That doesn't solve the problem addressed... people keeping copyright on things that are no longer economically viable to them.
I also like the idea. But...
I worked for an avionics firm some years ago. The base patents were solid science and discoveries exuded from vigorous field research. They were of the kind which one patent built upon another over time, with additional research. The kind of patents, I'm trying to say, would find few here who would argue against validity.
The market for this science was in small aircraft. To get the devices approved for those aircraft required considerable expense and effort and the sign-off of a government entity. "Economically Viable" is a complex equation in such a scenario. At the whim of the FAA it could be made non-viable but this would not be an aspect of the IP, rather being economic and political.
Generalizing, if the consideration of Viable does not take into account changing economic trends and further discoveries from research then the absolute core reason for such IP law is bankrupt.
dude. I didn't mean wiretap as in Allow the government to listen-in, I meant "wiretap" as in Maintain a presence within the private individual's domain. DRM does that. It's law enformcement. Except mostly without the backing of law. Until recently...
I was going to moderate you off-topic but, well, then.... my 2 cents.
First, don't minimize the scope of the government of the largest and strongest nation coercing private enterprise to bend to its will and to do illegal acts. That goes WAY beyond the issues of private commerce between individuals and recordings-producers.
With that said; what the fux do you think DRM *is* except a way to "wiretap" the private individual (aka. customer). Without judicial review. Unilaterally.
Personally I think it's a violation of RICO and monopolistic to enforce law through technology when the issues of fair-use are not resolved by a court. That's another rant though.
Go to jail. You are required to comply with the court order or summons. The court does not provide transportation nor lodging. I think it would take an unsympathetic view to your not providing your own identification, proper identification of course...
Very true, but that doesn't mean becoming free of religion wouldn't be a good thing;
The adage "Be careful of what you wish" comes to mind. In a world completely devoid of spiritual guidance, does even the Golden Rule apply?
Or does every man, woman, and child conclude that they can do whatever they care to, and that any impact on other human beings is simply Natural Selection.
I posit that early communities found it necessary to instill a sense of community and sacrifice for the greater good into their peoples (those that did not could not survive/compete)
Why, Bob the Cave Painter (Bob Painter) might ask? Well, because there are terrible things that might happen otherwise Sue the Tree Mentor might reply. Along comes Phil the Gardener and says it's clear that all depends on good food so we must appease the spirits of the wood (Phil is a little over the edge in comparison to the other folks but he's tolerated cause he does actually get good results)
Do you not see the Theory behind their suppositions?
Science has also evolved from early alchemy towards unfocused application (think steam engine) to concrete proof (think refrigeration). Should we, unvariangly, take ON FAITH that today's science will not be supplanted by a more refined model? No, obviously.
But yet you would throw away all of the Human knowledge that Bob Painter, Sue Mentor and Phil Gardener accumulated thoughout the ages?
So it's impetus is some kind of Higher Power. And so that may actually be inaccurate. Is your belief that Natural Selection will keep our species viable any different?
Your position corresponds very well with this quote: "I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours", Stephen Roberts
This rather works for Evolution too. It's the current Best that Science has to offer. There were many mis-steps along the way. There were religions spawned by early hominids' extrapolation of physical phenomenae. Along the way Humankind sought to further explain God. There were many mis-steps along the way.
The Gnostics thought they could divine God from Knowledge. Is that so different from Science or are we just at another lateral step?
I purchased for my son a copy of the Sacred Text Archive on DVD-ROM. Besides being a good way to support open and accessible information, it allows him to know there are many more things on earth and in... well, you get the picture;)
Growing up we prayed insofar as saying grace before meals. We discussed prayer in general. We watched some of the Holiday shows and I answered questions when they arose. We went to churches a few times. He's 14 and still goes to church-sponsored youth-group but now considers himself agnostic.
Now that he's old enough I've been frank with him that I believe we descend from a penal colony established by the Progenitors. I've taught him it doesn't matter what you believe- it's actions that matter and the only real and true guide for that is the Golden Rule. If you try every day to do better than the day before then Karma will approve. That's something that transcends how we came to be as a matter of a Rule of the Universe.
It's been hard for him too. But in the lutheran church in which I was raised it was very hard for me too. I also didn't know what to do even though we went every Sunday. Since I didn't "get it", I felt outside of all that everyone else was feeling and doing.
Part of me wants to advise you to just "Have Faith" (that your daughter will figure it out) but that may be too ironic for words. But here I did say it after all so what the h311.;)
Remember the Rush song? Choosing not to make a choice is still a choice. I think your daughter misunderstands your "we don't have any beliefs" because she is smart enough to know that just doesn't make sense. Every functional adult has a belief system.
Is it wrong to let your kid know yours is not "off-the-shelf"?
I don't think so. The world is undergoing tragic change. It's more ruled by international corporations than by secular governments. There is still a powerful reactionary component that harkens back to the "old days" but even Rome is changing with the times.
I should probably post this part separately since I'll probably get moderated based on this rather than the above, but I don't much care about moderation points.
My problem with Evolution is "Where are all the intermediate species?" If a bunch of random changes are constantly acting on generations should not we have things that look like cats but act more like dogs? IOW- Shouldn't species be more like a toddler's toybox than like a primary student's pencil box?
My problem with the Benevolent God is "Where have you been these last 2 Thousands of years?!".
So, either the Universe runs on autopilot and there's some as yet not discovered force that molds species into discrete channels -OR- God only cares about the macro-universe and not our individual needs -OR- our understanding of what God is is woefully inadequate.
Regarding the OP, I'm siding with the "forget it and leave it be" camp. If you don't make a fuss, the only person that could get in potential trouble if it turned out to be rotten would be the guy who wrote it.
"Leaving It Be" isn't an option either. The OP found the problem in researching a bug. Since that needs to be fixed and since the forum post came up in his search it's possible that he'll need to use fixes from forum replies. It then becomes obvious that he perpetuated the original mistake (if there was one- as others have pointed out the code may have originated with the lead developer who posted to the forum as well as using some of his base code in the company project).
I think he has reason to be careful. It's not clear from the OP, greenrom, how old the code is. Even a few years ago there was much less attention paid to the ethics of using publicly posted code. Greenrom's management might very well be more concerned about this in today's climate than when the original decision was made.
I think he has reason to be concerned as well. One smell. Could there be two? Maybe there is a lot of code lifted by the lead developer. It's every associate's responsibility to act to protect the company. Not knowing that answer makes approaching the developer one-on-one a risky proposition. To protect himself the LD may well begin finding fault with greenrom's work in an effort to have him fired. Flank assaults like that are harder to fight than head-on attacks in some kind of audit or investigatory situation.
My action (given the brevity of information) and this is not legal or other type of advice, would be to email boss, Cc the lead, subject: need clarification for license. body: While researching for a bug fix I stumbled on code significantly similar to ours. Pls be aware that some fault may exist in at . ref: These code blocks are nearly identical.
Simple, factual and non-accusatory. No further explanation about what was being searched or the possible impact or anything else as that is a management problem. Also, managers tend to only read the first three sentences. btw- redundancy intended. Make sure the point is clear.
As to the poster who proclaimed some defect in the OP for having used the internet to help him fix the bug. That's just ridiculous. It's a HUGE time saver.
Price, Schedule, Frequency in that order is how people buy airfare.
I buy mostly on schedule. I don't know what you mean by frequency since that's an aspect of schedule. I would guess your analysis is mostly valid for tourists. When business flyers chose though I'd think schedule is more important.
I'm a different buyer though. My son visits hometown periodically and is a minor. I have to bite for the "unaccompanied" addon and have to be careful that termination allows for pickup and by the declared parties.
A big problem with schedule buying is connections. 30 minutes between flights in St Louis? Come on! You're almost guaranteed to miss the connection. 3 hours in Chicago? Enough time to get in trouble but too long to be comfortable and too short to do anything interesting really.
Of course we sort by price. Not would be insane. It's loaded though. There's no significant difference between buying a flight tomorrow and 2 weeks from now. Either the seat is available or it is not. Ditto with a Thursday compared to a Saturday. The ticket should actually be cheaper on a Saturday as it's more full and cost per passenger is less.
There's no sense to the purchase. The purchase sites are geared to cost. In frustration we purchase on price. The industry is creating a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Domestic air travel is one of the five most price elastic products avaliable for purchase today. It's also complicated and hard, much like buying a car. So many variables. Making it more discreet and harder is not a good idea.
Charging to get your baggage first is the same as offering a discount if you don't mind them coming out last.
Define last. 3 hours later? Whenever the h311 they decide to "find" them? At the end of the day?
The problem is that to do this they have to expend resources (==cost) to sort the baggage and return it in separate queues. They'll either have to charge enough to elite to cover that or make the non-elite incentivized enough that few don't pay.
I once tried to sell a bicycle to a friend of mine. It was sweet! Had a banana seat, it was dark, metallic blue. The tires on it were nearly brand-new! I needed a 10-speed but me and this ol' bike had had some good days. It also (these were the days when having them wasn't so weird as I guess it is nowadays) had a bell on the handle. I'd bought that with my own paper-route monies and it was pretty useful in reminding errant pets that I had a job to do and to please move along.
I wanted $25 for this bike. It was used, after all. And that's how much I needed to effect a transfer of my bike ownership from this one to the new 10-speed I was to buy. I thought that a very fair price and included the bell!
Well, Timmy wasn't at all interested in the bell. Said if I'd sell for $20 I could keep the bell. I told him I *needed* to sell it *with* the bell and for $25. I pointed out all the advantages of the bell. I asked him to come over and *see* the bell. I rang it for him and it made this sweet ringing you could hear all down the street. I even showed him the package it came in with its guarantee.
Despite all this effort, my cost, and all the flashiness, well, Timmy just wasn't interested. All I could do was keep the bell and wait just a bit longer before I could buy my 10-speed. It was a pain walking the route for awhile, but I adjusted.
I guess you'd have to say I learned a lesson from that.
I will weigh in on the side of desktop user out there (that wants the Linux sitting beneath their desk to devote its every waking minute to making *them* happy) by saying that if my mplayer "hangs" in the middle of a song (only to continue with a loud burst of noise 10 seconds later) when the CPU is busy with "nice -19" processes, my Firefox browser takes half a minute to scroll a page or open a screen) when memory is tight, and it takes minutes to bring up a tab or minimized program I haven't touched in 3 days and return them to a functional state then the operating system *Has a PROBLEM*.
Hear! Hear!
I'm constantly amazed by running niced 19 programs (mostly sh/bash) or by opening a tab in firefox that my 2.8GHz dual AMD can just.... pause. Not swap cause there's 2G RAM. The scheduler must obey a human user.
A Standard Template Library (or Terminal IO library like http://sourceforge.net/projects/utio/) that doesn't keep up with C++ (a la the stable trunk of GCC), that has but one developer, that has not seen a release since Q3-2006, well...
Pardon my bluntness but that's not really such a loss.
I'm sure you have your reasons. I haven't seen them enumerated here; just the constant barrage that you don't like GPLv3. Not even a word about key points. While there may be many reasons posited in the conversations here, surely not ALL of them pertain to your decision.
Correct me but how are your libraries affected by the license of GCC again? Not at all.
Surely you are joking. Uncertainty moving toward certainty. At some point along that line most reasonable people will agree a thing is "proven". Don't pick nits on a post that primarily thanked another user for having caused a light in my own mind to shine for a moment.
Zukester got blasted on his use of theory but Theory obeys falsification. Inductive Theory models like origins are highly falsifiable. It always makes me chuckle when I hear the phrase "though the Theory has a few minor contradictions that aren't predicted by it, the Theory is still accepted..." In my line of work that's called a bug and is considered to be a problem.
The interesting thing I found in the OP was uncertainty moving toward certainty moving toward uncertainty. The meta models like evolution/age/origin are built on highly predictive models but also on a fair amount of assumption.
Unlike Zukester I'm not a creationist (per se), nor ID. I pretty much accept that there's an evolutionary developmental component and the world is pretty darned old. Whether humankind originated from one mutation and spread around the world, multiple mutations that cross bread, independent compatible mutations, or some other scenario is unprovable. Any prediction made on such a Theory is unlikely to be resolved in human life scale. And by definition it cannot make predictions about current human population due to its prime component of random change.
Like Zukester I would question having Evolution/Age/Origin posited to my kids as fact, unquestionable and inviolate. Especially since, aside from the Three R's, I think critical thinking is a crucial skill needed to be learned in childhood. Teaching these meta models as Fact makes for easy testing, but works against reasoning and curiosity.
I wish I had mod points to give you. I think you make several important points: - science is of the proven - scientists also deal with the unproven (theory) - the unproven often has corollarial unproven context (eg. amoeba isA primitive) - the sum of context (ie. evolution, darwinism, etc.) is often indistinguishable from faith
Slashdot Mirror
I also like the idea. But...
I worked for an avionics firm some years ago. The base patents were solid science and discoveries exuded from vigorous field research. They were of the kind which one patent built upon another over time, with additional research. The kind of patents, I'm trying to say, would find few here who would argue against validity.
The market for this science was in small aircraft. To get the devices approved for those aircraft required considerable expense and effort and the sign-off of a government entity. "Economically Viable" is a complex equation in such a scenario. At the whim of the FAA it could be made non-viable but this would not be an aspect of the IP, rather being economic and political.
Generalizing, if the consideration of Viable does not take into account changing economic trends and further discoveries from research then the absolute core reason for such IP law is bankrupt.
dude. I didn't mean wiretap as in Allow the government to listen-in, I meant "wiretap" as in Maintain a presence within the private individual's domain. DRM does that. It's law enformcement. Except mostly without the backing of law. Until recently...
I was going to moderate you off-topic but, well, then.... my 2 cents.
First, don't minimize the scope of the government of the largest and strongest nation coercing private enterprise to bend to its will and to do illegal acts. That goes WAY beyond the issues of private commerce between individuals and recordings-producers.
With that said; what the fux do you think DRM *is* except a way to "wiretap" the private individual (aka. customer). Without judicial review. Unilaterally.
Personally I think it's a violation of RICO and monopolistic to enforce law through technology when the issues of fair-use are not resolved by a court. That's another rant though.
I live in Iowa, you insensitive clod!
(and groceries are probably less expensive in NY,NY than here. $4.09 for a gallon of milk at the local stop&go)
IANAL
Go to jail. You are required to comply with the court order or summons. The court does not provide transportation nor lodging. I think it would take an unsympathetic view to your not providing your own identification, proper identification of course...
that was accomplished long ago with the New Deal
The adage "Be careful of what you wish" comes to mind. In a world completely devoid of spiritual guidance, does even the Golden Rule apply?
Or does every man, woman, and child conclude that they can do whatever they care to, and that any impact on other human beings is simply Natural Selection.
I posit that early communities found it necessary to instill a sense of community and sacrifice for the greater good into their peoples (those that did not could not survive/compete)
Why, Bob the Cave Painter (Bob Painter) might ask? Well, because there are terrible things that might happen otherwise Sue the Tree Mentor might reply. Along comes Phil the Gardener and says it's clear that all depends on good food so we must appease the spirits of the wood (Phil is a little over the edge in comparison to the other folks but he's tolerated cause he does actually get good results)
Do you not see the Theory behind their suppositions?
Science has also evolved from early alchemy towards unfocused application (think steam engine) to concrete proof (think refrigeration). Should we, unvariangly, take ON FAITH that today's science will not be supplanted by a more refined model? No, obviously.
But yet you would throw away all of the Human knowledge that Bob Painter, Sue Mentor and Phil Gardener accumulated thoughout the ages?
So it's impetus is some kind of Higher Power. And so that may actually be inaccurate. Is your belief that Natural Selection will keep our species viable any different?
This rather works for Evolution too. It's the current Best that Science has to offer. There were many mis-steps along the way. There were religions spawned by early hominids' extrapolation of physical phenomenae. Along the way Humankind sought to further explain God. There were many mis-steps along the way.
The Gnostics thought they could divine God from Knowledge. Is that so different from Science or are we just at another lateral step?
I purchased for my son a copy of the Sacred Text Archive on DVD-ROM. Besides being a good way to support open and accessible information, it allows him to know there are many more things on earth and in... well, you get the picture ;)
;)
Growing up we prayed insofar as saying grace before meals. We discussed prayer in general. We watched some of the Holiday shows and I answered questions when they arose. We went to churches a few times. He's 14 and still goes to church-sponsored youth-group but now considers himself agnostic.
Now that he's old enough I've been frank with him that I believe we descend from a penal colony established by the Progenitors. I've taught him it doesn't matter what you believe- it's actions that matter and the only real and true guide for that is the Golden Rule. If you try every day to do better than the day before then Karma will approve. That's something that transcends how we came to be as a matter of a Rule of the Universe.
It's been hard for him too. But in the lutheran church in which I was raised it was very hard for me too. I also didn't know what to do even though we went every Sunday. Since I didn't "get it", I felt outside of all that everyone else was feeling and doing.
Part of me wants to advise you to just "Have Faith" (that your daughter will figure it out) but that may be too ironic for words. But here I did say it after all so what the h311.
Remember the Rush song? Choosing not to make a choice is still a choice. I think your daughter misunderstands your "we don't have any beliefs" because she is smart enough to know that just doesn't make sense. Every functional adult has a belief system.
Is it wrong to let your kid know yours is not "off-the-shelf"?
I don't think so. The world is undergoing tragic change. It's more ruled by international corporations than by secular governments. There is still a powerful reactionary component that harkens back to the "old days" but even Rome is changing with the times.
I should probably post this part separately since I'll probably get moderated based on this rather than the above, but I don't much care about moderation points.
My problem with Evolution is "Where are all the intermediate species?" If a bunch of random changes are constantly acting on generations should not we have things that look like cats but act more like dogs? IOW- Shouldn't species be more like a toddler's toybox than like a primary student's pencil box?
My problem with the Benevolent God is "Where have you been these last 2 Thousands of years?!".
So, either the Universe runs on autopilot and there's some as yet not discovered force that molds species into discrete channels -OR- God only cares about the macro-universe and not our individual needs -OR- our understanding of what God is is woefully inadequate.
Meanwhile it's simple to *do* the best we can.
look at the complainantt name: P BCalmear
Please B Calmer
come on!
that was supposed to be ...fault may exist in: CODEFILE at: CODEBLOCKS ref: FORUMURL
"Leaving It Be" isn't an option either. The OP found the problem in researching a bug. Since that needs to be fixed and since the forum post came up in his search it's possible that he'll need to use fixes from forum replies. It then becomes obvious that he perpetuated the original mistake (if there was one- as others have pointed out the code may have originated with the lead developer who posted to the forum as well as using some of his base code in the company project).
I think he has reason to be careful. It's not clear from the OP, greenrom, how old the code is. Even a few years ago there was much less attention paid to the ethics of using publicly posted code. Greenrom's management might very well be more concerned about this in today's climate than when the original decision was made.
I think he has reason to be concerned as well. One smell. Could there be two? Maybe there is a lot of code lifted by the lead developer. It's every associate's responsibility to act to protect the company. Not knowing that answer makes approaching the developer one-on-one a risky proposition. To protect himself the LD may well begin finding fault with greenrom's work in an effort to have him fired. Flank assaults like that are harder to fight than head-on attacks in some kind of audit or investigatory situation.
My action (given the brevity of information) and this is not legal or other type of advice, would be to email boss, Cc the lead, subject: need clarification for license. body: While researching for a bug fix I stumbled on code significantly similar to ours. Pls be aware that some fault may exist in at . ref: These code blocks are nearly identical.
Simple, factual and non-accusatory. No further explanation about what was being searched or the possible impact or anything else as that is a management problem. Also, managers tend to only read the first three sentences. btw- redundancy intended. Make sure the point is clear.
As to the poster who proclaimed some defect in the OP for having used the internet to help him fix the bug. That's just ridiculous. It's a HUGE time saver.
I buy mostly on schedule. I don't know what you mean by frequency since that's an aspect of schedule. I would guess your analysis is mostly valid for tourists. When business flyers chose though I'd think schedule is more important.
I'm a different buyer though. My son visits hometown periodically and is a minor. I have to bite for the "unaccompanied" addon and have to be careful that termination allows for pickup and by the declared parties.
A big problem with schedule buying is connections. 30 minutes between flights in St Louis? Come on! You're almost guaranteed to miss the connection. 3 hours in Chicago? Enough time to get in trouble but too long to be comfortable and too short to do anything interesting really.
Of course we sort by price. Not would be insane. It's loaded though. There's no significant difference between buying a flight tomorrow and 2 weeks from now. Either the seat is available or it is not. Ditto with a Thursday compared to a Saturday. The ticket should actually be cheaper on a Saturday as it's more full and cost per passenger is less.
There's no sense to the purchase. The purchase sites are geared to cost. In frustration we purchase on price. The industry is creating a self-fulfilling prophesy. Domestic air travel is one of the five most price elastic products avaliable for purchase today. It's also complicated and hard, much like buying a car. So many variables. Making it more discreet and harder is not a good idea.
Define last. 3 hours later? Whenever the h311 they decide to "find" them? At the end of the day?
The problem is that to do this they have to expend resources (==cost) to sort the baggage and return it in separate queues. They'll either have to charge enough to elite to cover that or make the non-elite incentivized enough that few don't pay.
Either way it's a lame idea. To be polite....
but that's just repetitive and redundant
And our good friends at MIT - http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/courses/courses/index.htm#Mathematics
but does it play linux?!
I once tried to sell a bicycle to a friend of mine. It was sweet! Had a banana seat, it was dark, metallic blue. The tires on it were nearly brand-new! I needed a 10-speed but me and this ol' bike had had some good days. It also (these were the days when having them wasn't so weird as I guess it is nowadays) had a bell on the handle. I'd bought that with my own paper-route monies and it was pretty useful in reminding errant pets that I had a job to do and to please move along.
I wanted $25 for this bike. It was used, after all. And that's how much I needed to effect a transfer of my bike ownership from this one to the new 10-speed I was to buy. I thought that a very fair price and included the bell!
Well, Timmy wasn't at all interested in the bell. Said if I'd sell for $20 I could keep the bell. I told him I *needed* to sell it *with* the bell and for $25. I pointed out all the advantages of the bell. I asked him to come over and *see* the bell. I rang it for him and it made this sweet ringing you could hear all down the street. I even showed him the package it came in with its guarantee.
Despite all this effort, my cost, and all the flashiness, well, Timmy just wasn't interested. All I could do was keep the bell and wait just a bit longer before I could buy my 10-speed. It was a pain walking the route for awhile, but I adjusted.
I guess you'd have to say I learned a lesson from that.
Buyer Beware implies Seller Beware.
Hear! Hear!
I'm constantly amazed by running niced 19 programs (mostly sh/bash) or by opening a tab in firefox that my 2.8GHz dual AMD can just.... pause. Not swap cause there's 2G RAM. The scheduler must obey a human user.
possibly Radio Electronics.
A Standard Template Library (or Terminal IO library like http://sourceforge.net/projects/utio/) that doesn't keep up with C++ (a la the stable trunk of GCC), that has but one developer, that has not seen a release since Q3-2006, well...
Pardon my bluntness but that's not really such a loss.
I'm sure you have your reasons. I haven't seen them enumerated here; just the constant barrage that you don't like GPLv3. Not even a word about key points. While there may be many reasons posited in the conversations here, surely not ALL of them pertain to your decision.
Correct me but how are your libraries affected by the license of GCC again? Not at all.
amazing...
Here ya go: coherent english
Surely you are joking. Uncertainty moving toward certainty. At some point along that line most reasonable people will agree a thing is "proven". Don't pick nits on a post that primarily thanked another user for having caused a light in my own mind to shine for a moment.
Zukester got blasted on his use of theory but Theory obeys falsification. Inductive Theory models like origins are highly falsifiable. It always makes me chuckle when I hear the phrase "though the Theory has a few minor contradictions that aren't predicted by it, the Theory is still accepted..." In my line of work that's called a bug and is considered to be a problem.
The interesting thing I found in the OP was uncertainty moving toward certainty moving toward uncertainty. The meta models like evolution/age/origin are built on highly predictive models but also on a fair amount of assumption.
Unlike Zukester I'm not a creationist (per se), nor ID. I pretty much accept that there's an evolutionary developmental component and the world is pretty darned old. Whether humankind originated from one mutation and spread around the world, multiple mutations that cross bread, independent compatible mutations, or some other scenario is unprovable. Any prediction made on such a Theory is unlikely to be resolved in human life scale. And by definition it cannot make predictions about current human population due to its prime component of random change.
Like Zukester I would question having Evolution/Age/Origin posited to my kids as fact, unquestionable and inviolate. Especially since, aside from the Three R's, I think critical thinking is a crucial skill needed to be learned in childhood. Teaching these meta models as Fact makes for easy testing, but works against reasoning and curiosity.
I wish I had mod points to give you. I think you make several important points:
- science is of the proven
- scientists also deal with the unproven (theory)
- the unproven often has corollarial unproven context (eg. amoeba isA primitive)
- the sum of context (ie. evolution, darwinism, etc.) is often indistinguishable from faith
Definately something to think about. thanks.