I pay for a cd and the music on it, and I can download it in mp3 from wherever I want for my personal use. That's perfectly legal.
But I pay for cable, I watch the shows, and its illegal for me to download them? Huh?
I understand the TV is a business driven by ad revenue, and because of that, the only crime here would seem to be removing the commercials.
Why don't the tv networks get together on a "secure" drm movie format, a secure free properietary player, and lets us download our tv shows with the commercials in them? With the format and the media player they could take extremely aggressive actions to stop you from fast forwarding through commericals... and then just let us DOWNLOAD THEM FOR FREE.
The main reason I download shows is for convience. I no longer have to a slave to my TV. If they'd just give us "handcuffed" shows to download with a media player, I think we'd all love that.
And if we didn't love that, perhaps we could pay a fee to watch a commerical free version of our favorite shows.
In addition, television stations could stand to make even more money because more people could have access to their shows. People would no longer have to choose between watching 24 on FOX and Everybody Loves Raymond on CBS. You could watch both shows and both the television audience and the tv networks would benefit.
Copyrights are internationally honoured. Unless you're in one of the few countries that hasn't signed the international treaties on copyright then you are bound by US copyright just as much as you are bound by Japanese copyright.
It's not quite so cut and dry. What is illegal in one country may not be illegal in another. Take America for example, half the laws in America these days seem to be written for the lobby groups and not the citizens. What is considered a copyright violation may not be considered a violation in another country.
Last year (or maybe two years ago) it was ruled in Canada that sharing music was perfectly legal. The judge ruled that having a "shared music folder" on your computer where other users could download copies of the music was tantamount to the public library letting a citizens use photocopier to copy pages of a given book. That is the exact analogy he used.
So while in America sharing music might be illegal and said to violate copyright law, in Canada it is perfectly legal. Even if the MPAA thought we were violating American copyright, they have no course of action to take against us.
While Canada & America and countless other countries are bound by international copyrights, what violates a copyright in each respective country can be very different.
...using BitTorrent I've been watching HDTV quality shows on my PC...
Technically speaking, chances are you're not watching anything close to HD quality. Most shows that are ripped and uploaded as "HD" are about 1/4 of the lowest end proper HD resolution. The shows listed as HD shows on the torrent sites are usually 600ish by 330ish pixels.
Actual 720p HD is 1280x720.
I few select shows are ripped in what is called HRHD (high resolution high definition), but even these are a few hundred pixels short in either direction of having 720p's resolution.
And having watched some HRHD torrents on my TV, I can tell you that they don't compare in quality to the true 720p HD programming on cable.
All I'm saying is that these torrents masquerading as HD or even HRHD don't do true paid for HD justice.
I understand that is essence it only passes the buck. The intelligent design, to my understanding, does allow for evolution. Under those precepts, its perfectly acceptable that an advanced civilization evolved naturally elsewhere.
The only reason why some people believe the intelligent design theory is because they believe that there are inconsistencies in the evolution of us as human beings. Like I said, I believe they think the main inconsistency with human evolution is our so called "missing link" as it relates to our evolution from apes.
That's in affect the whole catalyst for the I.D. theory. So in that sense, I don't think the theory is inteaded to pass the buck. Another advanced civilization could evolve on its own, they just don't believe that we have.
To that extent, since we have seen evolution in action, we know that its a process that could potentially create intelligent beings. We as us having an "eternal, self-existing creator" has no basis in anything but mystery. We're unaware of any process where such a thing exists, heh.
For that reason, to me, logically, intelligent design (basically intervention) is a little more plausible. There is just no reason to postulate the existence of god, other than to explain things that we can't understand. Where as there are reasons to believe that an extraterrestial civilization could've evolved... because again, we've all seen at least the concept of evolution in action.:)
I've never seen god in action, have you?:) Like you said, its matter of faith.
By the article mentioning the AUSCS (Americans United for the Separation of Church and State) involvement and the various posts I'm seeing mentioning "fundamentalists", its seems as the though the theory of "intelligent design" is being singled out, when it actually has nothing to do with this.
There is nothing religious, nothing that violates the seperation of church and state in the ideology of intelligent design.
What is being referred to as "intelligent design" is really -Creationism-. Creationism is based on the bible, the church, etc. Intelligent design is not.
From what I understand, the theory of intelligent design falls somewhere in between creationism and evolution.
Intelligent Design doesn't involve any hocus pocus, or any god doing his best david copperfield impression. Intelligent Design agrees that the world and the life on it was formed over time through natural processes. Where they different from evolution is when it comes to humans. They believe that something happened, someone intervened to essentially "humanize" the apes. Its there answer to the missing link, and apparent answer man & apes coexistence.
But this someone who intervened is not believed to be "God". Its believed to some other extraterrestrial civilization.
While it might seem unlikely that another species genetically modified apes into human beings, I'd have to say that its far more likely theory than creationism. Afterall, the chance that the universe if filled with intelligent life is far greater than the chance that the earth is 6000 years old.:)
And although we have yet to prove there is intelligent life out there, the true intelligent design theory if true, would still hold up the science of evolution and our biological ancestry while explaining how civilization seems to appear rather abruptly.
Proponents of the Intelligent Design theory look to the old egyptian and sumerian writings as a somewhat historic basis for their beliefs. The writings are oldest records we have, and they frequently talk about "gods" coming down from the sky to educate them. We assume they're myths, but I guess you never know...
Either way, I'm an evolutionist. And what's being talking about in the article is -CREATIONISM- not Intelligent Design.
Ok, what sucks about diabetes is having to take the injections.. so now you have to take immunosuppressants? I hope they are pills (not injections) and that you still have a decent immune system left so you can fend off diseases.
Both my younger and older brother have type 1 diabetes, and I'm petrified at the thought of them losing their vision, or limbs, or dying too young. It's one thing to live your life knowing that it will inevitably be shortened. It's another to live your life knowing that in all likelyhood, the only way you're going to survive is with a life altering handicap.
I know some blind people say they enjoy life... but imagine having been able to see for 35/40 years, then your world goes dark. You can no longer play sports, perhaps do the work you love (both of my brothers work in television), you can't see your beautiful wife, you can't even see your kids grow up...
In all honesty, I'd rather be dead.
How the hell anyone could be so naive as to suggest that the cure is worse than the condition blows me away. It's not as though this is a new flu vaccine or anything.
To the point about injections "sucking", it doesn't take long to get use to the needles. I have to get a needle once every few years for one thing or another, and I only feel half those as it is.
And also, some people may not realize the fun you can have doing needles in public, or living a broken insulin syringe on a washroom counter somewhere.:)
When I get a chance to think about it, its not too pleasant to think that in all likelyhood I will not only outlive both of my brothers, but both of my parents will as well.
Oh ya, but those needles, geezus... That's really the worst part about it.:/
Dr. Vittorio Formisano is/was the principle investigator of the Planetary Fourier Spectrometer used by European Space Agencies Mars Express probe.
From reading the spectrometer, he believed it was evident that methane, ammonia, and formaldehyde can all be found in the martain atmosphere. Where as methane will last a few hundred years in the atmosphere, formaldehyde will only -eight- hours.
I'm not a scientist, but from what I've read, all 3 gases are strong indicators of life. While I know that the methane could be produced by volcanic activity on Mars (as mentioned elsewhere in the thread), Mars is a geologically dead planet. There is no sign of any such activity.
The presence of all 3 gases on a geologically dead planet would seem to be consistent with planet having some microbial life. As Mars entered its Spring, the levels of all 3 gases were found to rise as well. Of course, more life, more gas in the atmosphere.
It was also noted that the gas levels rose sharply over Mars' frozen oceans as spring approached. Perhaps some simples forms of life were frozen in the oceans? It could also be that the frozen oceans sit over some geological vents, trapping some methane.
But again, as far as anyone knows Mars is still a geologically dead planet.
Sorry if this doesn't make much sense... but gas indicating life in the martian atmosphere is OLD news, and there are far more compelling gases (like formaldehyde) that exist in the atmosphere. If it only lasts for 8 hours, something there is reproducing it.
Apparently, the only way to know definitively what is producing it, is to go dig up the soil. So... good luck on that ever happening. Apparently we have to build a base on the moon first.:)
I have a problem with BitTorrent being used to distribute content that I'm paying for. While I agree that movies and television shows should be legally available for download, they people supplying the content should pay for bandwidth.
If I use BitTorrent, I'm using my own bandwidth to help them redistribute/resell the exact same content that I just paid for.
Because of this, any content distributed over torrents should be discounted accordingly.
I believe that torrents work right now because their content is recieved for free. There is a sentiment of community. You can only get a file because other people seeded it. So in kind, people continue to seed the files to return to favor. That's what makes it work.
If I'm paying $10 for a movie, I wouldn't count on me spending anytime seeding it. I've paid for it. I don't owe the community anything.
This guy made his prediction in the first half of January. I really don't put too much stock in remote viewing (it's not really the same as being psychic), for the most part its hit and miss. But some people of them have more hits than misses, and he appeared to right on this one. I'm just hoping a shuttle launch never gets grounded because the heavens are over active.:)
In Canada, the PSP lauch not being a "homerun" doesn't really surprise me, and as far as I'm concerned, so far practice or trade laws are also being broken.:)
Some points.
1) The price point in theory should fine. The base unit would've retailed for $250 CDN. The nintendo DS launched at $200 and sold well. The PSP offer an entire generational leap in graphics (think n64 to PS2) & added functionality that more than justifies the extra $50.
2) However, Sony screwed North America by only offering us a "Value Pack" model, forcing us to buy $50 extras with it, that by all accounts were viewed as junk from the original Japanese launch. That raised the price to $300 CDN.
Not only is that more expensive, but its rather alienating to the consumer when they're being -forced- to buy things that japanese consumers weren't.
3) The forced additional awful bundles on us. At large electronics retailers like Electronics Boutique, Future Shop & Best Buy were FORCED to not only by the valueless Value Pack, but also two additional games;Wayne Gretzky's Hockey and Twisted Metal: Head-On. This raised the cost to $400 CDN!!!
Now instead of buying a PSP for $250 and picking up a game of my choice, I'm forced to buy the value pack and two games that I'd never ever buy... for the bargain price of $400!!!
I -really- wanted this system, but I'm not picking one up on principle alone. I'm not going to have Sony tell me how I'm going to spend my money.
Sony screwed themselves by taking away one of the basic rights we have as consumers, CHOICE!
There is an infamous remote viewer by the name of Major Ed Dames who predicted that the relauch of the shuttle may soon be a harbinger of some serious danger on earth.
For those that don't know, remote viewing was something that was started by the U.S. government under the name "Project Stargate" where they essentially trained people to be "psychic". Basically, they could remotely view any location/time from with in their minds eye, if you will.
Anyways, Major Ed Dames was an early member of Project Stargate, and has made a number of predictions of varying accuracy. But just yesterday, a prediction he made came true. He predicted that another large earthquake (around 8 richter) would hit indonesia before the end of March. Sure enough, it just happened. It could've been a well-informed or lucky guess. I tend to think he genuinely remote viewed the event however.
That said Remote Viewing is far from 100% accurate. Those in it claim about 80%-90% accuracy, I'd say its closer to 40%.
Regardless, a while back he predicted that the shuttle would be re-commisioned, and on one of its launches it would be grounded due to meteor activitiy. The events he claims that will shortly follow that event, are nothing short of cataclysmic. In short, the earths magnetic field weakens leaving earth susceptible to violent solar flare strikes.
To say the least, I take any and all things "remote viewed" with a grain of salt. But the fact is, he was right about the Indonesian earthquake, and one of his next predictions was about the shuttle being grounded. If the shuttle gets grounded, I'm going to be a little bit nervous.
I'm not a big Ed Dames fan myself, and before last night I just basically viewed him as a source of entertainment. Lets hope for all of us it stays that way.:)
Other arguments (another can of worms which I don't want to get into now, especially not on Slashdot; if you're really interested, get a copy of C. S. Lewis's Mere Christianity) argue for believing in the existence of a God.
I've read Mere Christianity. In it C.S. Lewis makes the argument that Jesus was the son of god in the following way:
1. Jesus went around proclaiming himself to be the son of god
2. For someone to just go around proclaiming themselves to be the son of god, they could be two things, a) telling the truth or b) crazy
3. We all know Jesus wasn't crazy, so I guess he's the son of god
I'm a) telling the truth. You should mod that as funny. Seriously.:)
There is a missing link in evolution. An unaccounted for step to bring us into our present form from an ape. And creationism is simply ridiculous.
If we were seeded, and perhaps cross populated or intelligently designed from an ape, that would account for both our seemingly sudden appearance, and it doesn't count the theory of evolution.
The oldest texts we have, even the bible, account for our creation through some sort of engineering.
I find belief in a kind and loving God difficult because...
I don't think that in talking about god, we should ever be so bold/naive as to give god attributes that are completely human. It's a ridiculous statement.
Say a dog cares about her pups. If the dog could truely "think", she might think that she cares about her puppies the same way a human mother cares about her kids. To most humans I'D HOPE that that is an offensive thought. To think that a mom cares about her kids on the level of a dog and a pup... that's disgusting.
Much in the same way, I think its meaningless to label a being that is infinitely greater than ourselves with our petty human emotions.
Does god love? Our minds can't begin to fathom.
We need to stop trying to describe god in human terms. Its a disservice to god. That god can even be disserviced. Again, another human concept.:)
I got my tin foil hat off, thanks. But perhaps you should put your glasses back on and take a look at what is happening to your country.
The source code for the voting machines is close-source, a republican with a declared preference for bush runs the company, and their are security holes in these machines big enough to almost put the american debt in. You -really- should read what bev harris has found at blackboxvoting.org, it's appaling.
When Jeb Bush had the choice, and he was presented to go with choice, to go with Voting machines that have no voting reciept, and machines would supply a voting reciept that could be audited... WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD HE CHOOSE VOTING MACHINES THAT COULDN'T BE AUDITED?!!??
Sorry for the caps there, but why again wouldn't you want the results of your election to be double checked?
All it takes is the right phone number for the dial-up modem, and these machines are basically comprimised. No joke. When the the states called diebold to ask about the voting problems with these machines, diebold reps assured the states that the machines were safe. And the states left it at that. Again, it sounds ridiculous but its absolutely true.
How was Florida a toss up the day before the elections and it was a 5% spread the day of the elections? Oh, oh, oh... that's right. The polls aren't accurate... well, actually, they were very accurate in about every single states this election, except for florida. Funny.
Every american reading this, I dare you to read through the documentation and blackboxvoting.org and still come back with faith in your countries electoral system.
To be cliche, I understand that ignorance is bliss, but for some reason... The funny thing is, I'm sure the america of the 70's would stand for this crap. Oh oh oh, but now there is terrorism (which wasn't even the main reason people voted for bush, exit polls had the main reason as moral issues), and since there is terrorism, america is fire saling all her rights.
Sorry for the rant... but get serious about your country.
Now, our system isn't the best either. It has its problems, but at least we have about 5 legitimate parties across the country, and with the "minority goverment" that the Liberals (that is an actual party name) have right now, they to comprimise to get things passed. For those who don't know, everything our Prime Minister puts to the house to vote on, if its not passed by the majority, that is the end of our gov't. It's considered a vote of non-confidence, and we have another round of national elections. So it makes for flexible government, and something more representative of the countries views as a whole...
Anyways... I think Jon Stewart is dead on with his scorn of the crap on CNN and on american political tv in general. I watch a lot of political TV, and after these debates... on all the news channels, I only found one program ON FRICKING PBS that actually discussed the feasability and the logic behind the bush and kerry health care plans. They actually had people on who broke down and explained legit problems with health care in the states. They didn't start with "ten million less people have health care than they did 4 years ago" and respond with "all kerry is going to tax you even more". And actual logical break down of the pros and cons of each of their plans from people in the health care industry. Not some RNC and DNC tools debating who's the liar and who's daughter is a lesbian.
Like christ, all I hear after the last debate is that John Kerry mentioned Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian... DO WE CARE?!!!??? Ya, that affects me. How about the war, how about the economy, health care, education... No, no, no, all we're hearing about is this lesbian. What?
I'm not sure if people are aware of this or not, but at the end of July, after only a week in theatres, Farenheit 9/11 played on prime time TV in Cuba.
See cached yahoo news here.
See some other cuban news source here.
I understand all of that, but what I'm saying is they can go one way or the other. They can charge an upfront fee for a game and let us play it online, or build an online game and charge us to play it online. Don't charge us for the game, then charge to play it online. I'll pay for a game if the game itself is going to be providing my gaming experience. But I think its just wrong to pay for a game, and then pay to play it when other users (who are paying to play it with me) are making the game worthwhile.
Make some kind of system that loads with the game that is a distributed network or sorts, like peer 2 peer load sharing. I don't know the logicistics of that, and that might not even work, but that's besides the point. I don't pay to get into a club, then pay an hourly fee for being there. You don't pay for parking when you go in to a lot, then when you leave pay again for each hour that you've parked.
I don't mean to be saying that its any less of a game if its made to be all online, or that the developers are hacks, but I just don't believe that they are the type of game that you should pay for, then pay to again play.
If people want to say "OK developers, charge me $14.95 USD per montth to play this game that I've already payed for". That's fine. They're just adding to their own hell for now. But it won't be fine when it gets the point that all content is delivered online, and the price has been set so high be previous precedents, that it screws us all in the end. I know that's probably way down the road, but what can I say... It could screw us all.
And why would I start building a server farm anyways? I don't like mmorpg.:)
I'm not big into online games, much less mmorpg games. I am into superheroes however, but at $14.95 US per month, plus the initial cost of the game, I'm not going to be into these superheroes.
I read in a thread that its $49.95 for the game (including a month online), and $14.95 per month, after a year of an and off playing, it'll cost you $214.40 USD. Imagine that. That is ridiculous.
RETARDED EVEN!!!
Besides the cost, there is an idea at work here that I just find nauseating, and should no longer be condoned by gamers.
By it being a mmorpg, the players themselves are making the game worth playing. And what do the developers do to thank them for making their game worthwhile? They charge them more money. What crap. I have a real problem with that, especially when you have to pay for the game plus a monthly fee to play it. The game should be free,or at the very least have the monthly fee's reduced each month you're a subscriber, eventually recucing the monthly fee to nothing for the user... because the customer is after all doing the developer a favor by playing the game, not vice versa.
I payed $70 CDN for GTA: Vice City, and ya know what? It doesn't ask me for more money each time I want to play it. Would you buy an arcade machine for yourself, and not set it to free play?
This whole concept blows my mind. I understand that by interacting with real people in an online universe, the experience might be more diverse, or a bit richer, but I can't see why a person would buy a game, then pay to play it.
Its not even like you're paying to play a new game or an improved game each month. Its just going to be same junk over and over.
As a life long gamer, I enjoy paying for games like Metal Gear Solid 2; Where I know that the developers but a lot of hard work into the game and created a experience for me... What I find repulsive is the idea that a game company is pimping me out for $14.95 USD/month to other users, so that they can make even more money.
THAT CRAP MAKES MY SOUL ROT!
I know no one is forced to pay these monthly fees, but just do me a favor and don't even start.:)
I was reading through some threads here about the canadians isp's not having to give up file-sharers names and I didn't see this point mentioned. The judge didn't keep the isp's usersname's secret because of the users or companies right per se. The judge turned their request down because he did not believe that the any copyrights had been broken as a result of the user participating in file sharing. HA!
I'm not sure if the lawyers just made a really weak case or what the deal was, but the judge just didn't think that the users were violating any copyrights, ergo, there was no need to reveal their names.
Yes, it actually would be easy to find out what percentage was skipped. When you click to skip the commerical, it would send you to a URL. Maybe even a URL, that would in turn direct you to your intended page. When you click the skip commercial, there could be a value in the query string that receiving URL could log... something like:
http://www.website.com/page/new.php?percentSkipped =75
And the ActionScripting in the flash movie itself could dynamically change the value of percentSkipped as the movie progessed. That is a relatively crude way to keep track of how much of the movie was watched, but it's an example.:)
- All ads are essentially Flash movies with set limitations
- max file size 600K
- limit to 15 seconds max
- *MUST include sound off button
- *MUST include a skip commerical link
- if no buttons are visible at any point during the commerical, clicking on the commerical itself will allow the user to "bail" from watching it.
- embedded videos can be no larger than 320x240
And all interactivity and motion/animation is done in flash, most using actionscript. It almost seems like a crime to pass this off as new technology, when it fact it just appears to be flash movies forced to run full screen.
And no I don't agree with what they're doing, and I don't believe that I should have to pay with my own bandwidth to watch someone elses ads, but at least they're giving up the option in these ads to skip them... Which isn't much a silver lining but..???
The most important thing is that when we see these commercials, we should not click on anything but the "skip" button. If we make sure the skip them all, I think our message will be heard loud and clear by advertisers.
Slashdot Mirror
I pay for a cd and the music on it, and I can download it in mp3 from wherever I want for my personal use. That's perfectly legal.
But I pay for cable, I watch the shows, and its illegal for me to download them? Huh?
I understand the TV is a business driven by ad revenue, and because of that, the only crime here would seem to be removing the commercials.
Why don't the tv networks get together on a "secure" drm movie format, a secure free properietary player, and lets us download our tv shows with the commercials in them? With the format and the media player they could take extremely aggressive actions to stop you from fast forwarding through commericals... and then just let us DOWNLOAD THEM FOR FREE.
The main reason I download shows is for convience. I no longer have to a slave to my TV. If they'd just give us "handcuffed" shows to download with a media player, I think we'd all love that.
And if we didn't love that, perhaps we could pay a fee to watch a commerical free version of our favorite shows.
In addition, television stations could stand to make even more money because more people could have access to their shows. People would no longer have to choose between watching 24 on FOX and Everybody Loves Raymond on CBS. You could watch both shows and both the television audience and the tv networks would benefit.
Couldn't we all be happy with this?
Copyrights are internationally honoured. Unless you're in one of the few countries that hasn't signed the international treaties on copyright then you are bound by US copyright just as much as you are bound by Japanese copyright.
It's not quite so cut and dry. What is illegal in one country may not be illegal in another. Take America for example, half the laws in America these days seem to be written for the lobby groups and not the citizens. What is considered a copyright violation may not be considered a violation in another country.
Last year (or maybe two years ago) it was ruled in Canada that sharing music was perfectly legal. The judge ruled that having a "shared music folder" on your computer where other users could download copies of the music was tantamount to the public library letting a citizens use photocopier to copy pages of a given book. That is the exact analogy he used.
So while in America sharing music might be illegal and said to violate copyright law, in Canada it is perfectly legal. Even if the MPAA thought we were violating American copyright, they have no course of action to take against us.
While Canada & America and countless other countries are bound by international copyrights, what violates a copyright in each respective country can be very different.
...using BitTorrent I've been watching HDTV quality shows on my PC...
Technically speaking, chances are you're not watching anything close to HD quality. Most shows that are ripped and uploaded as "HD" are about 1/4 of the lowest end proper HD resolution. The shows listed as HD shows on the torrent sites are usually 600ish by 330ish pixels.
Actual 720p HD is 1280x720.
I few select shows are ripped in what is called HRHD (high resolution high definition), but even these are a few hundred pixels short in either direction of having 720p's resolution.
And having watched some HRHD torrents on my TV, I can tell you that they don't compare in quality to the true 720p HD programming on cable.
All I'm saying is that these torrents masquerading as HD or even HRHD don't do true paid for HD justice.
I understand that is essence it only passes the buck. The intelligent design, to my understanding, does allow for evolution. Under those precepts, its perfectly acceptable that an advanced civilization evolved naturally elsewhere.
:)
:) Like you said, its matter of faith.
The only reason why some people believe the intelligent design theory is because they believe that there are inconsistencies in the evolution of us as human beings. Like I said, I believe they think the main inconsistency with human evolution is our so called "missing link" as it relates to our evolution from apes.
That's in affect the whole catalyst for the I.D. theory. So in that sense, I don't think the theory is inteaded to pass the buck. Another advanced civilization could evolve on its own, they just don't believe that we have.
To that extent, since we have seen evolution in action, we know that its a process that could potentially create intelligent beings. We as us having an "eternal, self-existing creator" has no basis in anything but mystery. We're unaware of any process where such a thing exists, heh.
For that reason, to me, logically, intelligent design (basically intervention) is a little more plausible. There is just no reason to postulate the existence of god, other than to explain things that we can't understand. Where as there are reasons to believe that an extraterrestial civilization could've evolved... because again, we've all seen at least the concept of evolution in action.
I've never seen god in action, have you?
By the article mentioning the AUSCS (Americans United for the Separation of Church and State) involvement and the various posts I'm seeing mentioning "fundamentalists", its seems as the though the theory of "intelligent design" is being singled out, when it actually has nothing to do with this.
:)
There is nothing religious, nothing that violates the seperation of church and state in the ideology of intelligent design.
What is being referred to as "intelligent design" is really -Creationism-. Creationism is based on the bible, the church, etc. Intelligent design is not.
From what I understand, the theory of intelligent design falls somewhere in between creationism and evolution.
Intelligent Design doesn't involve any hocus pocus, or any god doing his best david copperfield impression. Intelligent Design agrees that the world and the life on it was formed over time through natural processes. Where they different from evolution is when it comes to humans. They believe that something happened, someone intervened to essentially "humanize" the apes. Its there answer to the missing link, and apparent answer man & apes coexistence.
But this someone who intervened is not believed to be "God". Its believed to some other extraterrestrial civilization.
While it might seem unlikely that another species genetically modified apes into human beings, I'd have to say that its far more likely theory than creationism. Afterall, the chance that the universe if filled with intelligent life is far greater than the chance that the earth is 6000 years old.
And although we have yet to prove there is intelligent life out there, the true intelligent design theory if true, would still hold up the science of evolution and our biological ancestry while explaining how civilization seems to appear rather abruptly.
Proponents of the Intelligent Design theory look to the old egyptian and sumerian writings as a somewhat historic basis for their beliefs. The writings are oldest records we have, and they frequently talk about "gods" coming down from the sky to educate them. We assume they're myths, but I guess you never know...
Either way, I'm an evolutionist. And what's being talking about in the article is -CREATIONISM- not Intelligent Design.
FOX: 720p native
ABC: 720p native
CBS: 720p native
NBC: 1080i native
Ok, what sucks about diabetes is having to take the injections .. so now you have to take immunosuppressants? I hope they are pills (not injections) and that you still have a decent immune system left so you can fend off diseases.
:)
:/
Both my younger and older brother have type 1 diabetes, and I'm petrified at the thought of them losing their vision, or limbs, or dying too young. It's one thing to live your life knowing that it will inevitably be shortened. It's another to live your life knowing that in all likelyhood, the only way you're going to survive is with a life altering handicap.
I know some blind people say they enjoy life... but imagine having been able to see for 35/40 years, then your world goes dark. You can no longer play sports, perhaps do the work you love (both of my brothers work in television), you can't see your beautiful wife, you can't even see your kids grow up...
In all honesty, I'd rather be dead.
How the hell anyone could be so naive as to suggest that the cure is worse than the condition blows me away. It's not as though this is a new flu vaccine or anything.
To the point about injections "sucking", it doesn't take long to get use to the needles. I have to get a needle once every few years for one thing or another, and I only feel half those as it is.
And also, some people may not realize the fun you can have doing needles in public, or living a broken insulin syringe on a washroom counter somewhere.
When I get a chance to think about it, its not too pleasant to think that in all likelyhood I will not only outlive both of my brothers, but both of my parents will as well.
Oh ya, but those needles, geezus... That's really the worst part about it.
Dr. Vittorio Formisano is/was the principle investigator of the Planetary Fourier Spectrometer used by European Space Agencies Mars Express probe.
:)
From reading the spectrometer, he believed it was evident that methane, ammonia, and formaldehyde can all be found in the martain atmosphere. Where as methane will last a few hundred years in the atmosphere, formaldehyde will only -eight- hours.
I'm not a scientist, but from what I've read, all 3 gases are strong indicators of life. While I know that the methane could be produced by volcanic activity on Mars (as mentioned elsewhere in the thread), Mars is a geologically dead planet. There is no sign of any such activity.
The presence of all 3 gases on a geologically dead planet would seem to be consistent with planet having some microbial life. As Mars entered its Spring, the levels of all 3 gases were found to rise as well. Of course, more life, more gas in the atmosphere.
It was also noted that the gas levels rose sharply over Mars' frozen oceans as spring approached. Perhaps some simples forms of life were frozen in the oceans? It could also be that the frozen oceans sit over some geological vents, trapping some methane.
But again, as far as anyone knows Mars is still a geologically dead planet.
Sorry if this doesn't make much sense... but gas indicating life in the martian atmosphere is OLD news, and there are far more compelling gases (like formaldehyde) that exist in the atmosphere. If it only lasts for 8 hours, something there is reproducing it.
Apparently, the only way to know definitively what is producing it, is to go dig up the soil. So... good luck on that ever happening. Apparently we have to build a base on the moon first.
I have a problem with BitTorrent being used to distribute content that I'm paying for. While I agree that movies and television shows should be legally available for download, they people supplying the content should pay for bandwidth.
:)
If I use BitTorrent, I'm using my own bandwidth to help them redistribute/resell the exact same content that I just paid for.
Because of this, any content distributed over torrents should be discounted accordingly.
I believe that torrents work right now because their content is recieved for free. There is a sentiment of community. You can only get a file because other people seeded it. So in kind, people continue to seed the files to return to favor. That's what makes it work.
If I'm paying $10 for a movie, I wouldn't count on me spending anytime seeding it. I've paid for it. I don't owe the community anything.
If that makes any sense...
This guy made his prediction in the first half of January. I really don't put too much stock in remote viewing (it's not really the same as being psychic), for the most part its hit and miss. But some people of them have more hits than misses, and he appeared to right on this one. I'm just hoping a shuttle launch never gets grounded because the heavens are over active. :)
In Canada, the PSP lauch not being a "homerun" doesn't really surprise me, and as far as I'm concerned, so far practice or trade laws are also being broken. :)
Some points.
1) The price point in theory should fine. The base unit would've retailed for $250 CDN. The nintendo DS launched at $200 and sold well. The PSP offer an entire generational leap in graphics (think n64 to PS2) & added functionality that more than justifies the extra $50.
2) However, Sony screwed North America by only offering us a "Value Pack" model, forcing us to buy $50 extras with it, that by all accounts were viewed as junk from the original Japanese launch. That raised the price to $300 CDN.
Not only is that more expensive, but its rather alienating to the consumer when they're being -forced- to buy things that japanese consumers weren't.
3) The forced additional awful bundles on us. At large electronics retailers like Electronics Boutique, Future Shop & Best Buy were FORCED to not only by the valueless Value Pack, but also two additional games;Wayne Gretzky's Hockey and Twisted Metal: Head-On. This raised the cost to $400 CDN!!!
Now instead of buying a PSP for $250 and picking up a game of my choice, I'm forced to buy the value pack and two games that I'd never ever buy... for the bargain price of $400!!!
I -really- wanted this system, but I'm not picking one up on principle alone. I'm not going to have Sony tell me how I'm going to spend my money.
Sony screwed themselves by taking away one of the basic rights we have as consumers, CHOICE!
There is an infamous remote viewer by the name of Major Ed Dames who predicted that the relauch of the shuttle may soon be a harbinger of some serious danger on earth.
:)
For those that don't know, remote viewing was something that was started by the U.S. government under the name "Project Stargate" where they essentially trained people to be "psychic". Basically, they could remotely view any location/time from with in their minds eye, if you will.
Anyways, Major Ed Dames was an early member of Project Stargate, and has made a number of predictions of varying accuracy. But just yesterday, a prediction he made came true. He predicted that another large earthquake (around 8 richter) would hit indonesia before the end of March. Sure enough, it just happened. It could've been a well-informed or lucky guess. I tend to think he genuinely remote viewed the event however.
That said Remote Viewing is far from 100% accurate. Those in it claim about 80%-90% accuracy, I'd say its closer to 40%.
Regardless, a while back he predicted that the shuttle would be re-commisioned, and on one of its launches it would be grounded due to meteor activitiy. The events he claims that will shortly follow that event, are nothing short of cataclysmic. In short, the earths magnetic field weakens leaving earth susceptible to violent solar flare strikes.
To say the least, I take any and all things "remote viewed" with a grain of salt. But the fact is, he was right about the Indonesian earthquake, and one of his next predictions was about the shuttle being grounded. If the shuttle gets grounded, I'm going to be a little bit nervous.
I'm not a big Ed Dames fan myself, and before last night I just basically viewed him as a source of entertainment. Lets hope for all of us it stays that way.
Other arguments (another can of worms which I don't want to get into now, especially not on Slashdot; if you're really interested, get a copy of C. S. Lewis's Mere Christianity) argue for believing in the existence of a God.
:)
I've read Mere Christianity. In it C.S. Lewis makes the argument that Jesus was the son of god in the following way:
1. Jesus went around proclaiming himself to be the son of god
2. For someone to just go around proclaiming themselves to be the son of god, they could be two things, a) telling the truth or b) crazy
3. We all know Jesus wasn't crazy, so I guess he's the son of god
I'm a) telling the truth. You should mod that as funny. Seriously.
Your missing the point. God isn't human. I'm pretty sure god doesn't have human "emotions" anymore than a bird has human emotions.
There is a missing link in evolution. An unaccounted for step to bring us into our present form from an ape. And creationism is simply ridiculous.
:)
If we were seeded, and perhaps cross populated or intelligently designed from an ape, that would account for both our seemingly sudden appearance, and it doesn't count the theory of evolution.
The oldest texts we have, even the bible, account for our creation through some sort of engineering.
Who knows? Not me, but I believe it.
I find belief in a kind and loving God difficult because...
:)
I don't think that in talking about god, we should ever be so bold/naive as to give god attributes that are completely human. It's a ridiculous statement.
Say a dog cares about her pups. If the dog could truely "think", she might think that she cares about her puppies the same way a human mother cares about her kids. To most humans I'D HOPE that that is an offensive thought. To think that a mom cares about her kids on the level of a dog and a pup... that's disgusting.
Much in the same way, I think its meaningless to label a being that is infinitely greater than ourselves with our petty human emotions.
Does god love? Our minds can't begin to fathom.
We need to stop trying to describe god in human terms. Its a disservice to god. That god can even be disserviced. Again, another human concept.
I got my tin foil hat off, thanks. But perhaps you should put your glasses back on and take a look at what is happening to your country.
The source code for the voting machines is close-source, a republican with a declared preference for bush runs the company, and their are security holes in these machines big enough to almost put the american debt in. You -really- should read what bev harris has found at blackboxvoting.org, it's appaling.
When Jeb Bush had the choice, and he was presented to go with choice, to go with Voting machines that have no voting reciept, and machines would supply a voting reciept that could be audited... WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD HE CHOOSE VOTING MACHINES THAT COULDN'T BE AUDITED?!!??
Sorry for the caps there, but why again wouldn't you want the results of your election to be double checked?
All it takes is the right phone number for the dial-up modem, and these machines are basically comprimised. No joke. When the the states called diebold to ask about the voting problems with these machines, diebold reps assured the states that the machines were safe. And the states left it at that. Again, it sounds ridiculous but its absolutely true.
How was Florida a toss up the day before the elections and it was a 5% spread the day of the elections? Oh, oh, oh... that's right. The polls aren't accurate... well, actually, they were very accurate in about every single states this election, except for florida. Funny.
Every american reading this, I dare you to read through the documentation and blackboxvoting.org and still come back with faith in your countries electoral system.
To be cliche, I understand that ignorance is bliss, but for some reason... The funny thing is, I'm sure the america of the 70's would stand for this crap. Oh oh oh, but now there is terrorism (which wasn't even the main reason people voted for bush, exit polls had the main reason as moral issues), and since there is terrorism, america is fire saling all her rights.
Sorry for the rant... but get serious about your country.
Now, our system isn't the best either. It has its problems, but at least we have about 5 legitimate parties across the country, and with the "minority goverment" that the Liberals (that is an actual party name) have right now, they to comprimise to get things passed. For those who don't know, everything our Prime Minister puts to the house to vote on, if its not passed by the majority, that is the end of our gov't. It's considered a vote of non-confidence, and we have another round of national elections. So it makes for flexible government, and something more representative of the countries views as a whole...
Anyways... I think Jon Stewart is dead on with his scorn of the crap on CNN and on american political tv in general. I watch a lot of political TV, and after these debates... on all the news channels, I only found one program ON FRICKING PBS that actually discussed the feasability and the logic behind the bush and kerry health care plans. They actually had people on who broke down and explained legit problems with health care in the states. They didn't start with "ten million less people have health care than they did 4 years ago" and respond with "all kerry is going to tax you even more". And actual logical break down of the pros and cons of each of their plans from people in the health care industry. Not some RNC and DNC tools debating who's the liar and who's daughter is a lesbian.
Like christ, all I hear after the last debate is that John Kerry mentioned Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian... DO WE CARE?!!!??? Ya, that affects me. How about the war, how about the economy, health care, education... No, no, no, all we're hearing about is this lesbian. What?
I don't get it.
I'm not sure if people are aware of this or not, but at the end of July, after only a week in theatres, Farenheit 9/11 played on prime time TV in Cuba .
See cached yahoo news here.
See some other cuban news source here.
I understand all of that, but what I'm saying is they can go one way or the other. They can charge an upfront fee for a game and let us play it online, or build an online game and charge us to play it online. Don't charge us for the game, then charge to play it online. I'll pay for a game if the game itself is going to be providing my gaming experience. But I think its just wrong to pay for a game, and then pay to play it when other users (who are paying to play it with me) are making the game worthwhile.
:)
Make some kind of system that loads with the game that is a distributed network or sorts, like peer 2 peer load sharing. I don't know the logicistics of that, and that might not even work, but that's besides the point. I don't pay to get into a club, then pay an hourly fee for being there. You don't pay for parking when you go in to a lot, then when you leave pay again for each hour that you've parked.
I don't mean to be saying that its any less of a game if its made to be all online, or that the developers are hacks, but I just don't believe that they are the type of game that you should pay for, then pay to again play.
If people want to say "OK developers, charge me $14.95 USD per montth to play this game that I've already payed for". That's fine. They're just adding to their own hell for now. But it won't be fine when it gets the point that all content is delivered online, and the price has been set so high be previous precedents, that it screws us all in the end. I know that's probably way down the road, but what can I say... It could screw us all.
And why would I start building a server farm anyways? I don't like mmorpg.
I'm not big into online games, much less mmorpg games. I am into superheroes however, but at $14.95 US per month, plus the initial cost of the game, I'm not going to be into these superheroes.
,or at the very least have the monthly fee's reduced each month you're a subscriber, eventually recucing the monthly fee to nothing for the user... because the customer is after all doing the developer a favor by playing the game, not vice versa.
:)
I read in a thread that its $49.95 for the game (including a month online), and $14.95 per month, after a year of an and off playing, it'll cost you $214.40 USD. Imagine that. That is ridiculous.
RETARDED EVEN!!!
Besides the cost, there is an idea at work here that I just find nauseating, and should no longer be condoned by gamers.
By it being a mmorpg, the players themselves are making the game worth playing. And what do the developers do to thank them for making their game worthwhile? They charge them more money. What crap. I have a real problem with that, especially when you have to pay for the game plus a monthly fee to play it. The game should be free
I payed $70 CDN for GTA: Vice City, and ya know what? It doesn't ask me for more money each time I want to play it. Would you buy an arcade machine for yourself, and not set it to free play?
This whole concept blows my mind. I understand that by interacting with real people in an online universe, the experience might be more diverse, or a bit richer, but I can't see why a person would buy a game, then pay to play it.
Its not even like you're paying to play a new game or an improved game each month. Its just going to be same junk over and over.
As a life long gamer, I enjoy paying for games like Metal Gear Solid 2; Where I know that the developers but a lot of hard work into the game and created a experience for me... What I find repulsive is the idea that a game company is pimping me out for $14.95 USD/month to other users, so that they can make even more money.
THAT CRAP MAKES MY SOUL ROT!
I know no one is forced to pay these monthly fees, but just do me a favor and don't even start.
I was reading through some threads here about the canadians isp's not having to give up file-sharers names and I didn't see this point mentioned. The judge didn't keep the isp's usersname's secret because of the users or companies right per se. The judge turned their request down because he did not believe that the any copyrights had been broken as a result of the user participating in file sharing. HA!
I'm not sure if the lawyers just made a really weak case or what the deal was, but the judge just didn't think that the users were violating any copyrights, ergo, there was no need to reveal their names.
It's true. My Canadian news told me so.
Yes, it actually would be easy to find out what percentage was skipped. When you click to skip the commerical, it would send you to a URL. Maybe even a URL, that would in turn direct you to your intended page. When you click the skip commercial, there could be a value in the query string that receiving URL could log... something like:d =75
:)
http://www.website.com/page/new.php?percentSkippe
And the ActionScripting in the flash movie itself could dynamically change the value of percentSkipped as the movie progessed. That is a relatively crude way to keep track of how much of the movie was watched, but it's an example.
If you check out the specs sheet of the "Superstitial" full screen ad format here: http://www.unicast.com/formats/htmlspecs_fs.asp?do cument=FullScreenSpecs%5F05277521%2Epdf. At least the specs are reasonable.
- All ads are essentially Flash movies with set limitations
- max file size 600K
- limit to 15 seconds max
- *MUST include sound off button
- *MUST include a skip commerical link
- if no buttons are visible at any point during the commerical, clicking on the commerical itself will allow the user to "bail" from watching it.
- embedded videos can be no larger than 320x240
And all interactivity and motion/animation is done in flash, most using actionscript. It almost seems like a crime to pass this off as new technology, when it fact it just appears to be flash movies forced to run full screen.
And no I don't agree with what they're doing, and I don't believe that I should have to pay with my own bandwidth to watch someone elses ads, but at least they're giving up the option in these ads to skip them... Which isn't much a silver lining but..???
The most important thing is that when we see these commercials, we should not click on anything but the "skip" button. If we make sure the skip them all, I think our message will be heard loud and clear by advertisers.
All of the individual raw photos (which are clearer and in black & white) are available at:
. html
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/spirit
Enjoy.