The essence of any religion, including Christianity, is that logic and reason are less important than faith. There's no question that when convenient, religion would like to go along with logic and reason. The problem is when they conflict with faith, the religious are supposed to go with faith.
The usual response would be to get security to escort them to the exit.
If the IT punks tried that in any place I've worked at, *they* would be the ones out of a job. IT staff are like janitors -- they may not like to clean up messes the real employees make, but their job is to clean up messes with a smile -- it is hardly their place to criticize users for making them, as the users typically have far more valuable skills than a mere MSCE certification.
Do you seriously have a point other than claiming (completely unsourced by the way) that a non-scientist born in the middle of the 19th century was a creationist as defense of those ideas? Reading more about outdated ideas which are no longer seriously considered by the scientific community is not really a useful way for anyone to spend their time.
1) Fundamentalism as a *term* may be late 19th century and a reaction to evolution-- but the ideas themselves are what people believed before they had any scientific alternative -- just like how classical physics wasn't called that until relativity and quantum mechanics provided an alternative.
2) I see nothing in the wikipedia article to suggest that Wilson was an intellectual in any broad sense; he didn't contribute to multiple fields of study -- in fact his primary achievements seem to be in administration, not research of any kind -- nor do I see any evidence of any interest on his part in science other than funding a school of science while president of Princeton.
But the point is I get annoyed when people bring up famous people from other eras as defense of silly ideas. It's not their fault -- they didn't know any better. But we know more, and future generations will be even more knowledgeable.
He as 3 years old when origin of the species was published, was a recognized intellectual and was president of Princeton. You think he wasn't aware of Origin of the Species?
Quite possibly yes. Remember that America wasn't the center of science until after WWII. Probably most of America hadn't even heard of Darwin until the Scopes trial put evolution in the newspapers. And I'm not quite sure about Wilson being a "recognized intellectual" -- he was known as a historian, but not a general thinker outside his field, the way, say, Richard Feynman knew more than physics.
It's also worth mentioning that Wilson was born before the _Origin_ was published. So while he doesn't get any points for keeping up with scientific breakthroughs in his lifetime, that's a *big* difference from someone born in the 20th century refusing to accept the scientific consensus.
Holy shit. How you believe we originated really matters on whether you should have control of nuclear codes?
Because Fundamentalism not only deals with where we came but how we supposedly end too. Jesus can't come back until Armageddon happens according to biblical mythology -- so anyone who takes the mythology seriously might want to speed up the process...
The problem is that in the real world, you can't just let LaTeX do its thing and make your document "beautiful" (according to Lamport's and Knuth's idea of beauty) -- quite often the journal editor, thesis office, whatever, wants the formatting just *so*, and trying to get the formatting that way in LaTeX is like fighting a mule. Of course, the right way to handle this is is for the people in charge to create packages which will do the work for you, but often the people see the formatting issue as *your* problem and not *theirs*.
I would like to inquire exactly how you get these type of grants. I'm all ears. I'm a computer science major in college right now.
Basically you go to the web site of a relevant funding agency like the NSF and look at their current "call for proposals". Once you find one that is relevant to what you want to do, you write a proposal detailing what you want to do, how much it will cost, and why it is important. In practice you should either have a doctorate in a relevant field or be well on the way to getting one before writing a grant. Also, it helps if you are working at university or research institute because such places have grants offices that can give you advice on how much things are likely to cost. This is important because an unreasonably high or low budget is likely to doom a grant proposal.
But it's not. I'm on grants totalling over $1 million myself. If we could avoid land wars in Asia (so presciently predicted by Wallace Shawn in _The_Princess_Bride_), we could have billions to spend on science.
I'm not sure if you have tried this but on my Pentium 3 700MHz laptop with 384MB of RAM, I could hardly play emulated games using MAME or ZSNES. I've tried doing so in Windows XP as well as a stripped down Ubuntu system.
I have no idea what games you were trying to play, but 700 Mhz is fine for emulation of all the classics -- pac-man, galaga, space invaders, donkey kong, etc. Remember that MAME got started in 1997, when 266 Mhz machines were the norm.
It's not clear if you are seriously arguing, but the Egyptians made a very simple, hardly alcoholic, beer out of bread, and with lifespans in the 30s, harming one's liver wasn't probably a major concern then anyway.
Making liquor isn't trivial, and "bathtub gin" and moonshine often contain dangerous amounts of methanol.
And Prohibition wasn't repealed because it wasn't working, or because of the Hollywood-exaggerated Mafia battles, but because it was thought that it would help the economy to restart the alcohol industry. Why else did it last beyond the 20s and only end during the Great Depression?
1) Few people would bother with illegal (quite probably poisonous) moonshine in times when legal and safe alternatives were available, as they were in 1910 and 1934.
2) Our picture of prohibition is biased towards the images given by F. Scott Fitzgerald and other chroniclers of the elite set in the Roaring 20's. Sure *wealthy* people had access to speakeasys and such, but they didn't let just random riff-raff in.
This would be really funny if it wasn't so pathetic: how in the world were these statistics compiled when alcohol sale was illegal and thus everyone involved had in their utmost best interest not to appear in the statistics!?
They weren't. Alcohol was legal in 1910 (pre-prohibition) and in 1934 (after prohibition), the two years mentioned. As a method of social engineering, prohibition was a success. The point is making something illegal for a time gives it a negative stigma that remains.
Exactly. Circa 1980, on the Apple ][, not only "breakout" type games, but games requiring movement in all four directions often used *two* paddles as control. It was insane, and worse than keyboard control, imho.
By that "logic" Washington, DC is not part of the United States of America either as it too isn't a state. Much like Puerto Rico, it doesn't have the full rights of a state (neither DC nor Puerto Rico get congressmen or senators), yet it would be absurd to say that the capital isn't part of the USA.
Why does every computer "historian" ALWAYS forgets Commodore 64?
Ultimas all the way to Ultima VI was available on C-64.
1) The C64 was popular but not very historical -- it came out late in 8-bit history -- it came out in 1982. The Apple ][ came out in 1977. As a reminder, 16-bit computers like the IBM PC were already available in 1981.
2) Sure things like Ultima were on the C64 too, but as ports coming months or years after the Apple ][ originals. People like Lord British used the Apple ][ as their premier platform all the way until Ultima 6.
First of all, I *do* tend to reread books I like, but more importantly, I tend to like to read things that aren't quite so popular -- novels in German, grammars of various languages (modern, ancient and artificial), scholarly histories of eastern bloc nations. Generally, except for perhaps university libraries, libraries generally just have the major classics and a few recent popular books.
It's like radio -- if you actually *like* Top 40 music, probably listening to the radio is fine -- if you like alternative music, it isn't so great, though.
Terrorist ducks? I *knew* there was something fishy about Scrooge McDuck -- if he had nothing to hide, why doesn't he use legitimate banking methods to store his money?
Right. But it's really only the older books that are relevant, unless publishers allow free access to the newer books, which would be cool but unlikely.
Er no. And I speak as a professional evolutionary biologist. Selection is only a teeny, tiny part of the evolutionary process. The problem is that the evolutionary biologists that have written for the general public, such as Gould and Dawkins (neither of which are particularly famous in the actual scientific community) studied evolution in the old-fashioned, non-molecular sense (and I do mean *studied* Even Dawkins, who is still alive, hasn't actually done any science in years; it's so much easier to write for the general public than for peer review). Anyone studying evolution in the modern molecular era realizes that drift and molecular drive are far more common than selection.
What if it turned into a unicorn and spread rainbows around the airport? What then?
I'll tell you what would happen. There would be an outrage of how incompetent they were for not inviting the public to see the unicorn. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Let's be honest here ok? If someone is so ignorant that they think such a device is a unicorn (or an IED, for that matter, which is exactly as likely), they deserve to go back to their former job flipping burgers. What they did was basically scream "unicorn" in a airport. Fuck the unicorns! (which you actually can do in Second Life, according to BoingBoing, btw)
The question is *why* do you need to buy "large quantities of food" at once. Buy what you need for the next few days, and you can carry it in your hands from the store (even for a family) -- you'll also tend to buy more fresh fruits and vegetables and fewer canned and frozen stuff because if you aren't there to "stock up" for weeks you don't have to worry about things spoiling before you use them. And I certainly don't use cabs.
Also, vacationing is perfectly possible by Metro. For example, a wonderful National Park with camping facilities (Greenbelt Park) is accessible (after a short hike) from the Greenbelt and College Park Stations -- I went camping there last weekend, bringing my tent and sleeping bag in my backpack.
Slashdot Mirror
The essence of any religion, including Christianity, is that logic and reason are less important than faith. There's no question that when convenient, religion would like to go along with logic and reason. The problem is when they conflict with faith, the religious are supposed to go with faith.
The usual response would be to get security to escort them to the exit.
If the IT punks tried that in any place I've worked at, *they* would be the ones out of a job. IT staff are like janitors -- they may not like to clean up messes the real employees make, but their job is to clean up messes with a smile -- it is hardly their place to criticize users for making them, as the users typically have far more valuable skills than a mere MSCE certification.
Do you seriously have a point other than claiming (completely unsourced by the way) that a non-scientist born in the middle of the 19th century was a creationist as defense of those ideas? Reading more about outdated ideas which are no longer seriously considered by the scientific community is not really a useful way for anyone to spend their time.
1) Fundamentalism as a *term* may be late 19th century and a reaction to evolution-- but the ideas themselves are what people believed before they had any scientific alternative -- just like how classical physics wasn't called that until relativity and quantum mechanics provided an alternative.
2) I see nothing in the wikipedia article to suggest that Wilson was an intellectual in any broad sense; he didn't contribute to multiple fields of study -- in fact his primary achievements seem to be in administration, not research of any kind -- nor do I see any evidence of any interest on his part in science other than funding a school of science while president of Princeton.
But the point is I get annoyed when people bring up famous people from other eras as defense of silly ideas. It's not their fault -- they didn't know any better. But we know more, and future generations will be even more knowledgeable.
He as 3 years old when origin of the species was published, was a recognized intellectual and was president of Princeton. You think he wasn't aware of Origin of the Species?
Quite possibly yes. Remember that America wasn't the center of science until after WWII. Probably most of America hadn't even heard of Darwin until the Scopes trial put evolution in the newspapers. And I'm not quite sure about Wilson being a "recognized intellectual" -- he was known as a historian, but not a general thinker outside his field, the way, say, Richard Feynman knew more than physics.
It's also worth mentioning that Wilson was born before the _Origin_ was published. So while he doesn't get any points for keeping up with scientific breakthroughs in his lifetime, that's a *big* difference from someone born in the 20th century refusing to accept the scientific consensus.
Holy shit. How you believe we originated really matters on whether you should have control of nuclear codes?
Because Fundamentalism not only deals with where we came but how we supposedly end too. Jesus can't come back until Armageddon happens according to biblical mythology -- so anyone who takes the mythology seriously might want to speed up the process...
Pity she doesn't support *those*, favoring abstinence instead. That really worked out well for her daughter...
The problem is that in the real world, you can't just let LaTeX do its thing and make your document "beautiful" (according to Lamport's and Knuth's idea of beauty) -- quite often the journal editor, thesis office, whatever, wants the formatting just *so*, and trying to get the formatting that way in LaTeX is like fighting a mule. Of course, the right way to handle this is is for the people in charge to create packages which will do the work for you, but often the people see the formatting issue as *your* problem and not *theirs*.
I would like to inquire exactly how you get these type of grants. I'm all ears. I'm a computer science major in college right now.
Basically you go to the web site of a relevant funding agency like the NSF and look at their current "call for proposals". Once you find one that is relevant to what you want to do, you write a proposal detailing what you want to do, how much it will cost, and why it is important. In practice you should either have a doctorate in a relevant field or be well on the way to getting one before writing a grant. Also, it helps if you are working at university or research institute because such places have grants offices that can give you advice on how much things are likely to cost. This is important because an unreasonably high or low budget is likely to doom a grant proposal.
But it's not. I'm on grants totalling over $1 million myself. If we could avoid land wars in Asia (so presciently predicted by Wallace Shawn in _The_Princess_Bride_), we could have billions to spend on science.
I'm not sure if you have tried this but on my Pentium 3 700MHz laptop with 384MB of RAM, I could hardly play emulated games using MAME or ZSNES. I've tried doing so in Windows XP as well as a stripped down Ubuntu system.
I have no idea what games you were trying to play, but 700 Mhz is fine for emulation of all the classics -- pac-man, galaga, space invaders, donkey kong, etc. Remember that MAME got started in 1997, when 266 Mhz machines were the norm.
It's not clear if you are seriously arguing, but the Egyptians made a very simple, hardly alcoholic, beer out of bread, and with lifespans in the 30s, harming one's liver wasn't probably a major concern then anyway.
Making liquor isn't trivial, and "bathtub gin" and moonshine often contain dangerous amounts of methanol.
And Prohibition wasn't repealed because it wasn't working, or because of the Hollywood-exaggerated Mafia battles, but because it was thought that it would help the economy to restart the alcohol industry. Why else did it last beyond the 20s and only end during the Great Depression?
1) Few people would bother with illegal (quite probably poisonous) moonshine in times when legal and safe alternatives were available, as they were in 1910 and 1934.
2) Our picture of prohibition is biased towards the images given by F. Scott Fitzgerald and other chroniclers of the elite set in the Roaring 20's. Sure *wealthy* people had access to speakeasys and such, but they didn't let just random riff-raff in.
This would be really funny if it wasn't so pathetic: how in the world were these statistics compiled when alcohol sale was illegal and thus everyone involved had in their utmost best interest not to appear in the statistics!?
They weren't. Alcohol was legal in 1910 (pre-prohibition) and in 1934 (after prohibition), the two years mentioned. As a method of social engineering, prohibition was a success. The point is making something illegal for a time gives it a negative stigma that remains.
Exactly. Circa 1980, on the Apple ][, not only "breakout" type games, but games requiring movement in all four directions often used *two* paddles as control. It was insane, and worse than keyboard control, imho.
By that "logic" Washington, DC is not part of the United States of America either as it too isn't a state. Much like Puerto Rico, it doesn't have the full rights of a state (neither DC nor Puerto Rico get congressmen or senators), yet it would be absurd to say that the capital isn't part of the USA.
Why does every computer "historian" ALWAYS forgets Commodore 64?
Ultimas all the way to Ultima VI was available on C-64.
1) The C64 was popular but not very historical -- it came out late in 8-bit history -- it came out in 1982. The Apple ][ came out in 1977. As a reminder, 16-bit computers like the IBM PC were already available in 1981.
2) Sure things like Ultima were on the C64 too, but as ports coming months or years after the Apple ][ originals. People like Lord British used the Apple ][ as their premier platform all the way until Ultima 6.
First of all, I *do* tend to reread books I like, but more importantly, I tend to like to read things that aren't quite so popular -- novels in German, grammars of various languages (modern, ancient and artificial), scholarly histories of eastern bloc nations. Generally, except for perhaps university libraries, libraries generally just have the major classics and a few recent popular books.
It's like radio -- if you actually *like* Top 40 music, probably listening to the radio is fine -- if you like alternative music, it isn't so great, though.
Terrorist ducks? I *knew* there was something fishy about Scrooge McDuck -- if he had nothing to hide, why doesn't he use legitimate banking methods to store his money?
Right. But it's really only the older books that are relevant, unless publishers allow free access to the newer books, which would be cool but unlikely.
Er no. And I speak as a professional evolutionary biologist. Selection is only a teeny, tiny part of the evolutionary process. The problem is that the evolutionary biologists that have written for the general public, such as Gould and Dawkins (neither of which are particularly famous in the actual scientific community) studied evolution in the old-fashioned, non-molecular sense (and I do mean *studied* Even Dawkins, who is still alive, hasn't actually done any science in years; it's so much easier to write for the general public than for peer review). Anyone studying evolution in the modern molecular era realizes that drift and molecular drive are far more common than selection.
I think my post made as exactly as much sense as the one I was responding to...
What if it turned into a unicorn and spread rainbows around the airport? What then?
I'll tell you what would happen. There would be an outrage of how incompetent they were for not inviting the public to see the unicorn. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Let's be honest here ok? If someone is so ignorant that they think such a device is a unicorn (or an IED, for that matter, which is exactly as likely), they deserve to go back to their former job flipping burgers. What they did was basically scream "unicorn" in a airport. Fuck the unicorns! (which you actually can do in Second Life, according to BoingBoing, btw)
The question is *why* do you need to buy "large quantities of food" at once. Buy what you need for the next few days, and you can carry it in your hands from the store (even for a family) -- you'll also tend to buy more fresh fruits and vegetables and fewer canned and frozen stuff because if you aren't there to "stock up" for weeks you don't have to worry about things spoiling before you use them. And I certainly don't use cabs.
Also, vacationing is perfectly possible by Metro. For example, a wonderful National Park with camping facilities (Greenbelt Park) is accessible (after a short hike) from the Greenbelt and College Park Stations -- I went camping there last weekend, bringing my tent and sleeping bag in my backpack.