I think Barbara Streisand probably has some good advice on this subject.
Seriously, though, once your information is out, what do you hope to do? It's like complaining about spammers - get a better anti-spam system. Be prepared to filter aggressively. Do not engage.
I guess I look at those examples and think they are exceptional and dubious, respectively. Maybe that's just a cultural difference across the pond. If you head down to London and catch a show and don't want to walk home, I think that's about you, and maybe you catch a cab home.
Your other examples all seem like things that would likely be done before 10pm. As someone who lives in a college town and who also lived on campus at the U of Lancaster for a school year, it seems like 10pm would cover the vast majority of the use cases.
Maybe I should talk to the town council about dimming the lights.
And believe it or not, people still do relocate. Or go on a road trip, or vacation or visit families. So unless there are countless charging stations nationwide or a program to swap out batteries when they're almost out of charge, it's not going to replace a gasoline engine anytime soon.
From the article:
This was an amazing 15,000 mile Road Trip, we caught up with friends and family, met some intriguing people and saw a bit of America along with some really spectacular roadside kitsch, ticking loads of stuff off our bucket list. All the while, we drove the Model S without compromise, never running out of battery, we always found a place to charge, even in rural America. Now I completely disregard range anxiety as an unnecessary fear.
Or maybe not.
Yeah, this is basically an ad. But clearly, relocating is possible and road trips can be done. If you're worried, use a rental for the trip. Hell, maybe you want something bigger for camping/relocating, anyway. Cars can be shipped.
Instead of asking folks who have gone to the effort of putting in an adblocker to turn it off, maybe ask them for as much as the ad folks pay per eyeball?
Unless Google WONT be using the temperature I set it at for marketing purposes. I get enough robo-calls about solar, heating, etc as it is.
Really? I added myself to the do not call registry and no longer get any.
In addition, I mostly use google voice - which means that a lot of political calls go straight to spam instead of connecting to me, too. Thank you, google, for plugging the political loophole on the registry...
Physical and spiritual death (not cell death which the ancients wouldn't even know about) is the result of sin. There was no sin prior to the fall. In the genesis account God sees that what he created was good on each day.
OK - we're getting pretty deep, here. But let's roll with it.
Evolution through natural selection involves competition and killing. You can't have evolution without something dying.
There are two parts to the equation. The first part is reproducing. The second part is dying. It certainly seems possible to have mutation and variation in reproduction without supposing death. Death just adds the second part, and you're off to the races.
Really, though, there is no mention of reproduction before the fall - seems entirely possible for god to add both at the same time.
Die out? No. But, whence comes the current genetic diversity of humans, if not Adam and Eve?
Mutation happens. See also evolution.
Well, yes, actually, they would die out, but not from inherent genetic flaw, so much as the first disease that came along and took advantage of the monoculture.
I guess there are a couple of reasons this doesn't happen (see also every disease that one culture introduced to another): * The strong survive * If a disease wiped out an entire species, it doesn't bode well for the disease
... If evolutionary theory is true, there were no physical Adam and Eve...
that doesn't follow. If there were an Adam and Eve, there's no reason for evolution to be invalid. It's always seemed obvious to me: * Suppose there was an Adam and Eve. * Suppose that evolution is a real thing.
There ya go.
So who were Adam and Eves' parents?
In any creation myth I know, Man1 and Woman1 were created by god[s]. The mechanism varies.
What does that have to do with whether or not evolution is a real thing, today? Don't argue creation, you can not win, and it really does not matter. You *can not* prove that god *does not* exist. Take a deep breath and repeat after me (from the first paragraph on Wikipedia - the second paragraph is crap that religious folks may or may not disagree with, but which *does not matter* - the rest of the article is good science):
Evolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.
That's it. Done. Basic science. There are plenty of young world issues - the answer to which is always "because that's how god made it." Freakin cope with it, already - either you believe that or you don't.
The question before us is: Why does shit happen? The answer is: Because science.
The question NOT before us is: Why does science happen? Because the answer to that could be * Because god. or * Because.
It's a fine argument to have, but it has shit-all to do with evolution.
he'd have to explain why he didn't create immortality for his pet project
A couple of counters, either of which should do, and none of which has anything to do with evolution:
* He did create it - just not on this earth. That's kind of the point. * I can think of no reason why the existence of god would require living immortality. What's wrong with evolution?
Adam and Eve = insignificant genetic diversity. Unless, of course, 'God did it.'
Which, of course, is the case.
And besides, do you really think that a species would die out even if the 'original two' were identical except for a single chromosome? I mean - I guess it could happen if they both had tremendously detrimental genes, but let's give the almighty the benefit of the doubt and suppose that he started with a strong breeding pair.
The other question is, 'The Bible lays out a fairly clear timeline of where humanity was. Explain Chinese people. And Australians. And Africans. And, well, everybody else outside of the Middle East.'
No.
And that's all there is to it. Done.
But if we want to be pedantic (and that's why we're here, right?), practically none of any of this has anything to do with whether or not evolution is a real thing. So... done.
Trying to change someone's mind about a belief (this is how things happened - look, evidence vs. this is how things happened - look, religious belief) is nonsense.
Trying to change someone's mind about something observable and predictable is worthwhile.
... If evolutionary theory is true, there were no physical Adam and Eve...
that doesn't follow. If there were an Adam and Eve, there's no reason for evolution to be invalid. It's always seemed obvious to me: * Suppose there was an Adam and Eve. * Suppose that evolution is a real thing.
There ya go. All done.
All the arguing about evolution vs. creationism is not a real argument. Once you get past the notion of existence, either the universe happened at some point a long time ago by accident, or on purpose, or more recently on purpose. That's the real argument. You're never going to prove it one way or the other - 'because god.'
But whether it was on purpose or by accident and how long ago isn't real important. What's important (if you lean that way) is science.
What happens happens "because science." Done.
And if you're religious, then science happens "because god[*]."
Yes, they are. The metaphorical interpretation of the creation story still is incompatible with evolution. You have to explain why God would say death, which is necessary for evolution, is "good."
Not only is this unreasonable, it seems to be pretty much impossible. Very few manufacturers of anything are held responsible for the bad things that happen when the things they make are used.
* Cars * Guns * Knives * Drugs * Food
And when your dalek kills someone, whose fault is it? Is it the hardware manufacturer's fault? Or the software writer's? Which of those writers? What if we can narrow it down to some component - maybe it's that component manufacturer's fault, not DalekCo's. Or maybe the steel/plastic/pudding that went into that component was a bad batch. Or maybe the dalek watched too many Tom & Jerry's cartoons. Chuck Jones is at fault because he portrayed cartoon characters that could survive being hit over the head with a frying pan. It was not the Dalek's fault - blame the dead guy. Because that's what happens - you blame the dead guy.
I'm not saying that nobody is ever responsible. I'm just saying that it is sometimes the case that assigning the blame can be impossible, and it can also be worthless.
I have traveled to many western countries (US, several in europe). I have driven in a few of 'em. I did not drive in Italy or Greece - I was poor at the time, and it looked pretty hairy.
China is not like that. Driving in China is insane.
Got back from three weeks vacation out there. Driving is insane.
*ALL* driving rules are optional. And you might be thinking 'yeah, I sometimes break the driving laws.' No. It's not like that.
Do you routinely cut off oncoming traffic to make a left? Do you routinely stop in the middle of the street and get out of your car (for whatever reason)? Do you routinely drive down the emergency lane on freeways? Do you routinely drive on the wrong side of the road?
These are all things that happen *all the time*. Not just sometimes. Insanity.
Slashdot Mirror
SolarCity has bout 16,000 employees. 550 is a quarter of it's Nevada workforce. The article itself is poorly worded.
(yes, I work for SolarCity)
I think Barbara Streisand probably has some good advice on this subject.
Seriously, though, once your information is out, what do you hope to do? It's like complaining about spammers - get a better anti-spam system. Be prepared to filter aggressively. Do not engage.
I guess I look at those examples and think they are exceptional and dubious, respectively. Maybe that's just a cultural difference across the pond. If you head down to London and catch a show and don't want to walk home, I think that's about you, and maybe you catch a cab home.
Your other examples all seem like things that would likely be done before 10pm. As someone who lives in a college town and who also lived on campus at the U of Lancaster for a school year, it seems like 10pm would cover the vast majority of the use cases.
Maybe I should talk to the town council about dimming the lights.
What time is 'late', I wonder?
I'd be very happy if the (small) city I live in only kept street lights on from dusk until 10pm, for example.
This.
Holy crap. Fuck you, non-editors.
You forgot to mention zero-reasoning editors.
Yeah, I'm mostly with you - though this has been bubbling on /. for ... a couple of years, now? Still - you're right and the editors suck.
Wayland is an alternative display system that could maybe someday replace X.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Looks like for microsoft to preserve profitability it may have to continue to branch out of its core competency, windows...
Core /what/, now?
Sorry. Could not resist - having just installed 8.1.
The last thing the dude said to me as I walked out of Best Buy: "yeah, good luck installing *that*."
Lets say i relocate cross country.
I can fill up at any gasoline station.
I am completely shit out of luck with a Tesla.
No doubt.
http://www.teslamotors.com/cus...
And believe it or not, people still do relocate. Or go on a road trip, or vacation or visit families.
So unless there are countless charging stations nationwide or a program to swap out batteries when they're almost out of charge, it's not going to replace a gasoline engine anytime soon.
From the article:
This was an amazing 15,000 mile Road Trip, we caught up with friends and family, met some intriguing people and saw a bit of America along with some really spectacular roadside kitsch, ticking loads of stuff off our bucket list. All the while, we drove the Model S without compromise, never running out of battery, we always found a place to charge, even in rural America. Now I completely disregard range anxiety as an unnecessary fear.
Or maybe not.
Yeah, this is basically an ad. But clearly, relocating is possible and road trips can be done. If you're worried, use a rental for the trip. Hell, maybe you want something bigger for camping/relocating, anyway. Cars can be shipped.
Instead of asking folks who have gone to the effort of putting in an adblocker to turn it off, maybe ask them for as much as the ad folks pay per eyeball?
Unless Google WONT be using the temperature I set it at for marketing purposes. I get enough robo-calls about solar, heating, etc as it is.
Really? I added myself to the do not call registry and no longer get any.
In addition, I mostly use google voice - which means that a lot of political calls go straight to spam instead of connecting to me, too. Thank you, google, for plugging the political loophole on the registry...
Kurt
Write "Joe owes me $1" on a piece of paper and use it instead of $1.
Done.
Nobody will accept it. Nobody knows who joe is. Nobody knows where the paper has been or why.
Just like all the e-currencies. Just a little more anonymous and transparent.
Physical and spiritual death (not cell death which the ancients wouldn't even know about) is the result of sin. There was no sin prior to the fall. In the genesis account God sees that what he created was good on each day.
OK - we're getting pretty deep, here. But let's roll with it.
Evolution through natural selection involves competition and killing. You can't have evolution without something dying.
There are two parts to the equation. The first part is reproducing. The second part is dying. It certainly seems possible to have mutation and variation in reproduction without supposing death. Death just adds the second part, and you're off to the races.
Really, though, there is no mention of reproduction before the fall - seems entirely possible for god to add both at the same time.
I really don't see an issue.
Die out? No. But, whence comes the current genetic diversity of humans, if not Adam and Eve?
Mutation happens. See also evolution.
Well, yes, actually, they would die out, but not from inherent genetic flaw, so much as the first disease that came along and took advantage of the monoculture.
I guess there are a couple of reasons this doesn't happen (see also every disease that one culture introduced to another):
* The strong survive
* If a disease wiped out an entire species, it doesn't bode well for the disease
Just for argument's sake -
... If evolutionary theory is true, there were no physical Adam and Eve...
that doesn't follow. If there were an Adam and Eve, there's no reason for evolution to be invalid. It's always seemed obvious to me:
* Suppose there was an Adam and Eve.
* Suppose that evolution is a real thing.
There ya go.
So who were Adam and Eves' parents?
In any creation myth I know, Man1 and Woman1 were created by god[s]. The mechanism varies.
What does that have to do with whether or not evolution is a real thing, today? Don't argue creation, you can not win, and it really does not matter. You *can not* prove that god *does not* exist. Take a deep breath and repeat after me (from the first paragraph on Wikipedia - the second paragraph is crap that religious folks may or may not disagree with, but which *does not matter* - the rest of the article is good science):
Evolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.
That's it. Done. Basic science. There are plenty of young world issues - the answer to which is always "because that's how god made it." Freakin cope with it, already - either you believe that or you don't.
The question before us is:
Why does shit happen?
The answer is:
Because science.
The question NOT before us is:
Why does science happen?
Because the answer to that could be
* Because god.
or
* Because.
It's a fine argument to have, but it has shit-all to do with evolution.
he'd have to explain why he didn't create immortality for his pet project
A couple of counters, either of which should do, and none of which has anything to do with evolution:
* He did create it - just not on this earth. That's kind of the point.
* I can think of no reason why the existence of god would require living immortality. What's wrong with evolution?
Adam and Eve = insignificant genetic diversity. Unless, of course, 'God did it.'
Which, of course, is the case.
And besides, do you really think that a species would die out even if the 'original two' were identical except for a single chromosome? I mean - I guess it could happen if they both had tremendously detrimental genes, but let's give the almighty the benefit of the doubt and suppose that he started with a strong breeding pair.
The other question is, 'The Bible lays out a fairly clear timeline of where humanity was. Explain Chinese people. And Australians. And Africans. And, well, everybody else outside of the Middle East.'
No.
And that's all there is to it. Done.
But if we want to be pedantic (and that's why we're here, right?), practically none of any of this has anything to do with whether or not evolution is a real thing. So... done.
Trying to change someone's mind about a belief (this is how things happened - look, evidence vs. this is how things happened - look, religious belief) is nonsense.
Trying to change someone's mind about something observable and predictable is worthwhile.
Just for argument's sake -
... If evolutionary theory is true, there were no physical Adam and Eve...
that doesn't follow. If there were an Adam and Eve, there's no reason for evolution to be invalid. It's always seemed obvious to me:
* Suppose there was an Adam and Eve.
* Suppose that evolution is a real thing.
There ya go. All done.
All the arguing about evolution vs. creationism is not a real argument. Once you get past the notion of existence, either the universe happened at some point a long time ago by accident, or on purpose, or more recently on purpose. That's the real argument. You're never going to prove it one way or the other - 'because god.'
But whether it was on purpose or by accident and how long ago isn't real important. What's important (if you lean that way) is science.
What happens happens "because science." Done.
And if you're religious, then science happens "because god[*]."
Move along. Nothing to see, here.
Yes, they are. The metaphorical interpretation of the creation story still is incompatible with evolution. You have to explain why God would say death, which is necessary for evolution, is "good."
Why would you have to explain that?
You have to wonder at stories like this - are the researchers actually angling for an IgNobel, or do they have some other motive?
Not only is this unreasonable, it seems to be pretty much impossible. Very few manufacturers of anything are held responsible for the bad things that happen when the things they make are used.
* Cars
* Guns
* Knives
* Drugs
* Food
And when your dalek kills someone, whose fault is it? Is it the hardware manufacturer's fault? Or the software writer's? Which of those writers? What if we can narrow it down to some component - maybe it's that component manufacturer's fault, not DalekCo's. Or maybe the steel/plastic/pudding that went into that component was a bad batch. Or maybe the dalek watched too many Tom & Jerry's cartoons. Chuck Jones is at fault because he portrayed cartoon characters that could survive being hit over the head with a frying pan. It was not the Dalek's fault - blame the dead guy. Because that's what happens - you blame the dead guy.
I'm not saying that nobody is ever responsible. I'm just saying that it is sometimes the case that assigning the blame can be impossible, and it can also be worthless.
I have traveled to many western countries (US, several in europe). I have driven in a few of 'em. I did not drive in Italy or Greece - I was poor at the time, and it looked pretty hairy.
China is not like that. Driving in China is insane.
OMG. Do not do it.
Got back from three weeks vacation out there. Driving is insane.
*ALL* driving rules are optional. And you might be thinking 'yeah, I sometimes break the driving laws.' No. It's not like that.
Do you routinely cut off oncoming traffic to make a left?
Do you routinely stop in the middle of the street and get out of your car (for whatever reason)?
Do you routinely drive down the emergency lane on freeways?
Do you routinely drive on the wrong side of the road?
These are all things that happen *all the time*. Not just sometimes. Insanity.
At blizcon they said that 40% of the top tier players never spent a dime...