And this is why neither are considered to be theories -- they are interpretations that "explain" a theory so it makes sense in terms humans are accustomed to think of. It's Philosophy (a rare kind of philosophy that is not mental masturbation, navel gazing, theology or political ideology in disguise), not Physics.
Immediately after the idea was proposed, it was estimated to be 25 years in the future. Then implementation proven to be much harder than it first thought, so it's still estimated to be 25 years in the future.
So if anything, it was the other way around -- certainly at no point it was considered impossible.
1) you are incorrect. "Atheism" [merriam-webster.com] literally means "No god", or 'against god'. Not "Against religion".
What the fuck are you talking about?! I have just said that atheism is lack of belief in god. Religion is a belief in god. "Against" has nothing to do with it, atheism denies existence of god and therefore validity of religions. Atheist may choose to actively attack religions seeing them as dangerous (as I do), or consider them to be harmless curiosities (what would be perfectly reasonable if religions did not try to spread themselves).
2) "Agnosticism" [merriam-webster.com] literally means "Without knowledge"
And it's still an invalid way of reasoning, because it amounts to "anything may be true". Unless you can honestly act in a way that you assume such possibilities (that include me being a God, among other things), you can't claim to being consistently agnostic. Since no one can do this, the idea is stupid. Being "selective agnostic" is exactly the same as being a believer in a religion, just a very crappy believer.
3) Making up definitions to suit your world view is pretentious and conceited;
Me and every non-religious person everywhere.
You are correct in at least part of your rather barbed retort though; I cannot prove that you are not god, however, conversely, you cannot prove that you ARE. That does NOT make me have to bow down and worship you though.
If you don't expect me to be a god because I say so, you should also expect every religion to be wrong, too. Me being a god, and every god from every religion are on exactly the same foundation here -- no evidence whatsoever.
It just means I shouldnt fault somebody for falling for such a ploy and actually doing it. People have worshiped humans as if they were gods for centuries. I am not one of those people, so your commandment for me to die in a fire will fall on deaf ears. So sorry.
It should be utterly irrelevant to your own belief or lack of such, how you treat or blame other people. Your own beliefs and claims about them are under scrutiny, not your opinion about someone else.
Only if those observable effects can not be explained by a mechanism without universes.
Or I will make a hypothesis that the phone I am using now to post this comment, passes data to Slashdot site through another universe. You can observe the comment I have posted, but it can be easier explained by data being sent over various digital networks, all entirely within our Universe.
When it comes to conflating 'Atheism' with 'religion', I would argue that there *IS* a portion of the atheist demographic that even under fairly strict definitions could be described as religious. (Yes, I mean 'blind faith' type.)
1. Blind faith, zealotry and stubbornness, are not religion, they merely are common attributes of religious traditions and religious people -- but just as well can be completely unrelated.
The rest of your comment is therefore irrelevant. Nevertheless.
2. Atheism is a lack of belief. You can't "not believe" "blindly", as this is the most reasonable approach to everything that has no evidence, including all forms of religion. There is no point considering a possibility of ANYTHING outside things that can be observed, because then you would have to operate with the assumption that EVERYTHING is possible -- what is not in any way applicable to any decision you can make, and still would be even if some of those things were true. There is no valid argument for it, it's bullshit because then you have to admit that, for example, I may be the God, and that doesn't even scratch the surface of idiocy that would have to follow if your supposed "agnosticism" is applied consistently (just in case that you DO admit that I may be the God, I command you do die in a fire).
This brings us to the true meaning of "agnosticism" -- it's "I will just pretend that religious people might be right, because I am afraid of antagonizing religious authority figures". It belongs at the same intellectual junkyard as religions, pseudoscience, racism and some political movements.
Congratulations, you have demonstrated that atheism can be a hobby! Unfortunately the statement you were supposed to disprove is that atheism is not a religion. Hobbies were mentioned as a point for comparison, otherwise irrelevant to any arguments.
I am sure, you think of your expression as clever, but in reality it's either a poor attempt of deception, or lack of reasonong ability -- either qualifies you to get the fuck out of any intellectual discussion.
While Via goes out of its way to tell everyone how much they don't want their video to work under Linux, it's actually perfectly usable now, at the extent that anyone would expect Via peripheral to work.
There are absolutely no problems with Realtek devices being supported.
every single AIO printer in Walmart, etc etc etc?
I don't know, who or what AIO is, and I never shop at Walmart, so I wouldn't know. Neither should anyone.
Care to comment? Oh that's right, you can't because you know the support sucks as well as I do. Want proof? Take the "hairyfeet challenge. Step right up!
Everything supported on MacOS is now supported on Linux, thanks to Apple adopting CUPS as their only print subsystem. All networked printers now support Postscript, and therefore work just fine. If some manufacturer produces a printer model that specifically excludes Apple users, it must be an extreme piece of shit that no sane person would touch -- under any OS.
Open up three tabs in your browser. go to Walmart.com, Bestbuy.com, and Staples.com. These are the big three when it comes to retail PC peripherals sales. Now in each store you place these four things, which are the big sellers here, and NO RESEARCH!. Remember, you are an average consumer. No cheating! Ready? An all in one printer, a USB Wifi stick, the latest iPod and a USB TV Tuner. Now if you want this simulation to be accurate, buy the cheapest on half the purchases, as most consumers buy on price.
That's like complaining that cars can not run on horse feed because some ignorant person may expect them to. Nevertheless, of all devices you mentioned only "wifi sticks" actually are a problem -- and almost entirely thanks to a single company, Broadcom. Everything else works just fine. A person who can't find a supported device, has to be too dumb to use a computer.
Now go to...lets say Ubuntu, go to their forums and see if the twelve items you just "purchased" as three average shoppers works. Go on, I'll wait.
So you did google for ammunition against me, because Ubuntu forums are among first results when you look for anything with hardware problems. Obviously you didn't actually read, or you would see the dates on posts you found, and the amount of "it works in standard configuration" responses.
They don't work, do they? I'll wager you won't get a whole cart out of the store without doing research. I'm sure you also avoided lexmark to try to tip the odds in your favor even though a consumer wouldn't know about lexmark support and wouldn't do that.
Those printers are long out of production now. Standards won.
The rest of your post contains nothing but expression of your burning hatred toward Linux, with no actual claims about facts, so there is nothing there that warrants a response. You are right, you hate us. We know, and we hate you, too. However we actually have accomplished something, while all you can show for your effort is defending the pride of your Microsoft overlords.
Stalin is responsible for deaths of about 2 millions people. What Solzhenitsyn wrote is called vaguely autobiographical fiction, not a suitable foundation for studies claiming the numbers that would require him to kill everyone in USSR, twice.
Hitler, being directly responsible for WWII, caused at least 70 millions of deaths. Holocaust was among Nazis' most egregious crimes but it's merely a fraction of deaths they are responsible for, with European part of WWII being entirely their doing.
Give most people the power an average corporation has, and they will behave in quite the psychopathic fashion - regardless of their actual intent and efforts.
No. Just no.
"Power corrupts" is not supposed to be taken literally -- in reality, most people who try to achieve power are outright evil (or, more precisely, psychopathic) to begin with, so they end up corrupting the system.
It is not my claim that everyone in a capitalist society must act in an immoral manner, only an amoral one
Why? Because a nice authority figure told you so?
Morality is not at issue here.
Of course, it is -- my whole response is about it, so it is definitely an issue. Unless you are going to argue with yourself.
Also, it's not a claim: it is fact demonstrated by centuries of economics and the pure logic that the employer is not required to give everyone a raise when they hire someone at a higher salary, nor will any free market impose such a restriction as it is contrary to the basis of the system.
How anything can be "fact" or involve "logic" when it is actually an belief? Being required or not required to do something is not a law of nature, requirements are imposed on people by other people based on their idea of how society is supposed to work. While my opinion of it is obviously subjective, it is shared by billions of people, so "disproving" it by claiming that your equally subjective opinion is somehow more authoritative, accomplishes nothing. Of course, it is not entirely impossible to have an absolutely terrible society based on pure idiocy -- in fact, Europe over most of the Middle Ages was an example of just that. However all it proves is that there are stupid, immoral and evil people around -- such as yourself.
Also, you appear to be equating morality to fairness, which is rather naive.
Fairness is actually one of the most clearly expressed parts of morality. Of course, being indoctrinated with "greed is good", you see anything better than your principles as "naive".
People like you are the closest thing to pure evil that I have seen -- please die in a fire and let the rest of mankind develop into something better than society of predators preying on each other, that you are trying to build. If that was possible, both you and me would be dead by now.
Here is the only part that contains something resembling facts (ones that are not lies, shown in bold):
The big ones I ran into were, in no particular order: AMD chipsets/GPUs, Broadcom wireless, pretty much all the AIO printers offered at Walmart, Realtek HD chips, Via sound and network was hit or miss and seriously flaky, USB wireless and capture cards (a very popular add on here)
So you are complaining about known shit hardware, specifically sabotaged by manufacturers (ATI, Broadcom) who intentionally make it work only on Windows. In particular, ATI boards until recently were shit on Windows, too, and also recently, after they were bought by AMD, their support on Linux improved. Broadcom is a known offender -- I have no idea what is wrong with them, but they don't support OSX, either.
Everyone knowledgeable about Linux stays away from that hardware, because everything else works just fine.
The rest of your post basically explains just how much do you hate Linux, Free and Open source software, and how you believe that Windows is better, without a single valid reason. Congratulations, you are stupid.
The idea is just fine. It's actually the only thing that makes sense, because otherwise there would be nothing but paid spam and DRM'ed cable TV on the Internet.
Politicians who are trying to play on crap about "government regulation" are welcome to build their Libertarian paradise in Somalia.
Indoctrination always beats facts. The only way to get rid of religion is to prevent religious "education" of kids until they have capability to critically evaluate extraordinary claims. Would probably reduce numbers of rapes by priests, too, but that's just a side benefit.
For graphic or web designers or whatever, it's probably closer to 10% of the time they could use Linux, because the tools aren't there, and most people know this. (And hence people will argue against a strawman 'GIMP is nowhere near photoshop'...we know that.)
Then what you "know" is wrong. GIMP is perfectly adequate for any kind of graphics that ever crosses HTTP protocol. It's not our (open source developers') problem that most "web designers" are ignorant, and never heard anything about any software that is not either a marketing brochure or readme file for a keygen.
At this point Unix-like design is a foundation of all general-purpose operating systems, EXCEPT ones developed by Microsoft. There is a good reason for it, however explanation would be a book on OS design in itself, and therefore beyond the scope of a response to some retard's offhand comment on Slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
And this is why neither are considered to be theories -- they are interpretations that "explain" a theory so it makes sense in terms humans are accustomed to think of. It's Philosophy (a rare kind of philosophy that is not mental masturbation, navel gazing, theology or political ideology in disguise), not Physics.
Pretty much never.
Immediately after the idea was proposed, it was estimated to be 25 years in the future. Then implementation proven to be much harder than it first thought, so it's still estimated to be 25 years in the future.
So if anything, it was the other way around -- certainly at no point it was considered impossible.
1) you are incorrect. "Atheism" [merriam-webster.com] literally means "No god", or 'against god'. Not "Against religion".
What the fuck are you talking about?! I have just said that atheism is lack of belief in god. Religion is a belief in god. "Against" has nothing to do with it, atheism denies existence of god and therefore validity of religions. Atheist may choose to actively attack religions seeing them as dangerous (as I do), or consider them to be harmless curiosities (what would be perfectly reasonable if religions did not try to spread themselves).
2) "Agnosticism" [merriam-webster.com] literally means "Without knowledge"
And it's still an invalid way of reasoning, because it amounts to "anything may be true". Unless you can honestly act in a way that you assume such possibilities (that include me being a God, among other things), you can't claim to being consistently agnostic. Since no one can do this, the idea is stupid. Being "selective agnostic" is exactly the same as being a believer in a religion, just a very crappy believer.
3) Making up definitions to suit your world view is pretentious and conceited;
Me and every non-religious person everywhere.
You are correct in at least part of your rather barbed retort though; I cannot prove that you are not god, however, conversely, you cannot prove that you ARE. That does NOT make me have to bow down and worship you though.
If you don't expect me to be a god because I say so, you should also expect every religion to be wrong, too. Me being a god, and every god from every religion are on exactly the same foundation here -- no evidence whatsoever.
It just means I shouldnt fault somebody for falling for such a ploy and actually doing it. People have worshiped humans as if they were gods for centuries. I am not one of those people, so your commandment for me to die in a fire will fall on deaf ears. So sorry.
It should be utterly irrelevant to your own belief or lack of such, how you treat or blame other people. Your own beliefs and claims about them are under scrutiny, not your opinion about someone else.
Only if those observable effects can not be explained by a mechanism without universes.
Or I will make a hypothesis that the phone I am using now to post this comment, passes data to Slashdot site through another universe. You can observe the comment I have posted, but it can be easier explained by data being sent over various digital networks, all entirely within our Universe.
When it comes to conflating 'Atheism' with 'religion', I would argue that there *IS* a portion of the atheist demographic that even under fairly strict definitions could be described as religious. (Yes, I mean 'blind faith' type.)
1. Blind faith, zealotry and stubbornness, are not religion, they merely are common attributes of religious traditions and religious people -- but just as well can be completely unrelated.
The rest of your comment is therefore irrelevant. Nevertheless.
2. Atheism is a lack of belief. You can't "not believe" "blindly", as this is the most reasonable approach to everything that has no evidence, including all forms of religion. There is no point considering a possibility of ANYTHING outside things that can be observed, because then you would have to operate with the assumption that EVERYTHING is possible -- what is not in any way applicable to any decision you can make, and still would be even if some of those things were true. There is no valid argument for it, it's bullshit because then you have to admit that, for example, I may be the God, and that doesn't even scratch the surface of idiocy that would have to follow if your supposed "agnosticism" is applied consistently (just in case that you DO admit that I may be the God, I command you do die in a fire).
This brings us to the true meaning of "agnosticism" -- it's "I will just pretend that religious people might be right, because I am afraid of antagonizing religious authority figures". It belongs at the same intellectual junkyard as religions, pseudoscience, racism and some political movements.
timothy is a lolcat!
Congratulations, you have demonstrated that atheism can be a hobby! Unfortunately the statement you were supposed to disprove is that atheism is not a religion. Hobbies were mentioned as a point for comparison, otherwise irrelevant to any arguments.
I am sure, you think of your expression as clever, but in reality it's either a poor attempt of deception, or lack of reasonong ability -- either qualifies you to get the fuck out of any intellectual discussion.
Religion is a belief in supernatural entities that control the reality.
Don't change the definition and mix a legitimate practice of being a stubborn asshole with a dangerous social problem.
I call bullshit on this.
Who performed those studies? Where are the results published?
And admins have the keys. You are still fucked.
I noticed how you just ignored Via, Realtek,
While Via goes out of its way to tell everyone how much they don't want their video to work under Linux, it's actually perfectly usable now, at the extent that anyone would expect Via peripheral to work.
There are absolutely no problems with Realtek devices being supported.
every single AIO printer in Walmart, etc etc etc?
I don't know, who or what AIO is, and I never shop at Walmart, so I wouldn't know. Neither should anyone.
Care to comment? Oh that's right, you can't because you know the support sucks as well as I do. Want proof? Take the "hairyfeet challenge. Step right up!
Everything supported on MacOS is now supported on Linux, thanks to Apple adopting CUPS as their only print subsystem. All networked printers now support Postscript, and therefore work just fine. If some manufacturer produces a printer model that specifically excludes Apple users, it must be an extreme piece of shit that no sane person would touch -- under any OS.
Open up three tabs in your browser. go to Walmart.com, Bestbuy.com, and Staples.com. These are the big three when it comes to retail PC peripherals sales. Now in each store you place these four things, which are the big sellers here, and NO RESEARCH!. Remember, you are an average consumer. No cheating! Ready? An all in one printer, a USB Wifi stick, the latest iPod and a USB TV Tuner. Now if you want this simulation to be accurate, buy the cheapest on half the purchases, as most consumers buy on price.
That's like complaining that cars can not run on horse feed because some ignorant person may expect them to. Nevertheless, of all devices you mentioned only "wifi sticks" actually are a problem -- and almost entirely thanks to a single company, Broadcom. Everything else works just fine. A person who can't find a supported device, has to be too dumb to use a computer.
Now go to...lets say Ubuntu, go to their forums and see if the twelve items you just "purchased" as three average shoppers works. Go on, I'll wait.
So you did google for ammunition against me, because Ubuntu forums are among first results when you look for anything with hardware problems. Obviously you didn't actually read, or you would see the dates on posts you found, and the amount of "it works in standard configuration" responses.
They don't work, do they? I'll wager you won't get a whole cart out of the store without doing research. I'm sure you also avoided lexmark to try to tip the odds in your favor even though a consumer wouldn't know about lexmark support and wouldn't do that.
Those printers are long out of production now. Standards won.
The rest of your post contains nothing but expression of your burning hatred toward Linux, with no actual claims about facts, so there is nothing there that warrants a response. You are right, you hate us. We know, and we hate you, too. However we actually have accomplished something, while all you can show for your effort is defending the pride of your Microsoft overlords.
A contest: spot a huge fucking problem with the above mentioned design.
(first prize -- not a complete idiot who should never be allowed in anywhere close to a spacecraft).
Stalin is responsible for deaths of about 2 millions people. What Solzhenitsyn wrote is called vaguely autobiographical fiction, not a suitable foundation for studies claiming the numbers that would require him to kill everyone in USSR, twice.
Hitler, being directly responsible for WWII, caused at least 70 millions of deaths. Holocaust was among Nazis' most egregious crimes but it's merely a fraction of deaths they are responsible for, with European part of WWII being entirely their doing.
I think, most office buildings can be described in this manner.
Give most people the power an average corporation has, and they will behave in quite the psychopathic fashion - regardless of their actual intent and efforts.
No. Just no.
"Power corrupts" is not supposed to be taken literally -- in reality, most people who try to achieve power are outright evil (or, more precisely, psychopathic) to begin with, so they end up corrupting the system.
It is not my claim that everyone in a capitalist society must act in an immoral manner, only an amoral one
Why? Because a nice authority figure told you so?
Morality is not at issue here.
Of course, it is -- my whole response is about it, so it is definitely an issue. Unless you are going to argue with yourself.
Also, it's not a claim: it is fact demonstrated by centuries of economics and the pure logic that the employer is not required to give everyone a raise when they hire someone at a higher salary, nor will any free market impose such a restriction as it is contrary to the basis of the system.
How anything can be "fact" or involve "logic" when it is actually an belief? Being required or not required to do something is not a law of nature, requirements are imposed on people by other people based on their idea of how society is supposed to work. While my opinion of it is obviously subjective, it is shared by billions of people, so "disproving" it by claiming that your equally subjective opinion is somehow more authoritative, accomplishes nothing. Of course, it is not entirely impossible to have an absolutely terrible society based on pure idiocy -- in fact, Europe over most of the Middle Ages was an example of just that. However all it proves is that there are stupid, immoral and evil people around -- such as yourself.
Also, you appear to be equating morality to fairness, which is rather naive.
Fairness is actually one of the most clearly expressed parts of morality. Of course, being indoctrinated with "greed is good", you see anything better than your principles as "naive".
People like you are the closest thing to pure evil that I have seen -- please die in a fire and let the rest of mankind develop into something better than society of predators preying on each other, that you are trying to build. If that was possible, both you and me would be dead by now.
Here is the only part that contains something resembling facts (ones that are not lies, shown in bold):
The big ones I ran into were, in no particular order: AMD chipsets/GPUs, Broadcom wireless, pretty much all the AIO printers offered at Walmart, Realtek HD chips, Via sound and network was hit or miss and seriously flaky, USB wireless and capture cards (a very popular add on here)
So you are complaining about known shit hardware, specifically sabotaged by manufacturers (ATI, Broadcom) who intentionally make it work only on Windows. In particular, ATI boards until recently were shit on Windows, too, and also recently, after they were bought by AMD, their support on Linux improved. Broadcom is a known offender -- I have no idea what is wrong with them, but they don't support OSX, either.
Everyone knowledgeable about Linux stays away from that hardware, because everything else works just fine.
The rest of your post basically explains just how much do you hate Linux, Free and Open source software, and how you believe that Windows is better, without a single valid reason. Congratulations, you are stupid.
The idea is just fine. It's actually the only thing that makes sense, because otherwise there would be nothing but paid spam and DRM'ed cable TV on the Internet.
Politicians who are trying to play on crap about "government regulation" are welcome to build their Libertarian paradise in Somalia.
As if that ever worked.
Indoctrination always beats facts. The only way to get rid of religion is to prevent religious "education" of kids until they have capability to critically evaluate extraordinary claims. Would probably reduce numbers of rapes by priests, too, but that's just a side benefit.
For graphic or web designers or whatever, it's probably closer to 10% of the time they could use Linux, because the tools aren't there, and most people know this. (And hence people will argue against a strawman 'GIMP is nowhere near photoshop'...we know that.)
Then what you "know" is wrong. GIMP is perfectly adequate for any kind of graphics that ever crosses HTTP protocol. It's not our (open source developers') problem that most "web designers" are ignorant, and never heard anything about any software that is not either a marketing brochure or readme file for a keygen.
Really?
Which particular drivers were "broken" in Ubuntu 9.04-10.10?
Come on, tell me, I want to see what kind of details you will find by googling for "ubuntu driver broken".
Food.
Consumer products.
Agricultural supplies.
Construction.
Waste removal.
Emergency services.
Mail.
Everyone depends on those things -- even people who never drive.
I would rather prefer not.
At this point Unix-like design is a foundation of all general-purpose operating systems, EXCEPT ones developed by Microsoft. There is a good reason for it, however explanation would be a book on OS design in itself, and therefore beyond the scope of a response to some retard's offhand comment on Slashdot.