I never stated belief in God was a theory if it appeared that way I apologise, is just that.
I haven't investigated ID enough to say if it falls in line with my personal beliefs, but then again I don't think my beliefs would be very useful in this thread.
Regardless the grant was to basically investigate the socal issues of ID and how it damages the acceptance of evolution, I believe this is valid research, in addition a grant should, however, be granted to someone that wishes to investigate the positive socal aspects of ID or how it can be brought in line with evolution. TFA didn't appear to be about proving a theory but instead to investigate social issues.
Without trying to cause a flamewar, it seems to me the grant is justified, so long as the board is also willing to provide a grant to a theologist that is trying to prove creationism or intelligent design. Refusing to allow someone a grant to research a subject that causes such differing opinion is fairly small minded.
Just so I clear this up I believe in evolution, however, I also firmly believe in God, I see no reason why both theories cannot co-exist, even the vatican support this view.
The web would be a much safer place if we could have a basic education test before allowing people to connect;o)
"Welcome to the web....to enter please answer the following multiple choice question correctly, if you get the answer right you will be allowed to connect, if you answer incorrectly we will use your unpatched version of IE to executed arbitary code on your machine causing your modem to be destroyed"
That was exactly my thoughts, from looking through this thread I haven't been flamed mostly people have agreed with my overall opinion of not all specific details.
I understand lack of user education but surely there is no one that hasn't at least heard of firefox by now, I mean if you have been on the web for more than a week you must have at least seen a link, there is news almost weekly on new IE vulnerabilities, when will the average user become educated and what more can us geeks do to push this?
I know IE is supposed to still be the most popular web browser there is, but my site shows firefox is in much higher use (roughly 96%). But I guess that since over 97% of hits to my site have been from slashdot that isn't so unusual, I was suprised to see that 98% of visitors used windows.
Why are people still using IE, even the most uneducated users must have heard of alternative browsers by now. I am not specifically advocating any particular browser, I use firefox, but I have heard great reports about opera. Geez these days I would use lynx over IE (and quite often do). We hear about new vulnerabilities in IE all the time IE users get a clue.
You cannot decide arbitrarily that because you agree with the results that they are the truth. That's not science.
I am not going to argue with your point, your are completely correct, poor wording on my part I should have used the word results and not truth. But my point does remain the same there is censorship going on here.
This is the internet, I'll compare whatever the fuck I want. Don't tell me what I can and can't do--that'll just angry up the blood.
I am so glad to see you take a mature approach to using your constitutional rights to freedom of speech, perhaps if the current administration did the same and didn't restrict the speech of the scientists researching global warming this entire thread wouldn't exist.
To quote something I have read in a book - "to beleive that the human race has the power or even the potential to destroy the earth is absolute arogance".
So say setting of every nuclear weapon on the planet would not destroy the earth? Or more specifically its ability to support life.
Global warming may not destroy the planet but it can destroy its ability to sustain human life.
That is a distinction without a difference. Blaming someone for a cover up and for protecting oil companies is essentially the same thing. In any other "wrong doing" if you cover up the deed or attempt to protect it are you not as guilty as the party who did it? Your implying that the current administration is helping out those who are responsible for global warming is implying that the current administration is responsible for global warming as well.
Of course there is a difference, if you kill someone and I hide evidence for you, I am guilty of obstruction of justice not murder. This is entirely my point, the current administration is not guilty of the actual crime but they are covering up or skewing the truth, making them guilty of something else entirely.
Essentially what I'm asking you is, "Would a Democratic president be doing anything differently?" That's hard to decide--both sides are all talk and no action on this subject.
whilst attempting not to get into a political discussion, I am not directly focusing on a political party here, just a particular individual, that I feel isn't exactly suited to his job.
I am not saying democrats would be different but the individual leading them could be.
Reality check, I am not saying that the current President is responsible for global warming, what I am saying is their supporters (oil and energy producers) do not want to accept any responsibility for it, this would cost them huge amounts of money to help fix a problem they helped cause.
I am in no way blaming the current administration for global warming, I do accuse them of covering up and protecting the people that have contributed to it though, if the oil companies had to pay out to help clean up their mess that would be less money for other things, such as I don't know, contributing to presidental campaigns perhaps?
Is this really a shocker? Bush has had a policy of denying global warming is a result of humans, the fact he is giving the NOAA extra money for research rather than prevention is quite interesting, global warming is something that is happening.
I remember years ago when the offical stance was there is no such thing as global warming, this has evolved to, there is no proof of global warming, to okay it exists but it isn't our fault, somehow I get the feeling the intention now is to attempt to prove it isn't caused by the biggest donators to the Bush administration.
When the whitehouse and the pentagon started to open up and declassify documents all those years ago, it was a good thing it felt like finally they are opening up, now things are going back to feeling more like the cold war, a policy of secrecy, spying (although internally now rather than on a foreign element), lies, and gagging the people with important information.
So as you feel your skin cancer forming and watch the ice caps come washing over us, just remember it isn't because of mankind, President Bush says so.
Since the general opinion seems to be that SCO is simply attempting to cause discord in the unix market, is this really so suprising?
Lets look at the facts here, SCO is filing lawsuits all over the place, being very vague on the specifics of the lawsuit, all of which ties the courts up and drags out the cases. There is a lot of publicity about how *NIX variants may be breaching all these copyrights, IP's, and licenses, which in the long term reduces confidence in *NIX since consumers can't be sure that the product they are investing money in may suddenly get pulled.
IMHO the money M$ has pushed towards SCO is entirely related to this case, by tying these vendors to the courts and reducing consumer confidence people are more likely to buy M$ products rather than face the risk of getting hurt with the outcome of these lawsuits.
I think these cases should all be thrown out, SCO has a fairly damning track record of lawsuits for the sake or lawsuits, regardless of the validity of the claims.
So because it is something 'you' want to do specifically it should be added to the source tree for openssh, you bring yet another good point up, user requirements, just because maybe 100 users want something but the other 900,000 people don't does that mean it should be added for the sake of the minority. You said someone had written the code? Cool patch it yourself and use this feature, myself I would prefer an extra possible flaw not be introduced to the sourcetree.
I feel about the same
on
Gmail vs Pine
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
First I would like to say it is nice to see an employee of a company looking at positive 'and' negative aspects of a product their employeer makes.
Secondly I used to use pine, for several years in fact, until I got turned onto mutt by a friend, it is IMHO way more powerful, and, configurable than pine.
Thirdly after recommendations from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=181673&cid=150 25454'./'s I am experimenting with gmail, and, have been having about the same experience, mostly I am impressed, but I am left with a feeling that it just isn't mature enough yet as a mail client. Don't get me wrong of all the webmail clients I have used this is my favorite, but generally I miss Mutt.
That was actually a very interesting article, I have suffered from insomia for many years, and have frequent problems with sleeping all the way through the night. I have suffered from back pain for years, although that is more likely related to an old injury from way back. I get headaches pretty frequently but I think that is also partly due me needed to get a new pescription for my glasses. So I can relate to all those things.
I am not so sure about the poor attention sp.......oooo I wonder if I can assign that class to a pointer....oh ummmm I got to go...
Re:What are the entry requirements?
on
Hacker Boot Camp
·
· Score: 1
I love the concept, I really hope that the implimentation will work out to be as good as the idea. If it works out this will be a major step towards bringing linux to more desktops.
Slashdot Mirror
I never stated belief in God was a theory if it appeared that way I apologise, is just that.
I haven't investigated ID enough to say if it falls in line with my personal beliefs, but then again I don't think my beliefs would be very useful in this thread.
Regardless the grant was to basically investigate the socal issues of ID and how it damages the acceptance of evolution, I believe this is valid research, in addition a grant should, however, be granted to someone that wishes to investigate the positive socal aspects of ID or how it can be brought in line with evolution. TFA didn't appear to be about proving a theory but instead to investigate social issues.
Without trying to cause a flamewar, it seems to me the grant is justified, so long as the board is also willing to provide a grant to a theologist that is trying to prove creationism or intelligent design. Refusing to allow someone a grant to research a subject that causes such differing opinion is fairly small minded.
Just so I clear this up I believe in evolution, however, I also firmly believe in God, I see no reason why both theories cannot co-exist, even the vatican support this view.
The web would be a much safer place if we could have a basic education test before allowing people to connect ;o)
"Welcome to the web....to enter please answer the following multiple choice question correctly, if you get the answer right you will be allowed to connect, if you answer incorrectly we will use your unpatched version of IE to executed arbitary code on your machine causing your modem to be destroyed"
That was exactly my thoughts, from looking through this thread I haven't been flamed mostly people have agreed with my overall opinion of not all specific details.
c'est la vie
I agree with the points you make, I just find it so frustrating that people won't learn.
Hmmm good point, I may try and track that statistic.
I understand lack of user education but surely there is no one that hasn't at least heard of firefox by now, I mean if you have been on the web for more than a week you must have at least seen a link, there is news almost weekly on new IE vulnerabilities, when will the average user become educated and what more can us geeks do to push this?
I know IE is supposed to still be the most popular web browser there is, but my site shows firefox is in much higher use (roughly 96%). But I guess that since over 97% of hits to my site have been from slashdot that isn't so unusual, I was suprised to see that 98% of visitors used windows.
Why are people still using IE, even the most uneducated users must have heard of alternative browsers by now. I am not specifically advocating any particular browser, I use firefox, but I have heard great reports about opera. Geez these days I would use lynx over IE (and quite often do). We hear about new vulnerabilities in IE all the time IE users get a clue.
1800's industrial era, humans have been producing fairly high levels of CO2 by way of coal burning since that period.
I am not going to argue with your point, your are completely correct, poor wording on my part I should have used the word results and not truth. But my point does remain the same there is censorship going on here.
I am so glad to see you take a mature approach to using your constitutional rights to freedom of speech, perhaps if the current administration did the same and didn't restrict the speech of the scientists researching global warming this entire thread wouldn't exist.
So say setting of every nuclear weapon on the planet would not destroy the earth? Or more specifically its ability to support life.
Global warming may not destroy the planet but it can destroy its ability to sustain human life.
Of course there is a difference, if you kill someone and I hide evidence for you, I am guilty of obstruction of justice not murder. This is entirely my point, the current administration is not guilty of the actual crime but they are covering up or skewing the truth, making them guilty of something else entirely.
whilst attempting not to get into a political discussion, I am not directly focusing on a political party here, just a particular individual, that I feel isn't exactly suited to his job.
I am not saying democrats would be different but the individual leading them could be.
Reality check, I am not saying that the current President is responsible for global warming, what I am saying is their supporters (oil and energy producers) do not want to accept any responsibility for it, this would cost them huge amounts of money to help fix a problem they helped cause.
I am in no way blaming the current administration for global warming, I do accuse them of covering up and protecting the people that have contributed to it though, if the oil companies had to pay out to help clean up their mess that would be less money for other things, such as I don't know, contributing to presidental campaigns perhaps?
Actually more middleleft, but if you prefer to remain blinded to the reality perhaps the extra UV rays will aid your efforts.
Is this really a shocker? Bush has had a policy of denying global warming is a result of humans, the fact he is giving the NOAA extra money for research rather than prevention is quite interesting, global warming is something that is happening.
I remember years ago when the offical stance was there is no such thing as global warming, this has evolved to, there is no proof of global warming, to okay it exists but it isn't our fault, somehow I get the feeling the intention now is to attempt to prove it isn't caused by the biggest donators to the Bush administration.
When the whitehouse and the pentagon started to open up and declassify documents all those years ago, it was a good thing it felt like finally they are opening up, now things are going back to feeling more like the cold war, a policy of secrecy, spying (although internally now rather than on a foreign element), lies, and gagging the people with important information.
So as you feel your skin cancer forming and watch the ice caps come washing over us, just remember it isn't because of mankind, President Bush says so.
Since the general opinion seems to be that SCO is simply attempting to cause discord in the unix market, is this really so suprising?
Lets look at the facts here, SCO is filing lawsuits all over the place, being very vague on the specifics of the lawsuit, all of which ties the courts up and drags out the cases. There is a lot of publicity about how *NIX variants may be breaching all these copyrights, IP's, and licenses, which in the long term reduces confidence in *NIX since consumers can't be sure that the product they are investing money in may suddenly get pulled.
IMHO the money M$ has pushed towards SCO is entirely related to this case, by tying these vendors to the courts and reducing consumer confidence people are more likely to buy M$ products rather than face the risk of getting hurt with the outcome of these lawsuits.
I think these cases should all be thrown out, SCO has a fairly damning track record of lawsuits for the sake or lawsuits, regardless of the validity of the claims.
So because it is something 'you' want to do specifically it should be added to the source tree for openssh, you bring yet another good point up, user requirements, just because maybe 100 users want something but the other 900,000 people don't does that mean it should be added for the sake of the minority. You said someone had written the code? Cool patch it yourself and use this feature, myself I would prefer an extra possible flaw not be introduced to the sourcetree.
First I would like to say it is nice to see an employee of a company looking at positive 'and' negative aspects of a product their employeer makes.
0 25454'./'s I am experimenting with gmail, and, have been having about the same experience, mostly I am impressed, but I am left with a feeling that it just isn't mature enough yet as a mail client. Don't get me wrong of all the webmail clients I have used this is my favorite, but generally I miss Mutt.
Secondly I used to use pine, for several years in fact, until I got turned onto mutt by a friend, it is IMHO way more powerful, and, configurable than pine.
Thirdly after recommendations from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=181673&cid=15
I will take a read but I have been wearing glasses for 23 years, even if I didn't need them I don't think I could give them up at this point :p
Hmm I think I will start trying that, thanks for the advice.
That was actually a very interesting article, I have suffered from insomia for many years, and have frequent problems with sleeping all the way through the night. I have suffered from back pain for years, although that is more likely related to an old injury from way back. I get headaches pretty frequently but I think that is also partly due me needed to get a new pescription for my glasses. So I can relate to all those things.
I am not so sure about the poor attention sp.......oooo I wonder if I can assign that class to a pointer....oh ummmm I got to go...
:) It happens
I love the concept, I really hope that the implimentation will work out to be as good as the idea. If it works out this will be a major step towards bringing linux to more desktops.