probably a rate of six inches per hour.
There are two, then. The legit one, and the one where you're supposed to change it the other way, but instead show up late for work saying "Oh man, I thought it was spring back."
Not necessarily. He may have meant to refer to his commenting, as in "your commenting sucks." Probably not, though.
That's because there stupid.