Slimmest scientific backing? You, sir, give them far too much credit. Try "Creationism that cannot be disproved and is therefore not even remotely related to science in any way."
Of course it can be disproved... Simply prove that life can create itself from nothing. From what I can see, the problem ID supporters have is that they keep asking for proof, or even a reasonable theory that would show it possible beyond a 'random chance'. Yet their detractors, rather than providing the thing requested, reduce to name-calling. ("It's not science!" "You still think the earth is flat!") You can insist that your side is right in a debate, but you should have answers to the basic questions that the other side raises. If you don't, what does that make you?
Something that I recently read, and that says quite a lot, IMHO, is the article by Stephen C. Meyer here. One thought that I found particularly interesting is: Scientists in many fields now recognize the connection between intelligence and information and make inferences accordingly. Archaeologists assume a mind produced the inscriptions on the Rosetta Stone. SETI's search for extraterrestrial intelligence presupposes that the presence of information imbedded in electromagnetic signals from space would indicate an intelligent source. As yet, radio astronomers have not found information-bearing signals coming from space. But molecular biologists, looking closer to home, have discovered information in the cell. Consequently, DNA justifies making what probability theorist William A. Dembski calls "the design inference."
Thoughtful, well-written explanations are the way you'll convince someone. Maybe it's things like this that give ID supporters their resolve. Or maybe, just maybe, it's the lack of explanations like this from the anti-ID camp.
If I had points, I would mod you up. The essay you link to is something that is extremely compelling and well-written.
IMHO, evolution is a religion in itself. Those who insist that it is right and every other way is wrong, are as bad (or worse) than those they condemn. Being open-minded and honest about it is the only way to truly be taken seriously.
that's just silly. if you want the fancy look of the ipod, you have to take the fancy scratchability as well. buy some brasso, shine it up, repeat next time it's needed.
The only thing that I don't see is the ability to do a search for a particular address. I'm thinking this would be awesome to include on my company's intranet for outside sales people, but we don't have gps coords for our customers.:\
good points... except BMW doesn't charge exorbitantly OR require you to buy the road you drive on from them OR require that you purchase a new set of seats, compatible stereo system, new steering wheel, etc. They realize that they can't offer a product THAT radically different from all the other cars out there.
I have no problem paying for quality. My point was that people would be MUCH more likely to use OSX on x86 because it speaks to the consumer. They want flashy, shiny, neato graphics, and an easy-to-use interface. Apple provides it, but insists that you only run said interface on hardware that's also overpriced. And they do this, in spite of the fact that the consumer has to go the extra mile and purchase ALL new software to run on it. If that barrier is there, they are instantly making it harder for anyone to justify using Apple computers.
Whether or not you LIKE the idea, and whether or not you agree with my suggestion, they ARE shooting their proverbial feet by marketing the way they do.
Why does Apple not realize that they would be doing themselves a favor if they didn't act like their product is 'holier than thou'? I mean, if it were priced below M$ and ran on x86 machines, it would eventually win.
Seriously, don't they realize that selling cheaper sometimes means bigger profits?
I have to laugh at those that insist on nothing good happening after the 5th or 6th season. My favorite season is #8, and I'd love to hear anyone try to knock the calibur of the humor throughout. I mean, seriously...
Season Eight: (personal fav's marked with *) You Only Move Twice* El Viaje Misterioso Nuestro Jomer The Springfield Files* Simpsoncalifragilisticexpiala-D'oh* Lisa' s Date With Density* Treehouse Of Horror VII* The Homer They Fall* A Milhouse Divided* Burns, Baby Burns Bart After Dark Hurricane Neddy* Twisted World Of Marge Simpson* Grade School Confidential* Mountain Of Madness* Homer's Phobia* Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show* My Sister, My Sitter* Brother From Another Series*** Homer Vs. The 18th Amendment* The Canine Mutiny* The Old Man And The Lisa* In Marge We Trust Homer's Enemy* The Simpsons Spin-off Showcase* The Secret War Of Lisa Simpson
And that's right in the middle, after the time that so many say the series was headed downhill.
I'll admit it, I've found myself thinking that the humor is getting more and more stupid/slapstick, but then something occurred to me: New episodes don't seem as funny, but in a few years they get quoted along with everything else. So even though I might complain about not laughing through a whole episode, in 4-5 years I'm quoting pieces of it and proclaiming that it's genius.
To me, it just shows that the writers do know what they're doing. The things that tend to be best (books,music,movies,simpson's episodes) may not strike you as amazing the first time around, but after a few exposures to them you suddenly realize how cool they really are.
Yeah, I've implememted it on our intranet for certain types of reporting.
Personally, I love it. Once I figured it out, it struck me at how clunky my old code was. There are many areas where I went through WAY too much trouble putting things into JS arrays and whatnot because I didn't want the visitor to have to refresh. But now I can use common PHP code to get the data when I need it.
The one thing I will say is that there seems to be a lot of needlessly complicated example code out there. I've implemented the entire system in 3 JS functions, and it works flawlessly. I'd post it here, but somehow I feel I'd either be looked at as a karma whore or a redundant post.:/
Either way, you should try it. It's not that hard, and the results are definitely useful.
I'm not sure how accurate it is, but I was told that a store can't do anything to you without actually seeing you take something. So that's probably why the guards let you go. Otherwise, why have cameras at all... it would be cheaper to tag everything and let it get sorted out at the door.
Also, from what I've been told, it's best to act as if nothing happened. Shoplifters get away with their crime more often than not because they just keep walking and they can be in their car by the time the guard get to them.
then why not do it like Apple? My ipod charges/connects via usb or firewire, and it came with a nifty wall-wart adapter that the firewire plugs into if a port isn't available. It's the perfect design, IMHO.
The first dozen replies are all trolls, so I'll add my experiences for posterity's sake.
I've been using python for pretty much anything in my company that isn't web based, and things couldn't be better. There's talk about python being slower, which it is, but most libraries that do important things are just C wrappers anyway, so the speed decrease is negligible as python is just holding the logic. Tk is nice enough, I guess, but I tend to use wxPython. Either way, it gives you cross platform GUIs, which is always a nice thing. Using pyexe allows you to even 'compile' scripts into exe files with win32 machines.
To be absolutely honest though, I can't think of an easier language to learn (I even teach >40 yo women now and then!) or a quicker language to code in. Once you're accustomed to it, the code just flows out, and I've seldom been disappointed by the results. The formatting requirement helps to ensure that your code isn't a disgusting mess that no one can figure out, YMMV.
funny you should mention that... I have quite a few programs I've written solely for myself where I haven't had time to fix the bugs, and I don't really need to. I figure everyone has those.
But as far as others interacting with the database, you're correct. My thing is, I insist on developers under me using the same programming practices. I train them not to write anything without knowing what they are writing to. So maybe it's just my circumstances, but we've never had data corruption among 5 developers in about 4 years of using MySQL.
Again, I'm not saying the issues of the grandparent shouldn't raise errors, I'm just explaining why it shouldn't necessarily affect a developer negatively.
um... I must be missing something. Shouldn't a developer be smart enough to CHECK THE DATABASE STRUCTURE before writing data into it?
I mean, I understand your argument, but I've never been affected by it, as I always know what I'm writing to. And while the things you mention *should* return errors, it's not like they're show stoppers. To be honest, if this thing came back to bite me, I'd be knocking myself for not planning for it in the first place.
would you really want to rely on a DNS hack in that case?
A hack doesn't have to be unreliable. The debian stable tree has programs with hacks in their configs, but they've been deemed stable and are trusted. Really, the only thing separating a hack from an accepted practice is how widespread it's use is.
Sounds like you just want someone to blame... or flame?
Slashdot Mirror
please see the Itchy, Scratchy & Poochie Show studio scene where Homer asks if it will be broadcast live.
thank you. :)
You don't need a cell phone to know which way the wind blows. ...please tell me someone gets that
Q: How many marketing guys does it take to change a wafer-thin sheet of organic material coating your home's wall?
A: However many it takes to convince you that *this* is easier than just changing an ordinary incandescent bulb.
seriously though, i can't wait. i want my whole house to light up.
What's the emote for rolling eyes?
I've always wondered that. There are so many times it could be used.
Slimmest scientific backing? You, sir, give them far too much credit. Try "Creationism that cannot be disproved and is therefore not even remotely related to science in any way."
Of course it can be disproved... Simply prove that life can create itself from nothing. From what I can see, the problem ID supporters have is that they keep asking for proof, or even a reasonable theory that would show it possible beyond a 'random chance'. Yet their detractors, rather than providing the thing requested, reduce to name-calling. ("It's not science!" "You still think the earth is flat!") You can insist that your side is right in a debate, but you should have answers to the basic questions that the other side raises. If you don't, what does that make you?
Something that I recently read, and that says quite a lot, IMHO, is the article by Stephen C. Meyer here. One thought that I found particularly interesting is: Scientists in many fields now recognize the connection between intelligence and information and make inferences accordingly. Archaeologists assume a mind produced the inscriptions on the Rosetta Stone. SETI's search for extraterrestrial intelligence presupposes that the presence of information imbedded in electromagnetic signals from space would indicate an intelligent source. As yet, radio astronomers have not found information-bearing signals coming from space. But molecular biologists, looking closer to home, have discovered information in the cell. Consequently, DNA justifies making what probability theorist William A. Dembski calls "the design inference."
Thoughtful, well-written explanations are the way you'll convince someone. Maybe it's things like this that give ID supporters their resolve. Or maybe, just maybe, it's the lack of explanations like this from the anti-ID camp.
If I had points, I would mod you up. The essay you link to is something that is extremely compelling and well-written.
IMHO, evolution is a religion in itself. Those who insist that it is right and every other way is wrong, are as bad (or worse) than those they condemn. Being open-minded and honest about it is the only way to truly be taken seriously.
that's just silly. if you want the fancy look of the ipod, you have to take the fancy scratchability as well. buy some brasso, shine it up, repeat next time it's needed.
people, this isn't that hard.
as far as i can figure out... no, not without patching. i looked at ipcop before submitting the article. ;)
Microsoft claims that 90% of email on the internet is spam. So from now on, 90% of all mail received will be automatically deleted. Thank you.
The only thing that I don't see is the ability to do a search for a particular address. I'm thinking this would be awesome to include on my company's intranet for outside sales people, but we don't have gps coords for our customers. :\
I'm sick of your lack of faith! [lights the bomb and jams it into Jobriath's mouth]
good points... except BMW doesn't charge exorbitantly OR require you to buy the road you drive on from them OR require that you purchase a new set of seats, compatible stereo system, new steering wheel, etc. They realize that they can't offer a product THAT radically different from all the other cars out there.
I have no problem paying for quality. My point was that people would be MUCH more likely to use OSX on x86 because it speaks to the consumer. They want flashy, shiny, neato graphics, and an easy-to-use interface. Apple provides it, but insists that you only run said interface on hardware that's also overpriced. And they do this, in spite of the fact that the consumer has to go the extra mile and purchase ALL new software to run on it. If that barrier is there, they are instantly making it harder for anyone to justify using Apple computers.
Whether or not you LIKE the idea, and whether or not you agree with my suggestion, they ARE shooting their proverbial feet by marketing the way they do.
Maybe (gasp) they care about something more than just 'bigger profits'? Like, oh say long term survival of the company?
If they sold OSX separately, while still keeping their current business model of bundling HW+SW, they wouldn't survive? That doesn't say much for OSX.
When was the last time you saw linux run like OSX?
I mean, I'm all about Linux zealotry, but not for the desktop. Hence, your point is misguided.
Why does Apple not realize that they would be doing themselves a favor if they didn't act like their product is 'holier than thou'? I mean, if it were priced below M$ and ran on x86 machines, it would eventually win.
Seriously, don't they realize that selling cheaper sometimes means bigger profits?
I have to laugh at those that insist on nothing good happening after the 5th or 6th season. My favorite season is #8, and I'd love to hear anyone try to knock the calibur of the humor throughout. I mean, seriously...
' s Date With Density*
Season Eight:
(personal fav's marked with *)
You Only Move Twice*
El Viaje Misterioso Nuestro Jomer
The Springfield Files*
Simpsoncalifragilisticexpiala-D'oh*
Lisa
Treehouse Of Horror VII*
The Homer They Fall*
A Milhouse Divided*
Burns, Baby Burns
Bart After Dark
Hurricane Neddy*
Twisted World Of Marge Simpson*
Grade School Confidential*
Mountain Of Madness*
Homer's Phobia*
Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show*
My Sister, My Sitter*
Brother From Another Series***
Homer Vs. The 18th Amendment*
The Canine Mutiny*
The Old Man And The Lisa*
In Marge We Trust
Homer's Enemy*
The Simpsons Spin-off Showcase*
The Secret War Of Lisa Simpson
And that's right in the middle, after the time that so many say the series was headed downhill.
I'll admit it, I've found myself thinking that the humor is getting more and more stupid/slapstick, but then something occurred to me: New episodes don't seem as funny, but in a few years they get quoted along with everything else. So even though I might complain about not laughing through a whole episode, in 4-5 years I'm quoting pieces of it and proclaiming that it's genius.
To me, it just shows that the writers do know what they're doing. The things that tend to be best (books,music,movies,simpson's episodes) may not strike you as amazing the first time around, but after a few exposures to them you suddenly realize how cool they really are.
Yeah, I've implememted it on our intranet for certain types of reporting.
:/
Personally, I love it. Once I figured it out, it struck me at how clunky my old code was. There are many areas where I went through WAY too much trouble putting things into JS arrays and whatnot because I didn't want the visitor to have to refresh. But now I can use common PHP code to get the data when I need it.
The one thing I will say is that there seems to be a lot of needlessly complicated example code out there. I've implemented the entire system in 3 JS functions, and it works flawlessly. I'd post it here, but somehow I feel I'd either be looked at as a karma whore or a redundant post.
Either way, you should try it. It's not that hard, and the results are definitely useful.
I'm not sure how accurate it is, but I was told that a store can't do anything to you without actually seeing you take something. So that's probably why the guards let you go. Otherwise, why have cameras at all... it would be cheaper to tag everything and let it get sorted out at the door.
Also, from what I've been told, it's best to act as if nothing happened. Shoplifters get away with their crime more often than not because they just keep walking and they can be in their car by the time the guard get to them.
then why not do it like Apple? My ipod charges/connects via usb or firewire, and it came with a nifty wall-wart adapter that the firewire plugs into if a port isn't available. It's the perfect design, IMHO.
why is the parent marked troll? Seriously, he's right. If anything, mod him up.
The first dozen replies are all trolls, so I'll add my experiences for posterity's sake.
I've been using python for pretty much anything in my company that isn't web based, and things couldn't be better. There's talk about python being slower, which it is, but most libraries that do important things are just C wrappers anyway, so the speed decrease is negligible as python is just holding the logic. Tk is nice enough, I guess, but I tend to use wxPython. Either way, it gives you cross platform GUIs, which is always a nice thing. Using pyexe allows you to even 'compile' scripts into exe files with win32 machines.
To be absolutely honest though, I can't think of an easier language to learn (I even teach >40 yo women now and then!) or a quicker language to code in. Once you're accustomed to it, the code just flows out, and I've seldom been disappointed by the results. The formatting requirement helps to ensure that your code isn't a disgusting mess that no one can figure out, YMMV.
funny you should mention that... I have quite a few programs I've written solely for myself where I haven't had time to fix the bugs, and I don't really need to. I figure everyone has those.
But as far as others interacting with the database, you're correct. My thing is, I insist on developers under me using the same programming practices. I train them not to write anything without knowing what they are writing to. So maybe it's just my circumstances, but we've never had data corruption among 5 developers in about 4 years of using MySQL.
Again, I'm not saying the issues of the grandparent shouldn't raise errors, I'm just explaining why it shouldn't necessarily affect a developer negatively.
um... I must be missing something. Shouldn't a developer be smart enough to CHECK THE DATABASE STRUCTURE before writing data into it?
I mean, I understand your argument, but I've never been affected by it, as I always know what I'm writing to. And while the things you mention *should* return errors, it's not like they're show stoppers. To be honest, if this thing came back to bite me, I'd be knocking myself for not planning for it in the first place.
would you really want to rely on a DNS hack in that case?
A hack doesn't have to be unreliable. The debian stable tree has programs with hacks in their configs, but they've been deemed stable and are trusted. Really, the only thing separating a hack from an accepted practice is how widespread it's use is.
Sounds like you just want someone to blame... or flame?