yes, because nothing proves your sincerity by knowing what's written in a fantasy book.
The question of whether the Bible is a fantasy isn't at issue here. The issue is whether the President honestly believes it, studies it, and tries to live according to its teachings, or whether he's just pandering to the masses by telling them what they want to hear. His choice of words here suggests an intimate familiarity with the text that wouldn't be there if he were merely pandering.
A large number of people have been mislead into believing that President Obama is either an atheist or a Muslim. Many of the people who voted against him did so primarily because of these lies. Lies and deception are unhealthy in a democracy.
If you're an American who believes Christians are stupid and dangerous, I hope you were not similarly mislead, and exercised your right to vote for someone else.
I have no doubt that our PM is likely more religious than many of our previous PM's, however likely they most that would be said about it might be "yes I believe in god, and that is a private affair for myself and my family".
The quote wasn't from a speech, but from an interview that both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney gave for the midsummer 2012 issue of Cathedral Age, the magazine of the Washington National Cathedral. It did not receive much press coverage. The President doesn't speak publicly about his religious beliefs very much, although he doesn't dodge such questions when asked.
Perhaps you can point some of your Christian friends to this quote:
First and foremost, my Christian faith gives me a perspective and security that I don’t think I would have otherwise: That I am loved. That, at the end of the day, God is in control—and my main responsibility is to love God with all of my heart, soul, and mind, and to love my neighbor as myself. Now, I don’t always live up to that standard, but it is a standard I am always pursuing.
My faith is also a great source of comfort to me. I’ve said before that my faith has grown as president. This office tends to make a person pray more; and as President Lincoln once said, "I have been driven to my knees many times by the overwhelming conviction that I had no place else to go."
Finally, I try to make sure that my faith informs how I live my life. As a husband, as a father, and as president, my faith helps me to keep my eyes on the prize and focus on what is good and truly important.
-- President Barack Obama
The allusions to Matthew 22:37-39 and Philippians 3:14 are what makes me believe his sincerity.
You should be able to log into your phone account from another device and retrieve the location of the phone, Maybe listen in and record calls from your phone, too.
You don't even have to have him click a link. Send an email with a web bug (1 pixel img), hosted on a server you have log access to, and when he reads it you have his IP.
This doesn't work with modern email clients. Spammers can set the URL of the image to a unique ID code that's linked to your email address, so as soon as you load the image they've just confirmed that your email address is valid. We don't want that, so external images are blocked by default.
However, a decade ago this would have been more likely to work.
It is easier to charge the public more or ban something wasteful like children's balloons than it is to get the military or industry to do anything. Remember, the military and industry have a history of KILLING PEOPLE rather than change their ways - and you want them to change over a small resource supply problem? The military complex can't even stop wasting money when we run out of money.
But banning party balloons won't help us to not run out of helium so soon. It's such a small percentage, the difference would be imperceptible, and yet you're asking millions of people to sacrifice a fun tradition just so you can feel like you're "doing something" without any real benefit to the public.
My suggestion: tax it, just like cigarettes and gasoline. Artificially driving up the price will encourage people to waste less and recapture more, and the additional revenue can contribute to deficit reduction.
Furthermore, the silly codenames Ubuntu has are just that: codenames. They are for developers and testers, not end users, and certainly not "pundits".
That's precisely how Apple's cat names started, until rumor sites caught wind and end users started using them. Then starting with Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger", Apple's marketing team decided to just run with it.
Personally I'm really disappointed that Ubuntu didn't go with Hungry Hippo.
The real reason 7 felt so much faster than Vista: When they made Vista, they planned on you booting up very infrequently, so they scheduled a lot of junk to happen at boot and login, thinking that users would just 'sleep' instead of rebooting. Windows 7 (And Vista SP2) backs off a bit and does the housekeeping when you're not using the computer. Vista actually wasn't really 'slow', it's just 'irrationally busy' doing stuff with the I/O (indexing, precaching, defragmenting, etc.) while you're just trying to get to your gosh-darned desktop.
Also, the reason people had fewer compatibility problems with 7 isn't because Microsoft fixed the OS, it's because software and hardware vendors fixed their applications and drivers.
If you tried to do anything useful on Windows Vista within the first six months after it was released, you probably had a miserable experience. If you tried to do the same stuff on Windows 7 within the first six months of that OS's release, it probably worked fine. What people don't realize is that if you did a clean install of Vista when Windows 7 was released, it would have worked fine too, because the apps had been fixed by then.
An iPad can ALSO be a tool, but it's a different tool that is great at different things. To borrow another poster's analogy, a kitchen knife is a great tool, but I'm not gonna use one for eating soup. Conversely, slicing a ham with a spoon is probably about as much fun as writing a paper on an iPad.
...Surely using some kind of RFID security card that must be near the PC/Laptop to unlock would be cost effective. I could keep it in my wallet or as a keyring.
Or affix it to the laptop with a piece of tape, so you wouldn't have to worry about not being able to get your work done in case you forget your wallet or your keys.:-D
The analogy that I like to make is organ donation -- can I be compelled to give you a kidney, blood, or bone marrow if I'm the only compatible donor and the alternative is your death? Of course not, my right to control my body is paramount. Likewise, I don't believe we have the right to tell a woman that she MUST carry a baby to term.
That is a fantastic analogy. Thank you.
(I'm pro-life, but strongly oppose any anti-abortion law that doesn't make exceptions for the health of the mother. In principle I don't support exceptions for rape and incest, but it irritates me when other pro-lifers refuse to compromise on this.)
If it takes 10,000 years, what's the point of sending people? 10,000 years is longer than the whole of recorded human civilization; even assuming you could keep the crew alive in hibernation for that long (I'm quite sure you can't), what would they do when they got there? They'd have the rusty tub they came in, and... nothing. If they managed to land safely on a planet that happened to have a breathable atmosphere and all the natural resources necessary to build a successful colony, I suppose it's possible they could succeed, but how would we even find such a suitable destination for them? Far more likely that they'd land on a frozen rock and be confined to the ship until they either suffocated or starved to death.
Unless, of course, during that 10,000 years our technology and understanding of the universe advanced to the point where we figure out how to do FTL travel in some way, so when the colonists finally arrive, we're already there to welcome them.
Let's see if we can send a few unmanned probes to other solar systems before we try it with people, shall we? At this point we can't even do that.
When you compare the original SMB to SMB3, there are tons of new things that affect gameplay:
Improved physics for better control while jumping
The ability to scroll left, letting you go back over areas of the map you've already passed
The raccoon leaf, allowing Mario to fly (and to break bricks he can't punch from below)
P-blocks, temporarily transforming coins into bricks and vice-versa
Tons of new enemies that behave in very different ways, like ghosts and chain chomps and thwomps and the jumpy brick things and the guys that throw wrenches in World 8
Different worlds with their own unique elements like double-size enemies or ice that's slippery to walk on
Overworld maps, allowing you to see your progress and occasionally skip difficult levels
The ability to collect power-ups that can be used before starting a new level
A new approach to 2-player games: a level completed by one player is completed for both
SMB3 was revolutionary and creative. SMW built upon this by adding Yoshi, the ability to replay levels that had already been completed, and technical enhancements like stereo sound and higher resolution graphics and background graphics that scroll with perspective. From a gameplay perspective, it was evolutionary, not revolutionary. A great sequel, full of all the things that made the previous game great, but nothing felt like "oh, we're doing this again".
I haven't played most of the recent games, but it sounds like they need to look back to the creativity of the new elements that SMB3 introduced, and apply the same kind of creativity (not the same elements!) to the next Mario game. SMB3 and SMW were technological leaps forward from their predecessors, but we're long past the point where technological improvements matter to a Mario game.
The part you're missing though is services-- that's Apple's diversity. Apple has gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure that all of its physical products are tied to services that you need to pay to use. With the iCloud, they don't just want you to pay once, they want you to pay regularly.
Apple doesn't make a lot of money on its services, which mostly exist to add value to Apple's hardware. I'm not saying they're not making any money at all, but if they shut down iCloud completely, the biggest impact to Apple's bottom line would not be from the loss of subscription fees but rather from reduced hardware sales because consumers would find Macs and iPhones less attractive without it.
There are many millions of people with their music and videos in iTunes AAC/M4V format.
I think it's important to draw a distinction here between music and videos. Videos sold through the iTunes Store are encrypted with proprietary DRM technology making them unplayable on non-Apple devices, but that hasn't been true of music in many years. Virtually any modern media player should be able to play music purchased from the iTunes Store, and moving it from a Mac to a Linux box isn't any more complicated than moving it to another Mac (unless you use the feature in the new Mac's setup wizard to automatically copy everything from your old Mac).
After Apple lost the "Microsoft coppied our GUI" case, their desktop GUI remained unchanged for 10 years. System 7 through 9 were basically identical..... they couldn't even multitask properly (used cooperative multitasking which led to misbehaving programs refusing to give-up the CPU & freezing the system). Apple said they would stop innovating their GUI if competitors simply copied their ideas, and that's essentially what happened.
You're forgetting a couple of very important details. Apple tried to fix the under-the-hood stuff, including preemptive multitasking, but just couldn't pull it off. Classic Mac OS was a pretty decent code base for what it did, but they needed it to do things it was never designed for, and the project to revamp it (code-named "Copland") was a failure.
After scrapping the Copland project, Apple realized that classic Mac OS was a dead end, and they started shopping around for other operating systems they could buy. They were looking seriously at Be before settling on NeXT. Along with NeXT came Steve Jobs, who took over the company, replaced the board of directors, created the iMac, bought iTunes, created the iPod, borrowed KHTML to develop WebKit, etc. etc.
Also there are provisions for the police to enter and get someone. They can't arrest any of the diplomats, nor touch any of the papers, but they can arrest a non-protected person in there.
My understanding is that no, Britain cannot legally do that.
What Britain apparently CAN do is declare that the Ecuadorian embassy in London is no longer being used for diplomatic purposes, and therefore is no longer considered to be sovereign territory of Ecuador. This has diplomats all over the world freaking out, because it would set a very scary precedent.
What Britain SHOULD do is shut the hell up and sit on their hands. As long as Assange remains inside the embassy, he's off limits. The moment he leaves, he is subject to arrest, but not until then. Of course he can only stay as long as the folks in Quito decide they'd like him to remain their guest...
Um, Vista is still broken when download of new Windows Update software also ends up causing programs to crash due to DEP when they did not previously crash. For example would be Fritz 9 that ran fine in Vista SP2 64-bit up until the last update of Windows Update software... now running in any 3D board crashes on subsequent launch due to DEP. This includes even setting a DEP exception.
Thus why Data Execution Prevention is still subject to breaking programs that worked until the last Windows Update.
As designed, it sucks, and is not the program vendor's fault.
Yes, but Microsoft's marketing department had absolutely nothing to do with any of that. Vista is terrible because the engineers were incompetent, not because the marketing department smoked too much weed.
It seems that whenever someone in management lets marketing smoke enough weed to even think about visiting the engineers we get something like Bob or ME or Vista or Metro.
I don't think Vista belongs in that category. It seems to me that the driving force behind Vista was always from the engineers - they just weren't very good.
"It strains reason to conclude that Defendant was attempting to criticize Plaintiff's reputation or competency as an astronomer. One does not seriously attack the expertise of a scientist using the undefined phrase 'butt-head'."
My mom's Skype account was recently hacked. Apparently the hackers were able to abuse the Skype Manager system to gain control of her account without her authorization, transfer her account balance, and reset her password. Skype's customer service has acknowledged the problem but has not been able to restore access to the account yet.
(I don't know any more details than that, as I haven't been involved.)
Slashdot Mirror
Washington National Cathedral is a bit more than just "a church". Wikipedia
yes, because nothing proves your sincerity by knowing what's written in a fantasy book.
The question of whether the Bible is a fantasy isn't at issue here. The issue is whether the President honestly believes it, studies it, and tries to live according to its teachings, or whether he's just pandering to the masses by telling them what they want to hear. His choice of words here suggests an intimate familiarity with the text that wouldn't be there if he were merely pandering.
A large number of people have been mislead into believing that President Obama is either an atheist or a Muslim. Many of the people who voted against him did so primarily because of these lies. Lies and deception are unhealthy in a democracy.
If you're an American who believes Christians are stupid and dangerous, I hope you were not similarly mislead, and exercised your right to vote for someone else.
I have no doubt that our PM is likely more religious than many of our previous PM's, however likely they most that would be said about it might be "yes I believe in god, and that is a private affair for myself and my family".
The quote wasn't from a speech, but from an interview that both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney gave for the midsummer 2012 issue of Cathedral Age, the magazine of the Washington National Cathedral. It did not receive much press coverage. The President doesn't speak publicly about his religious beliefs very much, although he doesn't dodge such questions when asked.
Perhaps you can point some of your Christian friends to this quote:
First and foremost, my Christian faith gives me a perspective and security that I don’t think I would have otherwise: That I am loved. That, at the end of the day, God is in control—and my main responsibility is to love God with all of my heart, soul, and mind, and to love my neighbor as myself. Now, I don’t always live up to that standard, but it is a standard I am always pursuing.
My faith is also a great source of comfort to me. I’ve said before that my faith has grown as president. This office tends to make a person pray more; and as President Lincoln once said, "I have been driven to my knees many times by the overwhelming conviction that I had no place else to go."
Finally, I try to make sure that my faith informs how I live my life. As a husband, as a father, and as president, my faith helps me to keep my eyes on the prize and focus on what is good and truly important.
-- President Barack Obama
The allusions to Matthew 22:37-39 and Philippians 3:14 are what makes me believe his sincerity.
You should be able to log into your phone account from another device and retrieve the location of the phone, Maybe listen in and record calls from your phone, too.
http://www.apple.com/iphone/icloud/#find
You don't even have to have him click a link. Send an email with a web bug (1 pixel img), hosted on a server you have log access to, and when he reads it you have his IP.
This doesn't work with modern email clients. Spammers can set the URL of the image to a unique ID code that's linked to your email address, so as soon as you load the image they've just confirmed that your email address is valid. We don't want that, so external images are blocked by default.
However, a decade ago this would have been more likely to work.
It is easier to charge the public more or ban something wasteful like children's balloons than it is to get the military or industry to do anything. Remember, the military and industry have a history of KILLING PEOPLE rather than change their ways - and you want them to change over a small resource supply problem? The military complex can't even stop wasting money when we run out of money.
But banning party balloons won't help us to not run out of helium so soon. It's such a small percentage, the difference would be imperceptible, and yet you're asking millions of people to sacrifice a fun tradition just so you can feel like you're "doing something" without any real benefit to the public.
My suggestion: tax it, just like cigarettes and gasoline. Artificially driving up the price will encourage people to waste less and recapture more, and the additional revenue can contribute to deficit reduction.
The most important feature of Windows 7 is not being named "Vista". That alone generated millions of sales.
Furthermore, the silly codenames Ubuntu has are just that: codenames. They are for developers and testers, not end users, and certainly not "pundits".
That's precisely how Apple's cat names started, until rumor sites caught wind and end users started using them. Then starting with Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger", Apple's marketing team decided to just run with it.
Personally I'm really disappointed that Ubuntu didn't go with Hungry Hippo.
The real reason 7 felt so much faster than Vista: When they made Vista, they planned on you booting up very infrequently, so they scheduled a lot of junk to happen at boot and login, thinking that users would just 'sleep' instead of rebooting. Windows 7 (And Vista SP2) backs off a bit and does the housekeeping when you're not using the computer. Vista actually wasn't really 'slow', it's just 'irrationally busy' doing stuff with the I/O (indexing, precaching, defragmenting, etc.) while you're just trying to get to your gosh-darned desktop.
Also, the reason people had fewer compatibility problems with 7 isn't because Microsoft fixed the OS, it's because software and hardware vendors fixed their applications and drivers.
If you tried to do anything useful on Windows Vista within the first six months after it was released, you probably had a miserable experience. If you tried to do the same stuff on Windows 7 within the first six months of that OS's release, it probably worked fine. What people don't realize is that if you did a clean install of Vista when Windows 7 was released, it would have worked fine too, because the apps had been fixed by then.
I don't buy that. It may have appeared up, but that's because everything was intermittent all day.
An ipad is a toy. A laptop is a tool. Idiots.
An iPad can ALSO be a tool, but it's a different tool that is great at different things. To borrow another poster's analogy, a kitchen knife is a great tool, but I'm not gonna use one for eating soup. Conversely, slicing a ham with a spoon is probably about as much fun as writing a paper on an iPad.
...Surely using some kind of RFID security card that must be near the PC/Laptop to unlock would be cost effective. I could keep it in my wallet or as a keyring.
Or affix it to the laptop with a piece of tape, so you wouldn't have to worry about not being able to get your work done in case you forget your wallet or your keys. :-D
The analogy that I like to make is organ donation -- can I be compelled to give you a kidney, blood, or bone marrow if I'm the only compatible donor and the alternative is your death? Of course not, my right to control my body is paramount. Likewise, I don't believe we have the right to tell a woman that she MUST carry a baby to term.
That is a fantastic analogy. Thank you.
(I'm pro-life, but strongly oppose any anti-abortion law that doesn't make exceptions for the health of the mother. In principle I don't support exceptions for rape and incest, but it irritates me when other pro-lifers refuse to compromise on this.)
If it takes 10,000 years, what's the point of sending people? 10,000 years is longer than the whole of recorded human civilization; even assuming you could keep the crew alive in hibernation for that long (I'm quite sure you can't), what would they do when they got there? They'd have the rusty tub they came in, and... nothing. If they managed to land safely on a planet that happened to have a breathable atmosphere and all the natural resources necessary to build a successful colony, I suppose it's possible they could succeed, but how would we even find such a suitable destination for them? Far more likely that they'd land on a frozen rock and be confined to the ship until they either suffocated or starved to death.
Unless, of course, during that 10,000 years our technology and understanding of the universe advanced to the point where we figure out how to do FTL travel in some way, so when the colonists finally arrive, we're already there to welcome them.
Let's see if we can send a few unmanned probes to other solar systems before we try it with people, shall we? At this point we can't even do that.
It is certain that if a bunch of molecules were arranged the same as yours are, including the electrical charges, there would be a person who is you.
How do you know?
When you compare the original SMB to SMB3, there are tons of new things that affect gameplay:
SMB3 was revolutionary and creative. SMW built upon this by adding Yoshi, the ability to replay levels that had already been completed, and technical enhancements like stereo sound and higher resolution graphics and background graphics that scroll with perspective. From a gameplay perspective, it was evolutionary, not revolutionary. A great sequel, full of all the things that made the previous game great, but nothing felt like "oh, we're doing this again".
I haven't played most of the recent games, but it sounds like they need to look back to the creativity of the new elements that SMB3 introduced, and apply the same kind of creativity (not the same elements!) to the next Mario game. SMB3 and SMW were technological leaps forward from their predecessors, but we're long past the point where technological improvements matter to a Mario game.
The part you're missing though is services-- that's Apple's diversity. Apple has gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure that all of its physical products are tied to services that you need to pay to use. With the iCloud, they don't just want you to pay once, they want you to pay regularly.
Apple doesn't make a lot of money on its services, which mostly exist to add value to Apple's hardware. I'm not saying they're not making any money at all, but if they shut down iCloud completely, the biggest impact to Apple's bottom line would not be from the loss of subscription fees but rather from reduced hardware sales because consumers would find Macs and iPhones less attractive without it.
There are many millions of people with their music and videos in iTunes AAC/M4V format.
I think it's important to draw a distinction here between music and videos. Videos sold through the iTunes Store are encrypted with proprietary DRM technology making them unplayable on non-Apple devices, but that hasn't been true of music in many years. Virtually any modern media player should be able to play music purchased from the iTunes Store, and moving it from a Mac to a Linux box isn't any more complicated than moving it to another Mac (unless you use the feature in the new Mac's setup wizard to automatically copy everything from your old Mac).
After Apple lost the "Microsoft coppied our GUI" case, their desktop GUI remained unchanged for 10 years. System 7 through 9 were basically identical..... they couldn't even multitask properly (used cooperative multitasking which led to misbehaving programs refusing to give-up the CPU & freezing the system). Apple said they would stop innovating their GUI if competitors simply copied their ideas, and that's essentially what happened.
You're forgetting a couple of very important details. Apple tried to fix the under-the-hood stuff, including preemptive multitasking, but just couldn't pull it off. Classic Mac OS was a pretty decent code base for what it did, but they needed it to do things it was never designed for, and the project to revamp it (code-named "Copland") was a failure.
After scrapping the Copland project, Apple realized that classic Mac OS was a dead end, and they started shopping around for other operating systems they could buy. They were looking seriously at Be before settling on NeXT. Along with NeXT came Steve Jobs, who took over the company, replaced the board of directors, created the iMac, bought iTunes, created the iPod, borrowed KHTML to develop WebKit, etc. etc.
Also there are provisions for the police to enter and get someone. They can't arrest any of the diplomats, nor touch any of the papers, but they can arrest a non-protected person in there.
My understanding is that no, Britain cannot legally do that.
What Britain apparently CAN do is declare that the Ecuadorian embassy in London is no longer being used for diplomatic purposes, and therefore is no longer considered to be sovereign territory of Ecuador. This has diplomats all over the world freaking out, because it would set a very scary precedent.
What Britain SHOULD do is shut the hell up and sit on their hands. As long as Assange remains inside the embassy, he's off limits. The moment he leaves, he is subject to arrest, but not until then. Of course he can only stay as long as the folks in Quito decide they'd like him to remain their guest...
Um, Vista is still broken when download of new Windows Update software also ends up causing programs to crash due to DEP when they did not previously crash. For example would be Fritz 9 that ran fine in Vista SP2 64-bit up until the last update of Windows Update software... now running in any 3D board crashes on subsequent launch due to DEP. This includes even setting a DEP exception.
Thus why Data Execution Prevention is still subject to breaking programs that worked until the last Windows Update.
As designed, it sucks, and is not the program vendor's fault.
Yes, but Microsoft's marketing department had absolutely nothing to do with any of that. Vista is terrible because the engineers were incompetent, not because the marketing department smoked too much weed.
It seems that whenever someone in management lets marketing smoke enough weed to even think about visiting the engineers we get something like Bob or ME or Vista or Metro.
I don't think Vista belongs in that category. It seems to me that the driving force behind Vista was always from the engineers - they just weren't very good.
"It strains reason to conclude that Defendant was attempting to criticize Plaintiff's reputation or competency as an astronomer. One does not seriously attack the expertise of a scientist using the undefined phrase 'butt-head'."
Maybe you don't have an active enough imagination...
My mom's Skype account was recently hacked. Apparently the hackers were able to abuse the Skype Manager system to gain control of her account without her authorization, transfer her account balance, and reset her password. Skype's customer service has acknowledged the problem but has not been able to restore access to the account yet.
(I don't know any more details than that, as I haven't been involved.)