Where on earth is evidence that all these deities are the same? The only reason to believe something like that is because you want to. It's the ultimate in feel-good religion.
Why would atheists like this idea? God is real is the antithesis of atheism, no matter how it's dressed up.
Do to others as you would have them do to you is _not_ sound advice. It's a shallow aphorism, that assumes a non-existant symmetry. Anytime the symmetry breaks down, the golden rule breaks down.
For instance: You're a bum. You want people to give you money. So you give them money. Or: you're an immature adolescent male. What you want most in the world is for a girl to strip for you. So you find a beautiful girl and strip for her.
Why do you have to be Christian to get blanket forgiveness? Why can't you ask Allah, or the Goddess, or Zeus for forgiveness? Even if they don't exist, your act was as right as any Christian act of forgiveness, and a great god, a loving god would accept that.
Second, why does anyone not forgiven get an eternity in hell? That's mean, unfair and unjust. Punishment should fit the crime, and I'm not sure any crime deserves an eternity of torture.
Adolf Hitler did kill several million Jews by himself. He had people - and a nation - help. Interestingly enough, those people and that nation were Christian.
Please look up Pascal's wager in the Alt.Atheism FAQ sometime. One point is that there is many religions that will send you to hell for being a Christian, and some that will send you to hell for being a Christian but not an atheist.
As for Jesus being perfect, which I assume means sinless: (I don't have a Bible at hand, so I apolgize for the paraphrases)
1. He had his disciples steal a donkey when he was coming in for Passover.
2. He dishonored his mother and father, when he was a child, by not going home with them after church and mouthing off to them when they came back (a day's travel) to find him. (This is in the first part of Luke.)
3. He did it again when he was an adult, and his mother and siblings came to see him.
4. He destroyed some pig farmer's herd of pigs. (Luke and the legion of demons.) (I'm not sure this was technically a sin.)
I've read the Bible. It really makes me wonder about those who would worship a god like that. Try Job's kids. Why did they deserve to die, just because their father was a good guy? And what answer did Job get - roughly, "who the hell are you to speak to me that way! I am almighty, you pipsqueak." The context usually terrifies more than the details, because the context implies motives for God, and those aren't love.
Yes, I'm feeding the troll (sorry)
on
KDE 1.1 is out
·
· Score: 1
How do you compile Linux with Visual C? This I would like to see. Actually, GCC existed long before Linux and was used from the start.
Honestly, that sort of appearance impresses me. I read it as expressing "I am; and no, I don't care what you think about it" and get the impression these people know what their stuff.
Frankly, people take the advice of the neighborhood quake or "old maid" over real medical advice all the time, so if you can get a program that gives real medical advice that's at least a step up for many people.
Why not publish under the GPL? Seriously, if a company is going to abuse the GPL, it will happily abuse any license you put your code under. Furthermore, if you do go to court, the GPL was written with the help of a lawyer, while your license probably wasn't, meaning your license is much more likely to be found invalid or meingingless.
One thing that I'm curious about, that may be a mis-understanding on my part, is the package systems on non-i386 GNU/Linux platforms. How integrated are alternative architectures? On NetBSD, I can cd into/usr/pkgsrc and make pretty much any package on any platform, without having to ftp anything manually. Are things this slick on, say, Linux/Alpha or Linux/StrongARM, or does someone have to port each package and make it available for FTP somewhere, and hope that people can find it? That's my current impression.
Under Debian Linux, the non-i386 are treated just like i386. If a package comes in, it's then built for the sparc, i386, alpha and any other system, and they can be downloaded from any Debian mirror as a binary package. If you want the source, the source is available, but isn't automatically downloadable.
Thirdly, I believe this "free market" in tax breaks will be just for those that RMS mentioned: the corporations. Let's see income taxes go up and up, while the corporations pay nothing. That would hurt the poor the worst and break us into the poor, who get poorer and the rich, who would get richer. No thanks. America of the people and for the people really beats America of the corps and for the corps.
Vi includes support to run Python or Perl as scripts. Gnumeric uses Guile. Gimp uses... Scheme I think.
*At first you seemed to be complaining that Unix programmers "tend to build do everything programs", now you want more features...*
You misunderstand. I don't want a scripting language to write a script to do what I want, I want to be able to go to a menu and select what I want done. If I'm writting something in Emacs and I want wordcounts or Fog indexs, I could write a script, but it would be much easier for me just to go to a menu item.
Vi includes support to run Python or Perl as scripts. Gnumeric uses Guile. Gimp uses... Scheme I think.
You mis-understand. I don't want a scripting language to write a script to do what I want, I want to be able to go to a menu and select what I want done. If I'm writting something in Emacs and I want wordcounts or Fog indexs, I could write a script, but it would be much easier for me just to go to an index.
If you watched the Harmony lists, Harmony was effectively dead in the water the day QT declared the next version would be Open Source. Any one who cared about making an original toolkit was working on GTK or their own. The people working on Harmony wanted an open source version of QT. They have that. Why would they continue?
If you really care about this, the source is listed on the page. Take it and continue.
I've seen "does one thing, and does it well" programs in Linux. I also get the feeling that Unix programers tend to build do everything programs - first example Emacs. If a program doesn't have a scripting language flexible enough to write a web browser in, what is it worth?
Some times I wish Unix programers would add features instead of scripting machines with more theoretical power, but that are much harder to use.
Slashdot Mirror
Where on earth is evidence that all these deities are the same? The only reason to believe something like that is because you want to. It's the ultimate in feel-good religion.
Why would atheists like this idea? God is real is the antithesis of atheism, no matter how it's dressed up.
Do to others as you would have them do to you is _not_ sound advice. It's a shallow aphorism, that assumes a non-existant symmetry. Anytime the symmetry breaks down, the golden rule breaks down.
For instance: You're a bum. You want people to give you money. So you give them money. Or: you're an immature adolescent male. What you want most in the world is for a girl to strip for you. So you find a beautiful girl and strip for her.
Why do you have to be Christian to get blanket forgiveness? Why can't you ask Allah, or the Goddess, or Zeus for forgiveness? Even if they don't exist, your act was as right as any Christian act of forgiveness, and a great god, a loving god would accept that.
Second, why does anyone not forgiven get an eternity in hell? That's mean, unfair and unjust. Punishment should fit the crime, and I'm not sure any crime deserves an eternity of torture.
Adolf Hitler did kill several million Jews by himself. He had people - and a nation - help. Interestingly enough, those people and that nation were Christian.
Please look up Pascal's wager in the Alt.Atheism FAQ sometime. One point is that there is many religions that will send you to hell for being a Christian, and some that will send you to hell for being a Christian but not an atheist.
As for Jesus being perfect, which I assume means sinless: (I don't have a Bible at hand, so I apolgize for the paraphrases)
1. He had his disciples steal a donkey when he was coming in for Passover.
2. He dishonored his mother and father, when he was a child, by not going home with them after church and mouthing off to them when they came back (a day's travel) to find him. (This is in the first part of Luke.)
3. He did it again when he was an adult, and his mother and siblings came to see him.
4. He destroyed some pig farmer's herd of pigs. (Luke and the legion of demons.) (I'm not sure this was technically a sin.)
I've read the Bible. It really makes me wonder about those who would worship a god like that. Try Job's kids. Why did they deserve to die, just because their father was a good guy? And what answer did Job get - roughly, "who the hell are you to speak to me that way! I am almighty, you pipsqueak." The context usually terrifies more than the details, because the context implies motives for God, and those aren't love.
How do you compile Linux with Visual C? This I would like to see. Actually, GCC existed long before Linux and was used from the start.
Honestly, that sort of appearance impresses me. I read it as expressing "I am; and no, I don't care what you think about it" and get the impression these people know what their stuff.
Frankly, people take the advice of the neighborhood quake or "old maid" over real medical advice all the time, so if you can get a program that gives real medical advice that's at least a step up for many people.
Why not publish under the GPL? Seriously, if a company is going to abuse the GPL, it will happily abuse any license you put your code under. Furthermore, if you do go to court, the GPL was written with the help of a lawyer, while your license probably wasn't, meaning your license is much more likely to be found invalid or meingingless.
The Linux C Library is under the LGPL - anyone want to email FSF with this little tidbit?
One thing that I'm curious about, that may be a mis-understanding on my part, is the package systems on non-i386 GNU/Linux platforms. How integrated are alternative architectures? On NetBSD, I can cd into /usr/pkgsrc and make pretty much any package on any platform, without having to ftp anything manually. Are things this slick on, say, Linux/Alpha or Linux/StrongARM, or does someone have to port each package and make it available for FTP somewhere, and hope that people can find it? That's my current impression.
Under Debian Linux, the non-i386 are treated just like i386. If a package comes in, it's then built for the sparc, i386, alpha and any other system, and they can be downloaded from any Debian mirror as a binary package. If you want the source, the source is available, but isn't automatically downloadable.
Thirdly, I believe this "free market" in tax breaks will be just for those that RMS mentioned: the corporations. Let's see income taxes go up and up, while the corporations pay nothing. That would hurt the poor the worst and break us into the poor, who get poorer and the rich, who would get richer. No thanks. America of the people and for the people really beats America of the corps and for the corps.
Vi includes support to run Python or Perl as scripts. Gnumeric uses Guile. Gimp uses ... Scheme I think.
*At first you seemed to be complaining that Unix programmers "tend to build do everything programs", now you want more features...*
You misunderstand. I don't want a scripting language to write a script to do what I want, I want to be able to go to a menu and select what I want done. If I'm writting something in Emacs and I want wordcounts or Fog indexs, I could write a script, but it would be much easier for me just to go to a menu item.
Vi includes support to run Python or Perl as scripts. Gnumeric uses Guile. Gimp uses ... Scheme I think.
You mis-understand. I don't want a scripting language to write a script to do what I want, I want to be able to go to a menu and select what I want done. If I'm writting something in Emacs and I want wordcounts or Fog indexs, I could write a script, but it would be much easier for me just to go to an index.
If you watched the Harmony lists, Harmony was effectively dead in the water the day QT declared the next version would be Open Source. Any one who cared about making an original toolkit was working on GTK or their own. The people working on Harmony wanted an open source version of QT. They have that. Why would they continue?
If you really care about this, the source is listed on the page. Take it and continue.
I've seen "does one thing, and does it well" programs in Linux. I also get the feeling that Unix programers tend to build do everything programs - first example Emacs. If a program doesn't have a scripting language flexible enough to write a web browser in, what is it worth?
Some times I wish Unix programers would add features instead of scripting machines with more theoretical power, but that are much harder to use.