I run KDE 5.29 using Plasma and have a different image per screen (I run a triple head display). I use compiz as a window manager because it has nicer effects than the built in KDE WM.
Yes indeed. I live in New Zealand which is probably the second most remote large land mass for internet access behind only Antarctica (and maybe Iceland) and our internet connection to the rest of the world is quite acceptable. I enjoy 80Mb/s to servers in Europe. Cuba's internet issues have very little to do with geography.
Pointing out that a large percentage of Americans believe in imaginary sky people isn't condescending. It astounds me how the ridiculous meme of religion has pervaded a supposedly first world country. It's time for such superstitious nonsense to be replaced with reason.
Agreed. I think rules like "must include 2 numbers and 2 special characters" should only apply for passwords shorter than 10 characters. My passwords are easy to remember, unique per site and > 22 characters long. I'm happy that's it's secure.
If I send a request to a server and it sends a response back, how can that be illegal?
It's illegal to rob a house, even if the door is unlocked.
That analogy is a poor one. It's like someone left their back door open and when asked "can I come in" they say "yes".
I can send millions of requests to a poorly secured bank server, until I find a username password that gets a "logged in" response back. I can send a request after that to move money, and the server sends a response back with a reciept.
These are all things the server was configured to do. But I think most people would recognize that as theft.
It would be a poorly configured server. Again, the situation is different. Nothing is taken in the case of a server sending you files. It's not like taking money at all.
If I send a request to a server and it sends a response back, how can that be illegal? Their server was configured to do this. If I ask a server for a file and it provides it to me then I can't see how that makes me a criminal.
I don't think the words "morally" and "taxation" belong in the same sentence. No matter how you think a society should be run, the forced confiscation of private property using a threat of violence is not moral. I am not proposing an alternative, but a lack there-of does not make extortion in any way "moral".
The AppleTV fits well within the tech ecosystem I have at home, it just works after plugging it in and the price is so low as to consider to be pretty much free. As a bonus I get a Netflix app, RedbullTV and Flikr with no additional configuration. VPNing thorugh to different countries is simple too.
We have a few AppleTV devices. One of them is used solely as a digital photo frame using Flickr (it's a cheap way to build a DPF). The primary AppleTV (plugged into the main TV) is used nearly solely for NetFlix (with some RedbullTV too).
It would be interesting to try something like this on a bigger scale.
I disagree. If I wanted my money to be used for this then I would have donated to the cause. I don't want an organisation making that choice for me. let me choose where my money is spent. I am a New Zealander.
I'm not ridiculing individuals, I'm ridiculing patently absurd ideas. Ridiculous ideas deserve to be ridiculed. People should feel an intellectual shame in believing in goblins, fairies and gods.
>"So you have to add in there the bits about not eating shellfish, wearing mixed thread garments and homosexuality."
Old testament, not Jesus' teachings.
>"It's only in the New Testament that the idea of an eternity of hell for not believing is introduced. Is this moral? NO! It it not. "Love me or burn forever" is not a moral teaching."
Nope. Jesus never said anything about hell- that is an invention of others.
>"The teachings of Christianity as evidenced in the Bible *are* barbaric. Slavery. Torture. Stonings. The subjugation of women [...] You are commanded to kill your neighbour for working on the sabbath?"
Nope again- Jesus never taught any of that. I think you are still stuck on the old testament.
It's all very confusing. Isn't Jesus and God the same thing? Didn't this god command those things in the old testament? This god is not supposed to change it's mind on things. It's all very schizophrenic.
I take the more reasoned approach: none of it is real. it's all poppycock. It needs to go the way of alchemy and phrenology. In the meantime I maintain the opinion that Christianity is an immortal belief system.
You do not go to hell for not believing. You go to hell for committing evil.
Except that you can commit truly heinous atrocities and ask for foregiveness, and you will be spared. What an absolutely immoral teaching. It undoes all we know about ethics and personal responsibility.
Unholy things cannot be united with a holy God. If that sounds unpalatable, apparently Christ agreed, since he was willing to suffer and die to circumvent that on your behalf.
Vicarious redemption is an extremely immoral teaching. The idea that someone else can take the burden of your sins. This is scape-goating and it's a disturbing and unethical teaching.
Do all non-believers (upon death) go to hell without any secondary consideration? Some people do think that, but that's not laid out in any clear fashion. What is clear is that if you repent of evil deeds and choose Christ's path instead, you may have ever confidence of remaining in that forever.
There is no hell. It's a fairy tale. Threats of going there are like threats of being sent to Mordor. It's a made up place. Fiction.
Abrahamic religion is at it's core made up of immoral teachings.
Were you mistakingly thinking I was talking only of Islam? I was referring to all of the Abrahamic religions. Christianity is not better. If someone rapes your daughter the punishment is that the rapist must marry her. Is that a moral teaching? No, it is not. Pretending these barbaric ideas are good and just is like arguing that ice is hot.
I want there to be less superstition in the world and you equate that with castration and genocide? Really?
The way to get people to favour reason over superstition is with a secular government and secular education. But more importantly by ridiculing ridiculous ideas. Reasonable people shouldn't pander to someone else's belief in unicorns, goblins or gods. Ridiculous ideas should be ridiculed. Note: I didn't same we should ridicule people, only the nutty ideas they may have. People deserve respect, ideas do not.
Jesus specifically said he was not replacing the old laws. Not a jot or a tiddle. So you have to add in there the bits about not eating shellfish, wearing mixed thread garments and homosexuality. You have to add in the parts condoning slavery. Not even the New Testament speaks against slavery, it only tells you how you should treat your slaves.
It's only in the New Testament that the idea of an eternity of hell for not believing is introduced. Is this moral? NO! It it not. "Love me or burn forever" is not a moral teaching.
Feel free to only cherry pick the acceptable messages in the Bible, but don't pretend the other commands and laws are not there. You are commanded to kill your neighbour for working on the sabbath? Do you? Of course not, because your morality is better than that in the Bible.
Christianity if nothing like Buddhism. The teachings of Christianity as evidenced in the Bible *are* barbaric. Slavery. Torture. Stonings. The subjugation of women. "No thought for the morrow" is a ridiculous notion.
Don't paint Christianity as being a benign and loving belief system. It isn't, and it never was. If you think it is then it shows you have not read the Bible or you are so selective in the parts you follow as to make you guilty of not doing the things it commands you to do.
Am I anti-religion? Damn right I am, and the recent tragedy reveals one of the reasons why.
Slashdot Mirror
I run KDE 5.29 using Plasma and have a different image per screen (I run a triple head display). I use compiz as a window manager because it has nicer effects than the built in KDE WM.
Yes indeed. I live in New Zealand which is probably the second most remote large land mass for internet access behind only Antarctica (and maybe Iceland) and our internet connection to the rest of the world is quite acceptable. I enjoy 80Mb/s to servers in Europe. Cuba's internet issues have very little to do with geography.
Pointing out that a large percentage of Americans believe in imaginary sky people isn't condescending. It astounds me how the ridiculous meme of religion has pervaded a supposedly first world country. It's time for such superstitious nonsense to be replaced with reason.
Agreed. I think rules like "must include 2 numbers and 2 special characters" should only apply for passwords shorter than 10 characters. My passwords are easy to remember, unique per site and > 22 characters long. I'm happy that's it's secure.
Religion is like homeopathy for the mind. It too is a scam. I await this pronouncement from the government but I won't hold my breath.
It's illegal to rob a house, even if the door is unlocked.
That analogy is a poor one. It's like someone left their back door open and when asked "can I come in" they say "yes".
I can send millions of requests to a poorly secured bank server, until I find a username password that gets a "logged in" response back. I can send a request after that to move money, and the server sends a response back with a reciept.
These are all things the server was configured to do. But I think most people would recognize that as theft.
It would be a poorly configured server. Again, the situation is different. Nothing is taken in the case of a server sending you files. It's not like taking money at all.
If I send a request to a server and it sends a response back, how can that be illegal? Their server was configured to do this. If I ask a server for a file and it provides it to me then I can't see how that makes me a criminal.
I don't think the words "morally" and "taxation" belong in the same sentence. No matter how you think a society should be run, the forced confiscation of private property using a threat of violence is not moral. I am not proposing an alternative, but a lack there-of does not make extortion in any way "moral".
A theocracy banning a pasttime that sees you out seeking for beings that aren't really there.
Heh. Just kidding.
The AppleTV fits well within the tech ecosystem I have at home, it just works after plugging it in and the price is so low as to consider to be pretty much free. As a bonus I get a Netflix app, RedbullTV and Flikr with no additional configuration. VPNing thorugh to different countries is simple too.
We have a few AppleTV devices. One of them is used solely as a digital photo frame using Flickr (it's a cheap way to build a DPF). The primary AppleTV (plugged into the main TV) is used nearly solely for NetFlix (with some RedbullTV too).
How do they know how many people are in a room a turned on TV is in?
<troll>
How many A4s is a letter sized? What's with these weird measurement units?
</troll>
Nice that the NZ government pitched in.
It would be interesting to try something like this on a bigger scale.
I disagree. If I wanted my money to be used for this then I would have donated to the cause. I don't want an organisation making that choice for me. let me choose where my money is spent. I am a New Zealander.
I'm not ridiculing individuals, I'm ridiculing patently absurd ideas. Ridiculous ideas deserve to be ridiculed. People should feel an intellectual shame in believing in goblins, fairies and gods.
Hah! No-one is gullible enough to still believe such nonsense are they?
And if you did, why would you let this app have access to your location? I don't let any apps other than maps and cycling apps have my location.
Unless you're female. Or homosexual. Or atheist.
>"So you have to add in there the bits about not eating shellfish, wearing mixed thread garments and homosexuality."
Old testament, not Jesus' teachings.
>"It's only in the New Testament that the idea of an eternity of hell for not believing is introduced. Is this moral? NO! It it not. "Love me or burn forever" is not a moral teaching."
Nope. Jesus never said anything about hell- that is an invention of others.
http://www.godsplanforall.com/...
>"The teachings of Christianity as evidenced in the Bible *are* barbaric. Slavery. Torture. Stonings. The subjugation of women [...] You are commanded to kill your neighbour for working on the sabbath?"
Nope again- Jesus never taught any of that. I think you are still stuck on the old testament.
It's all very confusing. Isn't Jesus and God the same thing? Didn't this god command those things in the old testament? This god is not supposed to change it's mind on things. It's all very schizophrenic.
I take the more reasoned approach: none of it is real. it's all poppycock. It needs to go the way of alchemy and phrenology. In the meantime I maintain the opinion that Christianity is an immortal belief system.
You do not go to hell for not believing. You go to hell for committing evil.
Except that you can commit truly heinous atrocities and ask for foregiveness, and you will be spared. What an absolutely immoral teaching. It undoes all we know about ethics and personal responsibility.
Unholy things cannot be united with a holy God. If that sounds unpalatable, apparently Christ agreed, since he was willing to suffer and die to circumvent that on your behalf.
Vicarious redemption is an extremely immoral teaching. The idea that someone else can take the burden of your sins. This is scape-goating and it's a disturbing and unethical teaching.
Do all non-believers (upon death) go to hell without any secondary consideration? Some people do think that, but that's not laid out in any clear fashion. What is clear is that if you repent of evil deeds and choose Christ's path instead, you may have ever confidence of remaining in that forever.
There is no hell. It's a fairy tale. Threats of going there are like threats of being sent to Mordor. It's a made up place. Fiction.
Abrahamic religion is at it's core made up of immoral teachings.
Were you mistakingly thinking I was talking only of Islam? I was referring to all of the Abrahamic religions. Christianity is not better. If someone rapes your daughter the punishment is that the rapist must marry her. Is that a moral teaching? No, it is not. Pretending these barbaric ideas are good and just is like arguing that ice is hot.
I said "nearly justifying". I'm saying that I don't think the word "gay" should be in headlines because it's not the cause of this tragedy.
I want there to be less superstition in the world and you equate that with castration and genocide? Really?
The way to get people to favour reason over superstition is with a secular government and secular education. But more importantly by ridiculing ridiculous ideas. Reasonable people shouldn't pander to someone else's belief in unicorns, goblins or gods. Ridiculous ideas should be ridiculed. Note: I didn't same we should ridicule people, only the nutty ideas they may have. People deserve respect, ideas do not.
Jesus specifically said he was not replacing the old laws. Not a jot or a tiddle. So you have to add in there the bits about not eating shellfish, wearing mixed thread garments and homosexuality. You have to add in the parts condoning slavery. Not even the New Testament speaks against slavery, it only tells you how you should treat your slaves.
It's only in the New Testament that the idea of an eternity of hell for not believing is introduced. Is this moral? NO! It it not. "Love me or burn forever" is not a moral teaching.
Feel free to only cherry pick the acceptable messages in the Bible, but don't pretend the other commands and laws are not there. You are commanded to kill your neighbour for working on the sabbath? Do you? Of course not, because your morality is better than that in the Bible.
Christianity if nothing like Buddhism. The teachings of Christianity as evidenced in the Bible *are* barbaric. Slavery. Torture. Stonings. The subjugation of women. "No thought for the morrow" is a ridiculous notion.
Don't paint Christianity as being a benign and loving belief system. It isn't, and it never was. If you think it is then it shows you have not read the Bible or you are so selective in the parts you follow as to make you guilty of not doing the things it commands you to do.
Am I anti-religion? Damn right I am, and the recent tragedy reveals one of the reasons why.