If I am running a utility and I buy $1M worth of solar panels, and life of the panels is 25 years, with 10MWh of generation per year, then at a minimum I have to charge $1M/250MWh plus maintenance on my equipment and transmission lines and overhead... and markup for profits over that (the numbers are imaginary, but the calculation is just basic business). The number might be small, but X/Y != negative number if both X (cost) and Y(production) are always positive...
Because contrary to popular belief not all knowledge is available on Google (nor is Google a replacement for intelligence or the capability to reason), and that link does not explain why, only that spot prices went negative. When you can show me that paying people to take a product that you make is a valid business model, get back to me, but my assertion still stands. Somewhere there are government subsidies or other government market manipulation that is causing prices to become negative on rare occasions... It is possible for prices to get very low during a glut of supply, but never negative.
Yes, but there should be a federal law prescribing that if you as a company include a non-compete in any employee or contractor agreement, you are required to pay 1.5x their annual salary per year the non-compete is applied as severance, up to a limit of 4x the average wage paid by the company. If Amazon's average wage paid is $50k, then top executives top out at $200k/year. The point of making it 1.5x is so that the employee can also continue to buy and have benefits. A programmer making $80k/year would get $120k/year which is probably close to their overhead + salary cost to the company.
The point is that there are sometimes valid reasons for non-compete contracts, but right now in the US, where they are legal (they aren't legal in some states), they are completely one sided in favor of the employer. If the ex Amazon VP were smart, he would have moved temporarily out to California or one of the other states where non-competes are illegal, and then Amazon would have had to sit and spin.
Negative prices for energy are a pure fiction. If this were actually the case, the utility would pay you to use electricity. The reality here is that there are government subsidies or other government interference that is artificially distorting the market and that offset, minus the reduction in cost due to a glut in supply, may have netted a negative price for electricity temporarily. But all those wind turbines and other "green" systems are not free, thus if you have:
Some cost for green systems/total energy developed from those systems = positive cost per unit energy
Ignoring abusive A-holes is actually quite good form, and elevates the discussion. It has been far too long since we had a leader with the balls to call out the fascist alt-left liberals for being abusive, violent, factually incorrect, etc. whether it is the media making up false news, or individual liberals who are losing their shit as Trump does what he campaigned to do (and what those who elected him want him to do). As Barak Hussain Obama, our first Arab president http://www.cf-cia.org/obama_li... once remarked, "Elections have consequences."
I agree. The core of the problem here is akin to police finding a locked, impenetrable safe, and the key is hidden at another location that only the defendant knows. There is no judge in the US who would try to compel a defendant to tell police the location of the hidden key, yet these Luddite judges somehow think that they can compel individuals to divulge pass-codes (a hidden key that only the defendant knows about) to unlock their phones and therefore potentially incriminate themselves. The 5th clearly does protect against all forms of self incrimination, and unfortunately the only way this will be put to rest is if we can get the supreme court to rule or congress to pass a law clarifying that passwords cannot be compelled (along with protecting email and browsing history as private information requiring a warrant for police)... Or someone invents the self wiping phone, that wipes all data if it detects any form of tampering or is not properly logged in to at least every X hours, or some such measure to make it useless.
Importance != popularity. Civilization would completely collapse in about a week if all the engineers, technicians and operators that work to deliver clean water to your tap magically vanished along with their knowledge. Clean, potable water is 100% critical to civilization and without it millions die in a week or two and civilization collapses.
OTOH, you could nuke Hollywood from orbit and life for most of the planet, even in the US would continue uninterrupted...
You can use a one way opto-isolator to 100% air gap your system while still transmitting data for logging and tracking purposes.
Our most important secrets and most secure computer systems are air gapped inside Faraday cages. Physical access is controlled by armed guards. That is about as secure as humanly possible at this time...
And if they try to do that to the US under Trump, $5 says they get a cruise missile up the ass (we have specific missiles that home in on Russian made jamming equipment, demonstrated during the second Iraq war). Russia prospered under the feckless Obama administration (remember the "reset button" with Hildabeast?) The Trump/Russia collusion BS is just a smokescreen for the Democrats to try and hobble the Trump administration. Trump and Putin both know they aren't allies, and Putin knows Trump is not afraid to push the button after the Syrian missile strike. Only the far lefties and the media believe the Russian collusion BS, and the way things are going, they are all going to wind up in prison for hitting people in the head with bike locks or banned from TV for posting pictures with Trump's decapitated head...
Maybe in your fantasy land. In the real world, humans do not have the capability to make the entire planet uninhabitable. Stop confusing scifi with reality...
The first amendment gives wide latitude to freedom of speech, just see how many libel (the case in question was a Facebook post, so written word) cases have been won in the last 50 years. Any lawyer will tell you that it is nearly impossible to win such a case. Gawker lost to Hogan because they had no valid reason except prurient interest and they broke a number of laws to do it. Outside of that, you can call all sorts of names etc and be immune to libel/slander laws; or nearly every Democrat and liberal rag would owe Trump millions, since they have called him a traitor, collaborator, colluder with Rusia, etc. without any evidence (there are several honest Democrats/reporters who acknowledge this, but not many)...
While you are technically correct, you are citing the one in a billion moonshot (Stuxnet), which is the exception instead of the rule. As a business, if you airgap your critical infrastructure and ALSO follow best practices (that was assumed on my part, since you have infrastructure that needs to be airgapped in the first place) unless you are being targeted specifically by the NSA, CIA or other state level attackers who also have human assets in play, you are pretty safe...
And this, boys and girls, is what you get when you don't have a constitution that guarantees free speech. The lefties in the US are trying for the same thing by equating speech they don't like to assault and then rioting http://www.foxnews.com/politic... and beating people in the head with bike locks to shut down speech they disagree with. http://www.nbclosangeles.com/n... Every fascist leftie, piss ant bureaucrat and judge becomes their own little dictator who can shit on you from on high. The only thing stopping this crap in the US is our constitution and enforcement of the rule of law (which apparently doesn't happen in Berkeley, CA...
Um no, that is not the solution, the solution is to air gap anything you cant afford to have break due to hacking, and hunt down criminal hackers around the world. Treat state sponsored hacking like an act of war, and make sure everyone knows you will respond with devastating force.
Air gapping critical infrastructure should be a federal law, because anything connected can eventually be hacked given enough time and resources.
It is not necessarily magic, but the mechanisms are currently unknown to us (and thus appear supernatural to our perception and understanding).
Right, so science makes no claim to deal with that at all. It's impossible to use science to explore that realm.
It is not impossible to explore that realm, we just don't know how yet. It was impossible to explore the moon or Mars for medieval man, that didn't mean it was actually impossible in the absolute sense.
Your above assertion is like saying that because cars are built in a factory, setting off a bomb in a junk yard can also create the same exact car...
At least I'm using a philosophy with a demonstrated record of success to try and understand how the car was actually built, whereas you are content knowing that it was conjured by an unobservable sky pixie.
No, I am relying on the eyewitness accounts of tens of thousands of historical, real people who have had first hand interactions with the supernatural. You can blow it off all you want, but that means you are ignoring thousands of years of recorded history (or revising it to fit your bias, which a true scientist would never do). Science as a philosophy tells us what is knowable to us. If something is unknowable to us, science by definition fails to explain it. There are other tools besides science, history being one, logic being another. They are no less valid at understanding our world (the scientific method is actually just a limited extension of logic that deals with understanding only the physical world).
And your point is probably valid, however, if Mechanical Engineers (ASME, ASM, ASHRAE, SAE, etc.), Electrical Engineers (IEEE), Civil Engineers (ASCE), Aerospace Engineers (AIAA, etc.) can all control their antisocial, autistic predispositions long enough to form professional organizations for their betterment and the betterment of society, it seems like Software Engineers should be able to do it too. COBOL has been around since what 1960? I mean thats roughly 57 years of software engineering...
There are professional organizations, ACM and IEEE.
It's similar to asking why people speak more than 2 languages.
Ok, so first off IEEE is not really a software organization, seeing as it is the "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers". None of the software engineers on my teams have ever been members, whereas most EEs have been. I have never heard of ACM before (Association for Computing Machinery, I had to look it up), but it still kinda sounds off base as a software engineering professional society... From their site: "ACM is the world's largest educational and scientific computing society uniting the world's computing educators, researchers and professionals to inspire dialogue, share resources and address the field's challenges. ACM strengthens the profession's collective voice through strong leadership, promotion of the highest standards, and recognition of technical excellence. ACM supports the professional growth of its members by providing opportunities for life-long learning, career development, and professional networking." Computing is what a 12 year old does in the computer lab in MS word... Further, software engineers are not educators, scientists, or researchers, they are applied logicians, just as ME and EE are applied physicists...
Second off, it is not similar to speaking more than 2 languages, its more like having a job description where you know 5-10 languages but are expected to know well over 50. The key complexity of software is logic, and the various languages facilitate that logic to different degrees and complexities, but that is a hell of a lot of different languages to learn, and some company can squeeze out a new language tomorrow that your boss might get name recognition at the next board meeting if he can get you to program in it, so guess what, now you need to know yet another language that encodes the same basic logic, just slightly differently...
As an engineer who has worked alongside with software engineers for decades, it seems like a fair amount of the pain associated with software engineering is inflicted by the market and big businesses. Why do you have arcane syntax? Why are there no tools to check and automatically correct simple syntax errors? Why are there 50+ different programming languages (I get why there should be more than one, but I can't envision a need for more than maybe 10-12)?
Much of the pain and obscene complexity and continual churn of new languages could be dealt with if software engineers formed a professional organization with the basic charter of approving new languages before they could be put into use. After all, a language is useless unless people use it. With some relatively straight forward guidelines, any new languages wanting to be accepted could be required to use common syntax where appropriate, common commands and so on, at least somewhat simplifying the learning curve and the complexity of writing code on a new platform.
My God is rational and logical. (Where do you think logic and mathematics comes from in the first place? It is inherent to the existence of the universe.) He created a universe filled with laws that can be observed and understood, both physical laws and moral laws (where do those laws come from, by the way, if there is no Creator?). If you violate either, there are consequences, whether you like it or not. That is the harmony of my worldview as an applied scientist. You seem to harbor a false sense of moral superiority and at the same time an intense intolerance to those of a different worldview about whom you make many intolerant and bigoted assumptions https://www.merriam-webster.co... . You might want to take a minute and think about why you hate Christians, and what that means about you and your worldview.
I am happy to discuss philosophy or science with anyone who is interested, but name calling obscenity laced irrational tirades are hardly productive.
Yep, the probability is so low in fact that it is just a total SWAG theory and has never actually occurred at all, either in the lab under artificial, ideal circumstances, or in the wild. The Evolutionist argument that it must have happened once because we exist is flawed in that it excludes all other explanations, and an extra-dimensional alien being creating life on earth is much more likely than an impossible event of spontaneous generation, which was disproven centuries ago. The Evolutionists just exclude this possibility (and all of the other evidence to support this) because they happen to not like the other consequences that go along with it. Evolutionists call Creationists all manner of names because the believe in this higher being, while Evolutionists believe that rocks and mineral water became humans... and every other creature on the planet. You tell me which is more implausible.
To be clear, we believe an intelligent, extra-dimensional Being created all things in this universe. It is not necessarily magic, but the mechanisms are currently unknown to us (and thus appear supernatural to our perception and understanding). This Creator also left instructions for how to act and there are many people out there who strongly dislike these instructions and are willing to go to great lengths to pretend that the Creator does not exist...
Even if you manage to spend 100,000 man hours in a multi-million dollar lab and figure out how to create living tissue from non living material, all you have proven is that to create life from non life it requires directed, intelligent intent. Your above assertion is like saying that because cars are built in a factory, setting off a bomb in a junk yard can also create the same exact car... Please try to control your emotions and apply a modicum of logical intelligence to the discussion...
As the thousands of man hours tick up higher and higher as we attempt to understand how to create life, it only re-enforces what the man on the street with basic common sense already knows: Life, including man, was designed by a Designer, not by accident. If it takes 100,000 man hours (already likely spent) figuring out how to create life, and a multi million dollar lab to create it, all that proves is that it requires intelligence and direction to create life, not random chance (I doubt that we will ever be able to truly create life, because even if you take an organism, with all the parts and chemicals in the right place, once it has died, we can't figure out how to bring it back to life, let alone creating all the complex molecules, organelles and chemical processes from scratch and then getting them to come to life). At a basic level, we don't understand what makes one thing alive and another thing dead (sure, we understand the biochemical processes and actions, but the spark of life that causes those things to begin? No. (It's like building a mechanical clock, half of the knowledge required is how to build all the parts, the other half is how to properly apply an outside force to start the clock in motion. Otherwise, Frankenstein's monster would not be just fiction). Every process requiring greater entropy is a basic physics principle (2nd law of Thermodynamics) that evolution ignores. Evolutionists believe in science from the dark ages (spontaneous generation, disproved centuries ago) and their cognitive dissonance is amazing. Even this article is not about actual scientific discovery but speculation "Scientists may be"...
Evolutionists continually do mental back flips to try and justify their quackery and at this point people who have been paying attention have figured out that the Evolutionists of today will be viewed in much the way as the Vatican of the dark ages in the future. Evolutionary science today is science in name only, because they start with a conclusion and exclude all evidence (or opinions, or scientists) who indicate otherwise...
There is a vast difference between the statement "most terrorists are Muslim" and "most Muslims are terrorists." While your statement may be factually true, the conclusion you're implying from it is not.
I mean hell if we want to take your line of thinking to a stupid extreme: Straight men have started and controlled pretty much every war and tragedy in human history, so I guess we should just get rid of them? Time for heterophobia to get going already! Oh wait, your logic should only apply when you want it to? How convenient.
First off, pretty sure I didn't say most Muslims are terrorists, that is a straw man argument popularized by Obama and the Left, and no one else makes it.
Sorry, but you are buying into the PC/Islamist propaganda. Muslims make up just 3% of the US population, yet they are the only religious group to carry out multiple, organized, religiously motivated mass murders in the last 30 years. Islam is a violent religion, and while not all Muslims are active terrorists, a poll a while back indicated that 30% of US Muslims agree with radical violence against the US. Time and again we have seen half assed Muslims pick up arms and become hardcore fanatics and subsequently murder US citizens (Nidal Hassan, San Bernadino, Florida gay bar, etc.) You may not like the reality, it may not agree with your worldview, but it is reality none the less. I know Muslims in my personal life, and I take them as individuals, but I also don't turn my back on them and I would never trust them like I would a fellow American with a Judeo-Christian background, because I have read the Koran cover to cover and I know that it condones the deception and murder of non-believers for gain among other things. Liberals want to project their morality onto Muslims, but the reality is there to see, just look at Muslim majority nations: women are treated horribly, raped, subject to honor killings, child rape is rampant, there is no freedom of religious worship, homosexuals are routinely murdered, minorities like Jews are singled out and persecuted and Islam is involved in 17 of the 19 active wars around the world. Islam is not a religion of peace and they are diametrically opposed to what most US liberals hold dear. The cognitive dissonance in the left is truly amazing.
And no, white hetero males have not "started and controlled pretty much every war and tragedy in human history" that is just the liberal brainwashing you have been fed. I am immune to such bullshit because I actually know history. Here are a few examples of non-white-hetero "war and tragedy":
World war 2 Japan was pretty evil and murdered and brutalized millions of Chinese as well as US POWs (they are not "white" last time I checked) If you want a homosexual example, how about Jeffrey Dahmer, he was pretty evil too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Pol pot the Asian dictator murdered around 2.5 million of his own people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Mao Tse Tung: communists in China (not white Anglos) murdered millions of innocents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... The communist north Koreans have murdered at least a million of their own citizens since the revolution. Muslims have started over 100 wars since 600 AD and have killed millions: http://www1.cbn.com/churchandm...
On the other side of the coin, the US has been controlled by white male presidents since it's founding and has been almost universally a force for good in the world. Our one blemish, slavery, was inherited from MUSLIMS (yes, they started and ran the majority of the African slave trade as well as the white slave trade in the Mediterranean). The US stopped slavery, first by sendin
"Brutality and killing has only ever resulted in MORE people being brutalized and killed, is never actually a solution."
Spoken like a true, brainwashed, ignorant liberal... Apparently you failed history class. Here are a few highlights of the exact opposite: WW2 ended "new Socialist" Hitler's bid for world domination and extermination of around 8 million people of "lesser races", Korea stopped the brutalization and murder of millions of south Koreans (see what happened when the US failed in Vietnam and the millions of people brutalized and 7.5 million murdered there after we left http://rebirthofreason.com/Art... ), Desert Storm (the people of Kuwait were saved from brutalization and murder), even the crusades for all their faults, stopped the bloody, violent, imperialist expansion of Islam http://www.americanthinker.com... .
Trumps intelligence was underestimated by a lot of people, including you, apparently. How smart he actually is will be determined by his record.
Considering your own apparent lack of basic history, I suggest you may better use your time reading up on history so that in the future you can make a more reasonable argument.
Slashdot Mirror
Simple logic still applies:
If I am running a utility and I buy $1M worth of solar panels, and life of the panels is 25 years, with 10MWh of generation per year, then at a minimum I have to charge $1M/250MWh plus maintenance on my equipment and transmission lines and overhead... and markup for profits over that (the numbers are imaginary, but the calculation is just basic business). The number might be small, but X/Y != negative number if both X (cost) and Y(production) are always positive...
Because contrary to popular belief not all knowledge is available on Google (nor is Google a replacement for intelligence or the capability to reason), and that link does not explain why, only that spot prices went negative. When you can show me that paying people to take a product that you make is a valid business model, get back to me, but my assertion still stands. Somewhere there are government subsidies or other government market manipulation that is causing prices to become negative on rare occasions... It is possible for prices to get very low during a glut of supply, but never negative.
Yes, but there should be a federal law prescribing that if you as a company include a non-compete in any employee or contractor agreement, you are required to pay 1.5x their annual salary per year the non-compete is applied as severance, up to a limit of 4x the average wage paid by the company. If Amazon's average wage paid is $50k, then top executives top out at $200k/year. The point of making it 1.5x is so that the employee can also continue to buy and have benefits. A programmer making $80k/year would get $120k/year which is probably close to their overhead + salary cost to the company.
The point is that there are sometimes valid reasons for non-compete contracts, but right now in the US, where they are legal (they aren't legal in some states), they are completely one sided in favor of the employer. If the ex Amazon VP were smart, he would have moved temporarily out to California or one of the other states where non-competes are illegal, and then Amazon would have had to sit and spin.
NO, the utilities are being paid elsewhere and you are getting a fraction of that as a pass through...
Negative prices for energy are a pure fiction. If this were actually the case, the utility would pay you to use electricity. The reality here is that there are government subsidies or other government interference that is artificially distorting the market and that offset, minus the reduction in cost due to a glut in supply, may have netted a negative price for electricity temporarily. But all those wind turbines and other "green" systems are not free, thus if you have:
Some cost for green systems/total energy developed from those systems = positive cost per unit energy
That cost has to be paid by someone.
Ignoring abusive A-holes is actually quite good form, and elevates the discussion. It has been far too long since we had a leader with the balls to call out the fascist alt-left liberals for being abusive, violent, factually incorrect, etc. whether it is the media making up false news, or individual liberals who are losing their shit as Trump does what he campaigned to do (and what those who elected him want him to do). As Barak Hussain Obama, our first Arab president http://www.cf-cia.org/obama_li... once remarked, "Elections have consequences."
I agree. The core of the problem here is akin to police finding a locked, impenetrable safe, and the key is hidden at another location that only the defendant knows. There is no judge in the US who would try to compel a defendant to tell police the location of the hidden key, yet these Luddite judges somehow think that they can compel individuals to divulge pass-codes (a hidden key that only the defendant knows about) to unlock their phones and therefore potentially incriminate themselves. The 5th clearly does protect against all forms of self incrimination, and unfortunately the only way this will be put to rest is if we can get the supreme court to rule or congress to pass a law clarifying that passwords cannot be compelled (along with protecting email and browsing history as private information requiring a warrant for police)... Or someone invents the self wiping phone, that wipes all data if it detects any form of tampering or is not properly logged in to at least every X hours, or some such measure to make it useless.
Importance != popularity. Civilization would completely collapse in about a week if all the engineers, technicians and operators that work to deliver clean water to your tap magically vanished along with their knowledge. Clean, potable water is 100% critical to civilization and without it millions die in a week or two and civilization collapses.
OTOH, you could nuke Hollywood from orbit and life for most of the planet, even in the US would continue uninterrupted...
You can use a one way opto-isolator to 100% air gap your system while still transmitting data for logging and tracking purposes.
Our most important secrets and most secure computer systems are air gapped inside Faraday cages. Physical access is controlled by armed guards. That is about as secure as humanly possible at this time...
And if they try to do that to the US under Trump, $5 says they get a cruise missile up the ass (we have specific missiles that home in on Russian made jamming equipment, demonstrated during the second Iraq war). Russia prospered under the feckless Obama administration (remember the "reset button" with Hildabeast?) The Trump/Russia collusion BS is just a smokescreen for the Democrats to try and hobble the Trump administration. Trump and Putin both know they aren't allies, and Putin knows Trump is not afraid to push the button after the Syrian missile strike. Only the far lefties and the media believe the Russian collusion BS, and the way things are going, they are all going to wind up in prison for hitting people in the head with bike locks or banned from TV for posting pictures with Trump's decapitated head...
Maybe in your fantasy land. In the real world, humans do not have the capability to make the entire planet uninhabitable. Stop confusing scifi with reality...
The first amendment gives wide latitude to freedom of speech, just see how many libel (the case in question was a Facebook post, so written word) cases have been won in the last 50 years. Any lawyer will tell you that it is nearly impossible to win such a case. Gawker lost to Hogan because they had no valid reason except prurient interest and they broke a number of laws to do it. Outside of that, you can call all sorts of names etc and be immune to libel/slander laws; or nearly every Democrat and liberal rag would owe Trump millions, since they have called him a traitor, collaborator, colluder with Rusia, etc. without any evidence (there are several honest Democrats/reporters who acknowledge this, but not many)...
While you are technically correct, you are citing the one in a billion moonshot (Stuxnet), which is the exception instead of the rule. As a business, if you airgap your critical infrastructure and ALSO follow best practices (that was assumed on my part, since you have infrastructure that needs to be airgapped in the first place) unless you are being targeted specifically by the NSA, CIA or other state level attackers who also have human assets in play, you are pretty safe...
And this, boys and girls, is what you get when you don't have a constitution that guarantees free speech. The lefties in the US are trying for the same thing by equating speech they don't like to assault and then rioting http://www.foxnews.com/politic... and beating people in the head with bike locks to shut down speech they disagree with. http://www.nbclosangeles.com/n... Every fascist leftie, piss ant bureaucrat and judge becomes their own little dictator who can shit on you from on high. The only thing stopping this crap in the US is our constitution and enforcement of the rule of law (which apparently doesn't happen in Berkeley, CA...
Um no, that is not the solution, the solution is to air gap anything you cant afford to have break due to hacking, and hunt down criminal hackers around the world. Treat state sponsored hacking like an act of war, and make sure everyone knows you will respond with devastating force.
Air gapping critical infrastructure should be a federal law, because anything connected can eventually be hacked given enough time and resources.
It is not necessarily magic, but the mechanisms are currently unknown to us (and thus appear supernatural to our perception and understanding).
Right, so science makes no claim to deal with that at all. It's impossible to use science to explore that realm.
It is not impossible to explore that realm, we just don't know how yet. It was impossible to explore the moon or Mars for medieval man, that didn't mean it was actually impossible in the absolute sense.
Your above assertion is like saying that because cars are built in a factory, setting off a bomb in a junk yard can also create the same exact car...
At least I'm using a philosophy with a demonstrated record of success to try and understand how the car was actually built, whereas you are content knowing that it was conjured by an unobservable sky pixie.
No, I am relying on the eyewitness accounts of tens of thousands of historical, real people who have had first hand interactions with the supernatural. You can blow it off all you want, but that means you are ignoring thousands of years of recorded history (or revising it to fit your bias, which a true scientist would never do). Science as a philosophy tells us what is knowable to us. If something is unknowable to us, science by definition fails to explain it. There are other tools besides science, history being one, logic being another. They are no less valid at understanding our world (the scientific method is actually just a limited extension of logic that deals with understanding only the physical world).
And your point is probably valid, however, if Mechanical Engineers (ASME, ASM, ASHRAE, SAE, etc.), Electrical Engineers (IEEE), Civil Engineers (ASCE), Aerospace Engineers (AIAA, etc.) can all control their antisocial, autistic predispositions long enough to form professional organizations for their betterment and the betterment of society, it seems like Software Engineers should be able to do it too. COBOL has been around since what 1960? I mean thats roughly 57 years of software engineering...
There are professional organizations, ACM and IEEE.
It's similar to asking why people speak more than 2 languages.
Ok, so first off IEEE is not really a software organization, seeing as it is the "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers". None of the software engineers on my teams have ever been members, whereas most EEs have been. I have never heard of ACM before (Association for Computing Machinery, I had to look it up), but it still kinda sounds off base as a software engineering professional society... From their site: "ACM is the world's largest educational and scientific computing society uniting the world's computing educators, researchers and professionals to inspire dialogue, share resources and address the field's challenges. ACM strengthens the profession's collective voice through strong leadership, promotion of the highest standards, and recognition of technical excellence. ACM supports the professional growth of its members by providing opportunities for life-long learning, career development, and professional networking." Computing is what a 12 year old does in the computer lab in MS word... Further, software engineers are not educators, scientists, or researchers, they are applied logicians, just as ME and EE are applied physicists...
Second off, it is not similar to speaking more than 2 languages, its more like having a job description where you know 5-10 languages but are expected to know well over 50. The key complexity of software is logic, and the various languages facilitate that logic to different degrees and complexities, but that is a hell of a lot of different languages to learn, and some company can squeeze out a new language tomorrow that your boss might get name recognition at the next board meeting if he can get you to program in it, so guess what, now you need to know yet another language that encodes the same basic logic, just slightly differently...
As an engineer who has worked alongside with software engineers for decades, it seems like a fair amount of the pain associated with software engineering is inflicted by the market and big businesses. Why do you have arcane syntax? Why are there no tools to check and automatically correct simple syntax errors? Why are there 50+ different programming languages (I get why there should be more than one, but I can't envision a need for more than maybe 10-12)?
Much of the pain and obscene complexity and continual churn of new languages could be dealt with if software engineers formed a professional organization with the basic charter of approving new languages before they could be put into use. After all, a language is useless unless people use it. With some relatively straight forward guidelines, any new languages wanting to be accepted could be required to use common syntax where appropriate, common commands and so on, at least somewhat simplifying the learning curve and the complexity of writing code on a new platform.
My God is rational and logical. (Where do you think logic and mathematics comes from in the first place? It is inherent to the existence of the universe.) He created a universe filled with laws that can be observed and understood, both physical laws and moral laws (where do those laws come from, by the way, if there is no Creator?). If you violate either, there are consequences, whether you like it or not. That is the harmony of my worldview as an applied scientist. You seem to harbor a false sense of moral superiority and at the same time an intense intolerance to those of a different worldview about whom you make many intolerant and bigoted assumptions https://www.merriam-webster.co... . You might want to take a minute and think about why you hate Christians, and what that means about you and your worldview.
I am happy to discuss philosophy or science with anyone who is interested, but name calling obscenity laced irrational tirades are hardly productive.
Yep, the probability is so low in fact that it is just a total SWAG theory and has never actually occurred at all, either in the lab under artificial, ideal circumstances, or in the wild. The Evolutionist argument that it must have happened once because we exist is flawed in that it excludes all other explanations, and an extra-dimensional alien being creating life on earth is much more likely than an impossible event of spontaneous generation, which was disproven centuries ago. The Evolutionists just exclude this possibility (and all of the other evidence to support this) because they happen to not like the other consequences that go along with it. Evolutionists call Creationists all manner of names because the believe in this higher being, while Evolutionists believe that rocks and mineral water became humans... and every other creature on the planet. You tell me which is more implausible.
To be clear, we believe an intelligent, extra-dimensional Being created all things in this universe. It is not necessarily magic, but the mechanisms are currently unknown to us (and thus appear supernatural to our perception and understanding). This Creator also left instructions for how to act and there are many people out there who strongly dislike these instructions and are willing to go to great lengths to pretend that the Creator does not exist...
Even if you manage to spend 100,000 man hours in a multi-million dollar lab and figure out how to create living tissue from non living material, all you have proven is that to create life from non life it requires directed, intelligent intent. Your above assertion is like saying that because cars are built in a factory, setting off a bomb in a junk yard can also create the same exact car... Please try to control your emotions and apply a modicum of logical intelligence to the discussion...
As the thousands of man hours tick up higher and higher as we attempt to understand how to create life, it only re-enforces what the man on the street with basic common sense already knows: Life, including man, was designed by a Designer, not by accident. If it takes 100,000 man hours (already likely spent) figuring out how to create life, and a multi million dollar lab to create it, all that proves is that it requires intelligence and direction to create life, not random chance (I doubt that we will ever be able to truly create life, because even if you take an organism, with all the parts and chemicals in the right place, once it has died, we can't figure out how to bring it back to life, let alone creating all the complex molecules, organelles and chemical processes from scratch and then getting them to come to life). At a basic level, we don't understand what makes one thing alive and another thing dead (sure, we understand the biochemical processes and actions, but the spark of life that causes those things to begin? No. (It's like building a mechanical clock, half of the knowledge required is how to build all the parts, the other half is how to properly apply an outside force to start the clock in motion. Otherwise, Frankenstein's monster would not be just fiction). Every process requiring greater entropy is a basic physics principle (2nd law of Thermodynamics) that evolution ignores. Evolutionists believe in science from the dark ages (spontaneous generation, disproved centuries ago) and their cognitive dissonance is amazing. Even this article is not about actual scientific discovery but speculation "Scientists may be"...
Evolutionists continually do mental back flips to try and justify their quackery and at this point people who have been paying attention have figured out that the Evolutionists of today will be viewed in much the way as the Vatican of the dark ages in the future. Evolutionary science today is science in name only, because they start with a conclusion and exclude all evidence (or opinions, or scientists) who indicate otherwise...
There is a vast difference between the statement "most terrorists are Muslim" and "most Muslims are terrorists." While your statement may be factually true, the conclusion you're implying from it is not.
I mean hell if we want to take your line of thinking to a stupid extreme: Straight men have started and controlled pretty much every war and tragedy in human history, so I guess we should just get rid of them? Time for heterophobia to get going already! Oh wait, your logic should only apply when you want it to? How convenient.
First off, pretty sure I didn't say most Muslims are terrorists, that is a straw man argument popularized by Obama and the Left, and no one else makes it.
Sorry, but you are buying into the PC/Islamist propaganda. Muslims make up just 3% of the US population, yet they are the only religious group to carry out multiple, organized, religiously motivated mass murders in the last 30 years. Islam is a violent religion, and while not all Muslims are active terrorists, a poll a while back indicated that 30% of US Muslims agree with radical violence against the US. Time and again we have seen half assed Muslims pick up arms and become hardcore fanatics and subsequently murder US citizens (Nidal Hassan, San Bernadino, Florida gay bar, etc.) You may not like the reality, it may not agree with your worldview, but it is reality none the less. I know Muslims in my personal life, and I take them as individuals, but I also don't turn my back on them and I would never trust them like I would a fellow American with a Judeo-Christian background, because I have read the Koran cover to cover and I know that it condones the deception and murder of non-believers for gain among other things. Liberals want to project their morality onto Muslims, but the reality is there to see, just look at Muslim majority nations: women are treated horribly, raped, subject to honor killings, child rape is rampant, there is no freedom of religious worship, homosexuals are routinely murdered, minorities like Jews are singled out and persecuted and Islam is involved in 17 of the 19 active wars around the world. Islam is not a religion of peace and they are diametrically opposed to what most US liberals hold dear. The cognitive dissonance in the left is truly amazing.
And no, white hetero males have not "started and controlled pretty much every war and tragedy in human history" that is just the liberal brainwashing you have been fed. I am immune to such bullshit because I actually know history. Here are a few examples of non-white-hetero "war and tragedy":
World war 2 Japan was pretty evil and murdered and brutalized millions of Chinese as well as US POWs (they are not "white" last time I checked)
If you want a homosexual example, how about Jeffrey Dahmer, he was pretty evil too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Pol pot the Asian dictator murdered around 2.5 million of his own people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Mao Tse Tung: communists in China (not white Anglos) murdered millions of innocents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The communist north Koreans have murdered at least a million of their own citizens since the revolution.
Muslims have started over 100 wars since 600 AD and have killed millions: http://www1.cbn.com/churchandm...
On the other side of the coin, the US has been controlled by white male presidents since it's founding and has been almost universally a force for good in the world. Our one blemish, slavery, was inherited from MUSLIMS (yes, they started and ran the majority of the African slave trade as well as the white slave trade in the Mediterranean). The US stopped slavery, first by sendin
"Brutality and killing has only ever resulted in MORE people being brutalized and killed, is never actually a solution."
Spoken like a true, brainwashed, ignorant liberal... Apparently you failed history class. Here are a few highlights of the exact opposite: WW2 ended "new Socialist" Hitler's bid for world domination and extermination of around 8 million people of "lesser races", Korea stopped the brutalization and murder of millions of south Koreans (see what happened when the US failed in Vietnam and the millions of people brutalized and 7.5 million murdered there after we left http://rebirthofreason.com/Art... ), Desert Storm (the people of Kuwait were saved from brutalization and murder), even the crusades for all their faults, stopped the bloody, violent, imperialist expansion of Islam http://www.americanthinker.com... .
Trumps intelligence was underestimated by a lot of people, including you, apparently. How smart he actually is will be determined by his record.
Considering your own apparent lack of basic history, I suggest you may better use your time reading up on history so that in the future you can make a more reasonable argument.