Well, there are many written accounts of people around the world being raised from the dead when prayed for in Jesus name. Of course without actually seeing it for ones self it's difficult to convince one that these claims aren't hogwash so I of course don't expect you do believe either. Merely pointing it out.
Suddenly when the noun is "God," then everything changes and someone pretends that the speaker is claiming to know everything.
Well, yes it does change, since not believing in God as a creator being requires faith. Faith that the current schools of thought on evolution are not only correct, but the gaps such as what started the process off (that sea of amino acids that somehow just folded itself into useful proteins) will be answered with purely materialistic constructs. Faith that this is how we came to be, and that our meatspace is solely what defines us. Faith that your network of neurons and synapses is sufficient to define who you are and what you think and feel. Faith that when our meat fails us, 'we' cease to be.
This, my friend, is why atheism is a faith-based construct. Not a religion in the strict sense, since that suggests a spiritual component, but as much a faith-based system as, say our good friends the Scientologists.
By the way, Santa Claus did really exist. He just wasn't as you might have expected him to be.
I can't quite tell from your comment, but if you didn't notice, my (cached) test showed a ~13% reduction in execution time with atime over the execution time with noatime.
The complete source code of the book, and even precompiled binaries for Windows and Mac OS X, can be downloaded from the book's webpage.
All I see on that page is some sample code from examples contained in the book. I was kind of hoping for the actual source code for the book, preferably in LaTeX form.
I take it you don't believe you exist either? If you don't believe anything then you really don't know anything.
Would you like me to draw you a picture?
(after this administration which flat out hates scientists)...
I see now why Bush wants to put scientists on Mars. It's to leave them there, isn't it?
Well, there are many written accounts of people around the world being raised from the dead when prayed for in Jesus name. Of course without actually seeing it for ones self it's difficult to convince one that these claims aren't hogwash so I of course don't expect you do believe either. Merely pointing it out.
Suddenly when the noun is "God," then everything changes and someone pretends that the speaker is claiming to know everything.
Well, yes it does change, since not believing in God as a creator being requires faith. Faith that the current schools of thought on evolution are not only correct, but the gaps such as what started the process off (that sea of amino acids that somehow just folded itself into useful proteins) will be answered with purely materialistic constructs. Faith that this is how we came to be, and that our meatspace is solely what defines us. Faith that your network of neurons and synapses is sufficient to define who you are and what you think and feel. Faith that when our meat fails us, 'we' cease to be.
This, my friend, is why atheism is a faith-based construct. Not a religion in the strict sense, since that suggests a spiritual component, but as much a faith-based system as, say our good friends the Scientologists.
By the way, Santa Claus did really exist. He just wasn't as you might have expected him to be.
We, humans, know that god is fiction because he is OUR fiction. We invented him. We made him up.
Oh this should be good. Evidence please?
Had a drop or two, have we?
Ah crap, sorry I meant this one
Which leads to this much more impressive (and probably fake) one. Does anyone know the story behind these guys?
I made this comment in an earlier thread but think it more relevant here:
2 31207/
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=268725&cid=20
The Beatles?
Would you hunt me down and smack me if I told you that youtube, in all its 65kbps 22050Hz glory, is now my jukebox?
Address bar: y smooth criminal jackson
<click>
aaaah
... or a 192Kbps Ogg.
Update: 07/09 12:23 GMT by KD
So, was this updated on 7 September or 9 July? I suspect the update script is a bit, well, wrong.
I just hope the Wikipedia admins are reading this thread.
After the 2005 corruption debacle this may be a tipping point.
What, you mean F-Spot and Banshee were an existing .NET applications?
Yes I guess it could be taken as funny I suppose :)
I was just timing read operations and cat >>/dev/null was the first thing that came to mind.
Is that a strange way of pronouncing 'soldering'?
I can't quite tell from your comment, but if you didn't notice, my (cached) test showed a ~13% reduction in execution time with atime over the execution time with noatime.
The complete source code of the book, and even precompiled binaries for Windows and Mac OS X, can be downloaded from the book's webpage.
All I see on that page is some sample code from examples contained in the book. I was kind of hoping for the actual source code for the book, preferably in LaTeX form.
Let's expand that headline title a bit shall we?
"Patent troll firm Invests in Dynamic Pricing Model for obsolete patent-encumbered audio format."
(mount ext3 filesystem with noatime flag)
$ time for i in `seq 1 10000`; do touch file1.dat; done
real 0m15.231s
user 0m3.075s
sys 0m11.970s
$ time for i in `seq 1 10000`; do cat file1.dat >>/dev/null; done
real 0m14.326s
user 0m2.928s
sys 0m11.172s
(remount without noatime flag)
$ time for i in `seq 1 10000`; do touch file1.dat; done
real 0m12.629s
user 0m2.687s
sys 0m9.772s
$ time for i in `seq 1 10000`; do cat file1.dat >>/dev/null; done
real 0m12.401s
user 0m2.624s
sys 0m9.624s
Yes I think I'll stick with atime for now, thanks Linus.
The Mozilla folks were being silly about the use of their trademark.
I don't know, that sounds a bit complex.
Anyone wonder if this sort of thing is what Keely might have used? I'm sure someone with a good pseudo-scientific background will clue me in.
Also known as Zero Point energy, a term that is more familiar these days due to recent pseudo-scientific interest.