I used to be a GNOME man myself, but have recently become sold on KDE, because it really does shine. Not that long ago, both projects were at a similar level. Now kde has shot ahead, and gnome is left unconfigurable, empty. But that's not why I'm writing...
Something concerns me with the Qt licensing. I'm asking people who likewise share a love for the freedom that free software gives us, not to those who don't really care.
Imagine 3 years from now KDE has overtaken the Linux desktop, and GNOME/GTK+ has faded to obscurity. The Linux desktop is beginning to look bright and we start to have many commercial applications made for us (free is always better, but commercial is necessary).
With GNOME or KDE it is possible to make commercial applications. With GNOME the developer merely takes advantage of the LGPL license. In KDE however, the developer would need to purchase a license from Trolltech for Qt.
Now I have no problem with making companies pay - it's an incentive to make free software. But what I don't like, is if Qt becomes the necessary standard, that we have a commercial company that is the controller of the fate of commercial applications. I don't like the thought of commercial apps for Linux being in the hands of another company - I'd much rather if the community controlled such a mechanism.
So I want to know if others think my concerns are legitimate or misinformed?
Re:Let the flames begin ... and ignore them.
on
XFree86 4.3.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
What's this all about? I'm not biased towards or against X, I simply don't know enough.
But I do know that Microsoft also improves Windows with each release, addressing many major complaints. We still don't support them despite all this! So I don't see how your argument is useful at all..
And besides this, yours is the first modded up comment about X and whether it's obsolete or not.
Absolutely right. Sometimes hitting the child can be the worst option, at other times it can be the only one. I was smacked as a child as many of us were, and though I hated it, I do not hate my parents for it. I still love them. Not everyone comes out the same, and they vow never to strike their children. I'll make no such vow - instead I will understand my children and react accordingly.
I've heard stories of people who do acts of violence when they are older. No amount of reasoning could ever sway these people. Sometimes you feel like the best, only, solution is for these people to get a taste of their own medicine - so they can feel what they are dishing out.
Each person is beautifully unique, and the best advice is to encourage the parents to be wise and understanding - listen to their children.
As unpopular as religion is, I think this analogy is useful. Christians (protestant) see God as both a father and a judge. As a father He is loving and close to us, the best friend, must trustworthy guide. As a Judge He stand above us, punishing us and holding us under His thumb so we cannot err. We should see our parents that way too - respect our father, love him as a close friend and someone to be trusted. Yet never forget our place, that as our father his decision is to be final, and rebellion against him is a great evil. Parents should act in this way, dealing with their children according to each child.
Of course, this advice only works if your father is good. For those with wicked parents, your troubles are of an entirely different calibre.
Re:At the time it happened
on
Half Mast
·
· Score: 1
I think many people do not realise what they are capable of - I think everyone of us has the potential to kill, if pushed far enough, though most of us have the self-control to have that breaking point *very* far away. I used to have a really bad temper, would get angry at small things. Now it takes quite some time before I'm ready to rip someone's head off (ie, hit them).
But some things make me really, really, angry. And it is quite often when it's other people. The thought of a racist fills me with rage - I can't stand the thought of someone deriding someone for being born looking different. It sickens me. So does the thought of people being made outcasts in school, being bullied like many here. I was picked on occasionally, but I was fairly self-secure, so I didn't feel bad about it - just angry because of their ignorance. I did stand up for myself once physically, and it paid off great dividends I think.
I wish for every time someone made a racist insult, or mocked someone for being different or made an outcast, that I could be present to defend that person, verbally or physically. To let them know that they are not rejects, and that some people do love them. To anyone still in high school under these conditions, remember that slashdot - one of the most popular websites in the internet - has many people who empathise with you and accept you.
"It's also worthy of note that when an event like this happens - all of N. America and possible the world cry 'how could it happen'"
I feel the same way about 9/11 as many others do. I do not agree with what was done, but I think the vital question of "Why" was never answered by the Americans. And in the situation of bullying, these givers just do not understand the full extent of how bad they can make someone feel. Our tongue has the power to build nations and destroy cultures. Yet they are so ignorant and stupid to think that these people are weak and should just endure it. Stiff upper lip.
It was incredibly insightful. The privacy issues would interest geeks, but I think the value lies far more in the content.
It makes me feel pretty bleak at the moment, thinking of how far down everything might go. For many of us, we have grown up without knowing war - hearing of it in distant lands and distant ages - but never affecting us personally. This reality looks set to change, which is both frightening and exciting, in the sense that I live for change.
Who cares, really? If it's either no port or winex, I'll choose the latter. And if enough games say on the box "Runs on Linux" with a WineX symbol next to it then great! Once we have enough gamers we'll see native ports. Why? Because if 20% of their market is on Linux then they'll want them happy, and a WineX version is not that.
Any promotion of gaming on Linux, whether native or WineX, is positive. I know this because of my gamer friends, who only use computer for games. They're fascinated by Linux, and would be happy with WineX, so long as it runs close to the same as windows (doesn't need to be perfect for them).
Could you please immediately remove Australia from that link. Little Johnny Howard is gung ho for war, but a majority of us here are unsupportive of it unless the UN sanctions it. I do _not_ want people to think that Australia supports America in this, we Australians do not. Get UN support first, then we'll talk.
You'll need it to thread DRM support in your documents and view other similar such documents:) And once you do this and begin to save your documents in such a way, you'll force others to need an upgrade.
Heaven forbid that I suggest someone install the free OpenOffice software so they can read my documents, yet it is oh so natural for people to ask me to use Microsoft Office on my home desktop. Hypocrites, slaves to the borg....and yes, I've noticed a recent number of posts along the lines of "I'm cool because I don't mock Microsoft like all the other slashdotters" that gather karma - but I still don't trust these guys [Microsoft] and am annoyed at a lot of the rubbish we have to put up with because of a direct result of their practices)
Computers have revolutionised our world, without a doubt. We now work in ways that our ancestors could never have dreamed about.
But this is only the beginning. Once we can create computers faster than what we currently have, 100,000 times faster, 1,000,000 times faster, we'll have another revolution. Information will be ubiquitous or tightly controlled, will flow at incredible speed. I imagine we'll use computers to control our environment and monitor it to a degree never before anticipated.
And isn't this why geeks love computers? We usually don't care about wealth, but we do about control. The thought of controlling our house via a computer is appealling on so many levels. I imagine the computers of the future will allow us to move games from the realm of imagination to reality. No longer will we need to watch news, but instead we can watch it in full 3d. I imagine houses of the future will have a virtual reality room that is the computer. Standing in there we can do our shopping online (but the internet by now should be like electricity, ubiquitous), play games with friends, but more importantly explore the world and understand it. See first hand what the weather is like at the place we wish to travel to. See simulations of alien worlds in extraordinary detail.
Hand in hand with embedded computing, we will be able to control our environment like never before.
Lots will probably say that we can do this with computers today. My response is, that some things are easy and some things are harder. Take a strong, agile man who can pass obstacles in his stride. He finds very few problems he cannot overcome. He gains confidence in his ability so tries more and moves further, and his confidence is further boosted. Now imagine a weak, clumsy man. He has great difficulty with climbing over obstacles, moving, walking, etc. He has little confidence, so even though it is possible for him to overcome certain obstacles he doesn't because it is a tedious chore for him.
With fast computers we will have less fear to use them in powerful and new ways - especially if this causes the cost of current hardware to come down.
I was going to reply, but I'm tired and it's sunday and I want to relax. So I'll just say - that your ideas that Christianity was formed by the government are absurd and without foundation. You can't just say There is virtually no evidence Christianity ever existed prior to 100AD and not cite any references. I have read the Bible, and there is too much complexity and unity to be the product of a few governmental authorities trying to control the people. Same with your claim on the creation of the New Testament being around 323 AD. You cannot just say that because it flies in the face of all research so far - quote your sources, give references and arguments. And don't tell me a book to read because there's no chance I'll buy it. These ideas seem so unrealistic just like theories that the holocaust never occurred, that it would take some awesome convicting of common knowledge for me to be tempted to pick up such a book and waste my money on a radical theory. Don't get me wrong though, I often believe unpopular ideas because they are true, but it doesn't mean I'll go accepting any. There's got to be a good argument too.
Also I find your understanding of Christian history appalling in other ways. Eg, You dismiss 1700 years of Christian religion and expect me to believe that is the cause of my misunderstanding. Who do you think created your bible? Catholics. Who created it? Tell me the book and I will tell you the author. The main Christian movement eventually became the Roman Catholic church, yes - but it was not like it became in 300AD, it was much different before that - and there has always been a stream of Christians hated and murdered by the Catholics who held the beliefs of Christianity from before it was adopted by the Roman empire.
I think you have read too much anarchistic literature that makes the government a lot smarter than it really is. They are clever and use intrigue, but Christianity is by no means a tool of the government. If the government began to condone evil then the Christians would have legitimate cause from their beliefs to stand against the government. That does not sound like a tool that the government would like. Instead they would want a religion that would be required to support them stronger when they go against common wisdom.
Also, again, you have read too much anarchistic literature by assuming that I am somehow unhappy, sad, or crushed by my "crux" of religion. This is totally inaccurate and you should actually get to know some real Christians sometime (not catholics, who murdered my brethren, and not charismatics who have mistaken their own emotions for God). I program, play computer games, roleplay, try my hand at art, learn martial arts, have friends from other religions. I enjoy myself, have fun, go to cinemas. Yet I feel blessed and happy to worship God. I find it hard to understand that you cannot comprehend that someone could do this and still be happy. I am not mindless, but instead I try to understand. You have to do more than offer radical ideas - you must back them up.
I have read the book. It is typical of "pop" non-fiction today. The writing style is casual, the citiations are few, and the exploration of alternative explanations non-existant. Part of the reason such books have little impact on people like me, is I really don't care whether or not there is a god. Even if I find out there is a god, it will have no impact on my life. This book attempts ultimately, to suggest it is up to you to find Christ. Bullshit, that is not an answer.
I agree with your analysis of this book, which is why I said it is a good introduction. In other words, I do not think this book is sufficient for a person who wants to discover the answers for themselves. Instead, it provides a good summary of the arguments used, and the main figures of Christian thought so that if one wanted to discover the answers they'd know where to look. Maybe I should have made that clearer.
I am sure your God will be rejoicing at the coming bloodshed.
God takes pleasure in the repentance of a sinner - one who promises to Him to change from evil to do good, rather than the death of one. I have no idea why you even said this.
Even if I did think He would rejoice, why would your comments make me feel bad about it? How would it pursuade me that His rejoicing in it is wrong. How could you even accuse God of wrong? If He does wrong, then He must by definition not be all powerful and therefore not God.
What is with military freaks posting on slashdot lately. Dude, you are as blind to the truth as any other Christian. I got news for you, the military serves the same purpose as religion, to keep people content as slaves and to maintain the social order. Schools were created to make you WANT the very life of taking orders you now live.
That is not life. Free men don't take orders from anyway, supernatural or otherwise.
Sounds like you are an anarchist (www.anarchyfaq.com). I am very sympathising of that philosophy but I can't entirely agree. However, I gree with you 100% about school - it is a tool to brainwash us - see my section on school at http://tyreth.homelinux.org (excuse the server speed it's a p133 with 32mb ram running apache+sql+php). However, to be a freeman I don't agree requires us to be free from taking orders from anyone. I am a slave to Christ but a freeman in the world. If I weren't a slave to Christ I'd be a slave to this world and it's pursuits - whether I live in anarchism, capitalism, communism, or dictatorship.
What you don't realize is that is not fun. That is fun for someone who watches TV all day want wants to be in the TV program. Life is about the struggle, constant improvement, striving to make each day better than the last. Human life is incompatible with infinite existence, and would lose its meaning otherwise.
Agreed again. In heaven we won't know everything despite the parent post. That is absurd. But we will be without sin and evil. There will be challenges aplenty, and the joy of learning and sharing without evil. We will be able to spend eternity learning and exploring the mysteries of the universe and of God - but now we must deal with betrayal, violence, and much more. In the afterlife we will have the freedom to work together to reach out to the stars, so to speak. Something that can never happen this life (one reason I reject anarchism and I'm sure you'll disagree, I once did).
Thats not meaning. Thats an insult. Life is not meant to worship. Thats was Roman emperors wanted. That is a life for slaves.
It was a result of christianity that slavery was abolished (admittedly not completed even today). Your argument is empty. Christianity was rejected and illegal by the Romans well before it was the state religion. Nero the emperor used to burn Christians alive and kill them. This is definately not a religion created by any government as a tool, either by the Roman empire or the Jews who wanted to overthrow the Romans.
Anyway, have fun slaughtering the innocent citizens of Iraq.
I take it you are a pacifist. I abhor the idea of this Iraq war, but I do believe in the possibility of a just war - but not this one. Not yet. I would feel duty bound to oppose Hitler though I would be scared to kill and be killed. Yet the service it does to free those Jews and Christians would be for it, to defend the innocent and stop the aggressor.
I can't see that you have proved anything wrong yet. I will offer you a philosophical argument then that will perhaps satisfy your criticism.
Consider that you have stolen a car. Now compare yourself with a child who has stolen a loaf of bread. Who has done the greater evil? You have, for the child stole out of necessity, but you stole out of greed. Now consider your theft with one who embezzles his boss for $5million. He has done the greater evil, for his greed was aeons above yours.
Now compare your good works. You give your car to a family who needs one so the father can start a new job and provide for his family. Now consider a rich man who gives a donation of $1000 to a charity. You have done the greater good, because you gave greater than what he did, though he could have easily given more than you. Now imagine a child giving away his piggybank to help his friend pay for food. The child has given more than you because he gave everything he had, but you gave out of what you had.
Now consider God who has done no evil. He observes the works of the child, your works, and the works of the rich man. Whose works are sufficient to enter them into heaven? Who is good enough? At what point did they cross the mark?
You see, when we compare our sins with those around us, we can appear quite good in our own eyes. but when we compare our sins to the standard of the Great Judge we all fail helplessly as abominable. Who are you compared to Moses or Gandhi? Who are you compared to those murderes of 9/11? Where does the world stand in condemnation? There is only one measuring rod, and that is God, and we all fail. This is why works can never lead to salvation - unless you can offer to me the true standard in your eyes of salvation.
In summary, yes, Gandhi and Muhammad both will go to hell unless they believed in Jesus. Why? Because they rejected the Creator to whom they owed all to. And if you read those verses I showed, you will see that for those who have never heard they will still be saved if God has chosen them. There is not a person alive who is without excuse, "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse." Romans 1:20.
You must demonstrate to me how the standard for salvation is measured. You have talked with others like me who reject catholicism, do you ever wonder why? Your religion began in the same foundation as our faith did, yet we diverged at some point. At the beginning however we both accepted the Scriptures as the infallible word of God - perfect words given through men who were gifted for that purpose.
Show me also where Jesus was imperfect. I have seen Him act in sadness when Lazerus died, with rage when the temple was filled with merchants, and with fear when He approached the cross - but never imperfectly. Show me His sin or His faults.
I would tell myself, listen to your eldars. They have seen more and know more. They've learned from their own mistakes and the mistakes of others. Even your parents are too young.
Everyone makes mistakes.
You are smart, but also a fool - don't get proud.
Pursue the truth with all your heart, don't settle for a lie just because it's easier.
There's no one type of personality that is the best - there is a diversity, so appreciate it.
Always question and try to understand.
---------
In many ways, I would be afraid to offer myself advice. I could say what I said above, but I learned these lessons anyway. How can I be certain I would learn them at all if I told myself? We cannot predict what other mistakes we'd make and what other lessons we'd miss if we gave ourselves advice. I have made many mistakes, made myself the fool many times, and done wretched things - yet they all work towards good. My Lord Jesus instructed us that we would be persecuted, yet through evil we would be transformed into something good. Day by day I try to come closer to Him, to be more righteous like Him. So I cannot completely despise the evil things that have happened to me, but instead rejoice in them because bring me closer to Him.
A note about the description for that ID - Karma is now capped so that user ID will drop below the "excellent" stage quickly if somebody decides to be a troll every time they post.
By Jews the original poster was obviously referring to the Jewish religious leaders, such as the Pharisee's and the Sadduccees.
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness." - Matthew 23:27
Tombs also is "sepulchres" in some translations. I don't know about the other verse except in Isaiah 64:6 I think.
so you think that because you're "christian" that god already did everything for you and you don't have to do anything? HA! you've got it all wrong. maybe you should go back and read the bible again... oh and you might want to read the first 4 books of the new testament to get your stories correct on jesus' life.
Here is what the Bible teaches. It is two very clear principles which will aid your understanding of the Scriptures.
1. There is nothing we can do to be saved - salvation is a work of God alone - (John 6:44, 15:16, 15:19, Acts 13:48, Romans 8:30, 9:11, Eph 1:4, 2 Thes 2:13, 1 Pet 1:1)
2. Those whom God has chosen to be saved will do good works, and these good works, and if the works are lacking then they are likely not saved - James
Jesus did care about truth, but He taught in parables so that those who were not elected would not understand (Matt. 13:11), but those who were chosen were given understanding.
It is also a simple matter to demonstrate that Jesus did care how many gods one worshipped. "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mk 16:16). We must believe and that is all that is required of salvation. But as to worship of gods, we know that Jesus Himself was God. And He said, "no one can come to the Father but by Me". Examine the moral law, the 10 commandments that stand for all time on what is right and wrong, and read the first:
"You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image - any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, a, a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments." (Exodus 20:3-4). Jesus Himself embraced the Hebrew Scriptures:
"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." - Matt 5:17-19.
It is no small thing that you teach, for you teach the very things Jesus as God has condemned as abominable. I praise you for your journey has begun and you look to please God, but I rebuke your teachings as dangerous. Again read through the Scriptures, but open your eyes to understand - because you are reading the words of God.
Perhaps your God did create humans to worship him, but I find such a life repulsive and would consider such a God the essence of evil.
It is more logical to assume that you believe God created us in his own likeness. No human, save the most pathetic sociopaths, would ever demand worship from anyone. IF your original assertions were correct, your God did not create you in his likeness.
Your logic does not follow. If God created us to worship Him, then how is that evil? It is repulsive for one human to worship another human, because we know all humans are faulty and evil. Therefore the act of worshipping another is misguided and corrupt. Besides this, it is also evil because worship is to God alone.
But the main reason your logic does not follow is because if God created us and the universe, then He is the source and definition of good and evil. By calling Him evil you make Him a product of the creation rather than the originator. See the fault?
Because you cannot prove to me that your God is more the real God than Buddha, Muhammed, Shiva, Zeus, or any of the other fictional divinities.
Buddha and Mohammad were not gods, they were men and never even claimed to be gods. And if we can agree there is a God then I could demonstrate to you that the God as described in the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures is the true God, and that Shiva, Zeus and others are false gods. But since you do not believe there is any God then that discussion would be fruitless.
But a good place to start would be some demonstration of power which is beyond our comprehension. That would be a good start.
If that is enough then you should have believed long ago, unless you are living in a box. Let me take the classic example - the resurrection of Jesus the Christ. If you are genuinely wanting to know if this can be proven sufficiently (say, as much as we are sure about the authors of those works you mention later) then I suggest you read this book as an introduction to where and to whom you look for the answers - not sufficient in itself to prove the case, but if you investigate and follow a similar journey you should find the answers. Yet there is much more that cannot be explained in this world. Follow the course of genuine mediums and channellers, of those who have spirit guides, those in cults who can manipulate objects through the summoning of spirits. If you do not believe there are any mysteries, then look deeper than the surface. Our western world has discarded many of these evil practices, thanks to the influence of reformed Christianity - yet they are seeping in again. You will find them common in polytheistic religions such as Hinduism, and in the new age movement.
I am angry with no one. I am angry with the choices made by people like you. I value human life, and think this world is perfect. I believe much of the suffering of mankind is due to short sighted, narrow thinking by people like yourself. Rather than strive to create heaven on earth, you desire a fantasy world. Rather than trusting your instincts you abhor them. Rather than using your human talents to create something of value, you worry about petty love.
If this world is perfect then how can you condemn my choices, or suggest we strive for heaven on earth? By perfect I must assume that you mean the way it is meant to be. And that meaning is derived by the inherent meaningless of a universe without God. Yet we humans do have an understanding of doing good for others that will not benefit us. Even if we have difficulty doing it ourselves, we comprehend this as something good. Yet in a world created from meaningless, this behaviour is unexpected.
The saddest part is you do not realize your Christianity was created by a dying empire as a tool to enslave its people. It destroyed a thriving culture and replaced it with one founded in misery, ignorance, and suffering for over a thousand years.
Do you refer to Constantine's adoption as Christianity as the religion of Rome around 300 AD? (can't remember exactly when). Because that occurred well after Christianity started. Christianity was started by Jews for Jews, and only after Jesus died were gentiles invited. When Rome adopted Christianity this was an accursed event for the Christian faith - because the Roman Catholic church teachings were formed, teachings that do what you describe. They bind people in misery, cloud their minds and remove hope for salvation. I could not agree with you more, but understand this - when the reformation occurred in the 16/17th century, it was a break away from the Roman Catholic church that put the Bible in the hands of the people and away from the elite priests. These revolutionaries transformed our world from those dark ages, yet they still understood God and could live in peace with that knowledge. You are confusing the first with the last - the Christianity as taught by Jesus and the Apostles with the pseudo-Christianity taught by Roman Catholicism, an abominable organisation.
I appreciate your links to those other philosophers, whose works I will one day put the effort into familiarising myself with. Yet I suggest that you don't understand that there are a few Christians who live to understand, yet this comprehension has led them to the inescapable conclusion that there is a God. Some of these men are brilliant minds. Then you also have those, who as you say, bind the minds of the ignorant and produce a life of misery. There is no greater pleasure than to serve God and please Him, I can assure you - everything else fades to black. If I wish to make my parents happy, who are yet mortal sinful humans, then how much more do I desire to please the one for whom I owe every breath?
It's not difficult to understand in the way you explain it, but I think the reasons are more than just the same as why an American would be unhappy, perhaps a religious reason. That's why I said it.
But yeah it shouldn't be too hard for someone to understand.
The programmers this time are the ones who come up with the concept - and why shouldn't they? I enjoy programming more than, say, making art or levels - but I have ideas for games and I want to make my game. Why shouldn't I get to decide what game I make?
Then once the game is known the appropriate people to join the team are known. But the programmers are the ones who come up with the game concept and design.
That's a good way to let them choose the game for motivation. I tried that recently on my friends - previously I've offered them ideas which they seem interested in and do nothing. This time I asked them if they were interested, and if so let them take the steps. They were slightly more motivated, and got further, but still nothing concrete:) But I think the problem was only a few people. If you can find a group of self motivated people (and that may be hard to work out because people can sound motivated when they're really likely to drop off) then it should work well.
I think that if you did this, there would be a lot less committed people in the group. If you make it a select few that feel they earned their way in, then they are much more likely to committ. I know personally that it's hard to get a group of people together to make a game without much motivation.
If it were easy then there'd probably be more good quality opensource games out there.
First of all I am NOT an apple user. I love Linux, I'm a Linux user through and through. Well done for sorting out your xpdf problems, I couldn't be happier for you.
Second, if you agree with me on their trade show thing then good, we have common ground! My point proven! So why talk about me whining when your whole post is one big winge about how I'm some luser apple guy who is upset with lindows for misrepresenting it. It's simply not true. I'm all for Linux on laptops, and I think Lindows is doing a good job. I just don't appreciate comparing apples with oranges because most people don't know that apple is different. They think mhz comparisons are relevant. So everything you just said is "we know that, so what?" - the people who read it won't know. That's my fricking point.
And as for the PDA, they are suggesting that they are somehow equal. Take my family car example from before. I just don't think those are fair comparisons. Something like "Are You Considering a PDA? Perhaps a Lindows laptop is more suited to your role. You are probably better off with a Lindows laptop if..." Instead they make it sound as if the only reason you'd buy a PDA is for cost. That's deceptive. I'm all for proposing a laptop over a PDA, just don't deceive people! You said yourself most people have no idea that a PDA can't run their desktop software, so maybe buying a laptop they won't realise the consequences. Eg, with a PDA there is no need to manage a full OS yourself, since it's embedded into the device. With a laptop you might have to deal with formats n' stuff. Right tool for the right job. I might overlook this PDA comparison, except in conjunction with other observations, it is seen in a different light.
I couldn't care less if you don't agree with me, but at least stop winging and get your facts straight - you can't tell the difference between a Mac-head and a Linux lover. I have no intention of getting an apple in the future because of the reasons you mention. It is strange that you can't understand how someone desperately eager to see Linux get a chunk of the desktop space (yes, I do) still be critical of a Linux company when they make deceptive advertisements. Perhaps I'd just like Linux companies to act with integrity? Is that so hard to understand??
They compared their laptop to an apple notebook, showing the mhz rating as if they were supposed to be somehow similar in power but different in costs.
And comparing a laptop to a PDA???
And them changing their plans for the conference recently so their CEO spoke first (they are sponsoring the event, but they changed it quite late, and the event is not a lindows event but a linux one).
As for your religious arguments, I gave up trying to argue with religious zealots long ago. Your collective mental prison is none of my concern if you wouldn't leave it even given the key.
How can you be so bold in the assumption that I am in a prison - or that I even feel like I am in one? You hand me the "key" of atheism as if it will let me out - I try the key and open the door to a dark, musty room with shadows moving in the corners. Your analogy means nothing to me, because I have been freed through my beliefs, not entrapped. You'll have to use more than that analogy to pursuade me...
I believe in understanding truth - that it is imperative to reject false thinking and a false belief if presented with truth. If anyone has rational grounds on why religion is a crux then I will accept it. But I'm not interested in your experiences with ignorant christians who say "faith is not possible if we know" because that is irrational. Faith should be based on _knowing_ God is real and being able to prove that. Otherwise it is a self-deception. I'm not interested on your experience with Jehovah's Witnesses who are glorified salesmen, deceived into thinking that their superiors are moral leaders when in fact their organisation is a great vehicle for brainwashing. You think what I believe is irrational? I've never had a question I couldn't answer that deals with religion.
I have changed my opinion in large ways in the past, and I'll do it again in the future - I respect logic and truth, it's what I look for. But if you presume to have the key to superior wisdom, there is much you don't know. All I can suggest is that you have encountered the many religious normals who don't understand their faith and think that that is a necessary state of being. They don't realise that for their religion to be true it _must_ be rational.
Slashdot Mirror
Something concerns me with the Qt licensing. I'm asking people who likewise share a love for the freedom that free software gives us, not to those who don't really care.
Imagine 3 years from now KDE has overtaken the Linux desktop, and GNOME/GTK+ has faded to obscurity. The Linux desktop is beginning to look bright and we start to have many commercial applications made for us (free is always better, but commercial is necessary).
With GNOME or KDE it is possible to make commercial applications. With GNOME the developer merely takes advantage of the LGPL license. In KDE however, the developer would need to purchase a license from Trolltech for Qt.
Now I have no problem with making companies pay - it's an incentive to make free software. But what I don't like, is if Qt becomes the necessary standard, that we have a commercial company that is the controller of the fate of commercial applications. I don't like the thought of commercial apps for Linux being in the hands of another company - I'd much rather if the community controlled such a mechanism.
So I want to know if others think my concerns are legitimate or misinformed?
But I do know that Microsoft also improves Windows with each release, addressing many major complaints. We still don't support them despite all this! So I don't see how your argument is useful at all..
And besides this, yours is the first modded up comment about X and whether it's obsolete or not.
I've heard stories of people who do acts of violence when they are older. No amount of reasoning could ever sway these people. Sometimes you feel like the best, only, solution is for these people to get a taste of their own medicine - so they can feel what they are dishing out.
Each person is beautifully unique, and the best advice is to encourage the parents to be wise and understanding - listen to their children.
As unpopular as religion is, I think this analogy is useful. Christians (protestant) see God as both a father and a judge. As a father He is loving and close to us, the best friend, must trustworthy guide. As a Judge He stand above us, punishing us and holding us under His thumb so we cannot err. We should see our parents that way too - respect our father, love him as a close friend and someone to be trusted. Yet never forget our place, that as our father his decision is to be final, and rebellion against him is a great evil. Parents should act in this way, dealing with their children according to each child.
Of course, this advice only works if your father is good. For those with wicked parents, your troubles are of an entirely different calibre.
But some things make me really, really, angry. And it is quite often when it's other people. The thought of a racist fills me with rage - I can't stand the thought of someone deriding someone for being born looking different. It sickens me. So does the thought of people being made outcasts in school, being bullied like many here. I was picked on occasionally, but I was fairly self-secure, so I didn't feel bad about it - just angry because of their ignorance. I did stand up for myself once physically, and it paid off great dividends I think.
I wish for every time someone made a racist insult, or mocked someone for being different or made an outcast, that I could be present to defend that person, verbally or physically. To let them know that they are not rejects, and that some people do love them. To anyone still in high school under these conditions, remember that slashdot - one of the most popular websites in the internet - has many people who empathise with you and accept you.
"It's also worthy of note that when an event like this happens - all of N. America and possible the world cry 'how could it happen'"
I feel the same way about 9/11 as many others do. I do not agree with what was done, but I think the vital question of "Why" was never answered by the Americans. And in the situation of bullying, these givers just do not understand the full extent of how bad they can make someone feel. Our tongue has the power to build nations and destroy cultures. Yet they are so ignorant and stupid to think that these people are weak and should just endure it. Stiff upper lip.
It was incredibly insightful. The privacy issues would interest geeks, but I think the value lies far more in the content.
It makes me feel pretty bleak at the moment, thinking of how far down everything might go. For many of us, we have grown up without knowing war - hearing of it in distant lands and distant ages - but never affecting us personally. This reality looks set to change, which is both frightening and exciting, in the sense that I live for change.
Any promotion of gaming on Linux, whether native or WineX, is positive. I know this because of my gamer friends, who only use computer for games. They're fascinated by Linux, and would be happy with WineX, so long as it runs close to the same as windows (doesn't need to be perfect for them).
Could you please immediately remove Australia from that link. Little Johnny Howard is gung ho for war, but a majority of us here are unsupportive of it unless the UN sanctions it. I do _not_ want people to think that Australia supports America in this, we Australians do not. Get UN support first, then we'll talk.
Of course, it's really quite simple.
:) And once you do this and begin to save your documents in such a way, you'll force others to need an upgrade.
...and yes, I've noticed a recent number of posts along the lines of "I'm cool because I don't mock Microsoft like all the other slashdotters" that gather karma - but I still don't trust these guys [Microsoft] and am annoyed at a lot of the rubbish we have to put up with because of a direct result of their practices)
You'll need it to thread DRM support in your documents and view other similar such documents
Heaven forbid that I suggest someone install the free OpenOffice software so they can read my documents, yet it is oh so natural for people to ask me to use Microsoft Office on my home desktop. Hypocrites, slaves to the borg.
Hand in hand with embedded computing, we will be able to control our environment like never before.
Lots will probably say that we can do this with computers today. My response is, that some things are easy and some things are harder. Take a strong, agile man who can pass obstacles in his stride. He finds very few problems he cannot overcome. He gains confidence in his ability so tries more and moves further, and his confidence is further boosted. Now imagine a weak, clumsy man. He has great difficulty with climbing over obstacles, moving, walking, etc. He has little confidence, so even though it is possible for him to overcome certain obstacles he doesn't because it is a tedious chore for him.
With fast computers we will have less fear to use them in powerful and new ways - especially if this causes the cost of current hardware to come down.
Also I find your understanding of Christian history appalling in other ways. Eg, You dismiss 1700 years of Christian religion and expect me to believe that is the cause of my misunderstanding. Who do you think created your bible? Catholics. Who created it? Tell me the book and I will tell you the author. The main Christian movement eventually became the Roman Catholic church, yes - but it was not like it became in 300AD, it was much different before that - and there has always been a stream of Christians hated and murdered by the Catholics who held the beliefs of Christianity from before it was adopted by the Roman empire.
I think you have read too much anarchistic literature that makes the government a lot smarter than it really is. They are clever and use intrigue, but Christianity is by no means a tool of the government. If the government began to condone evil then the Christians would have legitimate cause from their beliefs to stand against the government. That does not sound like a tool that the government would like. Instead they would want a religion that would be required to support them stronger when they go against common wisdom.
Also, again, you have read too much anarchistic literature by assuming that I am somehow unhappy, sad, or crushed by my "crux" of religion. This is totally inaccurate and you should actually get to know some real Christians sometime (not catholics, who murdered my brethren, and not charismatics who have mistaken their own emotions for God). I program, play computer games, roleplay, try my hand at art, learn martial arts, have friends from other religions. I enjoy myself, have fun, go to cinemas. Yet I feel blessed and happy to worship God. I find it hard to understand that you cannot comprehend that someone could do this and still be happy. I am not mindless, but instead I try to understand. You have to do more than offer radical ideas - you must back them up.
I have read the book. It is typical of "pop" non-fiction today. The writing style is casual, the citiations are few, and the exploration of alternative explanations non-existant. Part of the reason such books have little impact on people like me, is I really don't care whether or not there is a god. Even if I find out there is a god, it will have no impact on my life. This book attempts ultimately, to suggest it is up to you to find Christ. Bullshit, that is not an answer.
I agree with your analysis of this book, which is why I said it is a good introduction. In other words, I do not think this book is sufficient for a person who wants to discover the answers for themselves. Instead, it provides a good summary of the arguments used, and the main figures of Christian thought so that if one wanted to discover the answers they'd know where to look. Maybe I should have made that clearer.
God takes pleasure in the repentance of a sinner - one who promises to Him to change from evil to do good, rather than the death of one. I have no idea why you even said this.
Even if I did think He would rejoice, why would your comments make me feel bad about it? How would it pursuade me that His rejoicing in it is wrong. How could you even accuse God of wrong? If He does wrong, then He must by definition not be all powerful and therefore not God.
Sounds like you are an anarchist (www.anarchyfaq.com). I am very sympathising of that philosophy but I can't entirely agree. However, I gree with you 100% about school - it is a tool to brainwash us - see my section on school at http://tyreth.homelinux.org (excuse the server speed it's a p133 with 32mb ram running apache+sql+php). However, to be a freeman I don't agree requires us to be free from taking orders from anyone. I am a slave to Christ but a freeman in the world. If I weren't a slave to Christ I'd be a slave to this world and it's pursuits - whether I live in anarchism, capitalism, communism, or dictatorship.
What you don't realize is that is not fun. That is fun for someone who watches TV all day want wants to be in the TV program. Life is about the struggle, constant improvement, striving to make each day better than the last. Human life is incompatible with infinite existence, and would lose its meaning otherwise.
Agreed again. In heaven we won't know everything despite the parent post. That is absurd. But we will be without sin and evil. There will be challenges aplenty, and the joy of learning and sharing without evil. We will be able to spend eternity learning and exploring the mysteries of the universe and of God - but now we must deal with betrayal, violence, and much more. In the afterlife we will have the freedom to work together to reach out to the stars, so to speak. Something that can never happen this life (one reason I reject anarchism and I'm sure you'll disagree, I once did).
Thats not meaning. Thats an insult. Life is not meant to worship. Thats was Roman emperors wanted. That is a life for slaves.
It was a result of christianity that slavery was abolished (admittedly not completed even today). Your argument is empty. Christianity was rejected and illegal by the Romans well before it was the state religion. Nero the emperor used to burn Christians alive and kill them. This is definately not a religion created by any government as a tool, either by the Roman empire or the Jews who wanted to overthrow the Romans.
Anyway, have fun slaughtering the innocent citizens of Iraq.
I take it you are a pacifist. I abhor the idea of this Iraq war, but I do believe in the possibility of a just war - but not this one. Not yet. I would feel duty bound to oppose Hitler though I would be scared to kill and be killed. Yet the service it does to free those Jews and Christians would be for it, to defend the innocent and stop the aggressor.
Consider that you have stolen a car. Now compare yourself with a child who has stolen a loaf of bread. Who has done the greater evil? You have, for the child stole out of necessity, but you stole out of greed. Now consider your theft with one who embezzles his boss for $5million. He has done the greater evil, for his greed was aeons above yours.
Now compare your good works. You give your car to a family who needs one so the father can start a new job and provide for his family. Now consider a rich man who gives a donation of $1000 to a charity. You have done the greater good, because you gave greater than what he did, though he could have easily given more than you. Now imagine a child giving away his piggybank to help his friend pay for food. The child has given more than you because he gave everything he had, but you gave out of what you had.
Now consider God who has done no evil. He observes the works of the child, your works, and the works of the rich man. Whose works are sufficient to enter them into heaven? Who is good enough? At what point did they cross the mark?
You see, when we compare our sins with those around us, we can appear quite good in our own eyes. but when we compare our sins to the standard of the Great Judge we all fail helplessly as abominable. Who are you compared to Moses or Gandhi? Who are you compared to those murderes of 9/11? Where does the world stand in condemnation? There is only one measuring rod, and that is God, and we all fail. This is why works can never lead to salvation - unless you can offer to me the true standard in your eyes of salvation.
In summary, yes, Gandhi and Muhammad both will go to hell unless they believed in Jesus. Why? Because they rejected the Creator to whom they owed all to. And if you read those verses I showed, you will see that for those who have never heard they will still be saved if God has chosen them. There is not a person alive who is without excuse, "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse." Romans 1:20.
You must demonstrate to me how the standard for salvation is measured. You have talked with others like me who reject catholicism, do you ever wonder why? Your religion began in the same foundation as our faith did, yet we diverged at some point. At the beginning however we both accepted the Scriptures as the infallible word of God - perfect words given through men who were gifted for that purpose.
Show me also where Jesus was imperfect. I have seen Him act in sadness when Lazerus died, with rage when the temple was filled with merchants, and with fear when He approached the cross - but never imperfectly. Show me His sin or His faults.
I would tell myself, listen to your eldars. They have seen more and know more. They've learned from their own mistakes and the mistakes of others. Even your parents are too young.
Everyone makes mistakes.
You are smart, but also a fool - don't get proud.
Pursue the truth with all your heart, don't settle for a lie just because it's easier.
There's no one type of personality that is the best - there is a diversity, so appreciate it.
Always question and try to understand.
---------
In many ways, I would be afraid to offer myself advice. I could say what I said above, but I learned these lessons anyway. How can I be certain I would learn them at all if I told myself? We cannot predict what other mistakes we'd make and what other lessons we'd miss if we gave ourselves advice. I have made many mistakes, made myself the fool many times, and done wretched things - yet they all work towards good. My Lord Jesus instructed us that we would be persecuted, yet through evil we would be transformed into something good. Day by day I try to come closer to Him, to be more righteous like Him. So I cannot completely despise the evil things that have happened to me, but instead rejoice in them because bring me closer to Him.
A note about the description for that ID - Karma is now capped so that user ID will drop below the "excellent" stage quickly if somebody decides to be a troll every time they post.
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness." - Matthew 23:27
Tombs also is "sepulchres" in some translations. I don't know about the other verse except in Isaiah 64:6 I think.
so you think that because you're "christian" that god already did everything for you and you don't have to do anything? HA! you've got it all wrong. maybe you should go back and read the bible again... oh and you might want to read the first 4 books of the new testament to get your stories correct on jesus' life.
Here is what the Bible teaches. It is two very clear principles which will aid your understanding of the Scriptures.
1. There is nothing we can do to be saved - salvation is a work of God alone - (John 6:44, 15:16, 15:19, Acts 13:48, Romans 8:30, 9:11, Eph 1:4, 2 Thes 2:13, 1 Pet 1:1)
2. Those whom God has chosen to be saved will do good works, and these good works, and if the works are lacking then they are likely not saved - James
Jesus did care about truth, but He taught in parables so that those who were not elected would not understand (Matt. 13:11), but those who were chosen were given understanding.
It is also a simple matter to demonstrate that Jesus did care how many gods one worshipped. "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mk 16:16). We must believe and that is all that is required of salvation. But as to worship of gods, we know that Jesus Himself was God. And He said, "no one can come to the Father but by Me". Examine the moral law, the 10 commandments that stand for all time on what is right and wrong, and read the first:
"You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image - any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, a, a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments." (Exodus 20:3-4). Jesus Himself embraced the Hebrew Scriptures:
"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." - Matt 5:17-19.
It is no small thing that you teach, for you teach the very things Jesus as God has condemned as abominable. I praise you for your journey has begun and you look to please God, but I rebuke your teachings as dangerous. Again read through the Scriptures, but open your eyes to understand - because you are reading the words of God.
It is more logical to assume that you believe God created us in his own likeness. No human, save the most pathetic sociopaths, would ever demand worship from anyone. IF your original assertions were correct, your God did not create you in his likeness.
Your logic does not follow. If God created us to worship Him, then how is that evil? It is repulsive for one human to worship another human, because we know all humans are faulty and evil. Therefore the act of worshipping another is misguided and corrupt. Besides this, it is also evil because worship is to God alone.
But the main reason your logic does not follow is because if God created us and the universe, then He is the source and definition of good and evil. By calling Him evil you make Him a product of the creation rather than the originator. See the fault?
Because you cannot prove to me that your God is more the real God than Buddha, Muhammed, Shiva, Zeus, or any of the other fictional divinities.
Buddha and Mohammad were not gods, they were men and never even claimed to be gods. And if we can agree there is a God then I could demonstrate to you that the God as described in the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures is the true God, and that Shiva, Zeus and others are false gods. But since you do not believe there is any God then that discussion would be fruitless.
But a good place to start would be some demonstration of power which is beyond our comprehension. That would be a good start.
If that is enough then you should have believed long ago, unless you are living in a box. Let me take the classic example - the resurrection of Jesus the Christ. If you are genuinely wanting to know if this can be proven sufficiently (say, as much as we are sure about the authors of those works you mention later) then I suggest you read this book as an introduction to where and to whom you look for the answers - not sufficient in itself to prove the case, but if you investigate and follow a similar journey you should find the answers. Yet there is much more that cannot be explained in this world. Follow the course of genuine mediums and channellers, of those who have spirit guides, those in cults who can manipulate objects through the summoning of spirits. If you do not believe there are any mysteries, then look deeper than the surface. Our western world has discarded many of these evil practices, thanks to the influence of reformed Christianity - yet they are seeping in again. You will find them common in polytheistic religions such as Hinduism, and in the new age movement.
I am angry with no one. I am angry with the choices made by people like you. I value human life, and think this world is perfect. I believe much of the suffering of mankind is due to short sighted, narrow thinking by people like yourself. Rather than strive to create heaven on earth, you desire a fantasy world. Rather than trusting your instincts you abhor them. Rather than using your human talents to create something of value, you worry about petty love.
If this world is perfect then how can you condemn my choices, or suggest we strive for heaven on earth? By perfect I must assume that you mean the way it is meant to be. And that meaning is derived by the inherent meaningless of a universe without God. Yet we humans do have an understanding of doing good for others that will not benefit us. Even if we have difficulty doing it ourselves, we comprehend this as something good. Yet in a world created from meaningless, this behaviour is unexpected.
The saddest part is you do not realize your Christianity was created by a dying empire as a tool to enslave its people. It destroyed a thriving culture and replaced it with one founded in misery, ignorance, and suffering for over a thousand years.
Do you refer to Constantine's adoption as Christianity as the religion of Rome around 300 AD? (can't remember exactly when). Because that occurred well after Christianity started. Christianity was started by Jews for Jews, and only after Jesus died were gentiles invited. When Rome adopted Christianity this was an accursed event for the Christian faith - because the Roman Catholic church teachings were formed, teachings that do what you describe. They bind people in misery, cloud their minds and remove hope for salvation. I could not agree with you more, but understand this - when the reformation occurred in the 16/17th century, it was a break away from the Roman Catholic church that put the Bible in the hands of the people and away from the elite priests. These revolutionaries transformed our world from those dark ages, yet they still understood God and could live in peace with that knowledge. You are confusing the first with the last - the Christianity as taught by Jesus and the Apostles with the pseudo-Christianity taught by Roman Catholicism, an abominable organisation.
I appreciate your links to those other philosophers, whose works I will one day put the effort into familiarising myself with. Yet I suggest that you don't understand that there are a few Christians who live to understand, yet this comprehension has led them to the inescapable conclusion that there is a God. Some of these men are brilliant minds. Then you also have those, who as you say, bind the minds of the ignorant and produce a life of misery. There is no greater pleasure than to serve God and please Him, I can assure you - everything else fades to black. If I wish to make my parents happy, who are yet mortal sinful humans, then how much more do I desire to please the one for whom I owe every breath?
I'm glad mine aren't regardless of this :)
But yeah it shouldn't be too hard for someone to understand.
Then once the game is known the appropriate people to join the team are known. But the programmers are the ones who come up with the game concept and design.
That's a good way to let them choose the game for motivation. I tried that recently on my friends - previously I've offered them ideas which they seem interested in and do nothing. This time I asked them if they were interested, and if so let them take the steps. They were slightly more motivated, and got further, but still nothing concrete :) But I think the problem was only a few people. If you can find a group of self motivated people (and that may be hard to work out because people can sound motivated when they're really likely to drop off) then it should work well.
If it were easy then there'd probably be more good quality opensource games out there.
First of all I am NOT an apple user. I love Linux, I'm a Linux user through and through. Well done for sorting out your xpdf problems, I couldn't be happier for you.
Second, if you agree with me on their trade show thing then good, we have common ground! My point proven! So why talk about me whining when your whole post is one big winge about how I'm some luser apple guy who is upset with lindows for misrepresenting it. It's simply not true. I'm all for Linux on laptops, and I think Lindows is doing a good job. I just don't appreciate comparing apples with oranges because most people don't know that apple is different. They think mhz comparisons are relevant. So everything you just said is "we know that, so what?" - the people who read it won't know. That's my fricking point.
And as for the PDA, they are suggesting that they are somehow equal. Take my family car example from before. I just don't think those are fair comparisons. Something like "Are You Considering a PDA? Perhaps a Lindows laptop is more suited to your role. You are probably better off with a Lindows laptop if..." Instead they make it sound as if the only reason you'd buy a PDA is for cost. That's deceptive. I'm all for proposing a laptop over a PDA, just don't deceive people! You said yourself most people have no idea that a PDA can't run their desktop software, so maybe buying a laptop they won't realise the consequences. Eg, with a PDA there is no need to manage a full OS yourself, since it's embedded into the device. With a laptop you might have to deal with formats n' stuff. Right tool for the right job. I might overlook this PDA comparison, except in conjunction with other observations, it is seen in a different light.
I couldn't care less if you don't agree with me, but at least stop winging and get your facts straight - you can't tell the difference between a Mac-head and a Linux lover. I have no intention of getting an apple in the future because of the reasons you mention. It is strange that you can't understand how someone desperately eager to see Linux get a chunk of the desktop space (yes, I do) still be critical of a Linux company when they make deceptive advertisements. Perhaps I'd just like Linux companies to act with integrity? Is that so hard to understand??
They compared their laptop to an apple notebook, showing the mhz rating as if they were supposed to be somehow similar in power but different in costs.
And comparing a laptop to a PDA???
And them changing their plans for the conference recently so their CEO spoke first (they are sponsoring the event, but they changed it quite late, and the event is not a lindows event but a linux one).
How can you be so bold in the assumption that I am in a prison - or that I even feel like I am in one? You hand me the "key" of atheism as if it will let me out - I try the key and open the door to a dark, musty room with shadows moving in the corners. Your analogy means nothing to me, because I have been freed through my beliefs, not entrapped. You'll have to use more than that analogy to pursuade me...
I believe in understanding truth - that it is imperative to reject false thinking and a false belief if presented with truth. If anyone has rational grounds on why religion is a crux then I will accept it. But I'm not interested in your experiences with ignorant christians who say "faith is not possible if we know" because that is irrational. Faith should be based on _knowing_ God is real and being able to prove that. Otherwise it is a self-deception. I'm not interested on your experience with Jehovah's Witnesses who are glorified salesmen, deceived into thinking that their superiors are moral leaders when in fact their organisation is a great vehicle for brainwashing. You think what I believe is irrational? I've never had a question I couldn't answer that deals with religion.
I have changed my opinion in large ways in the past, and I'll do it again in the future - I respect logic and truth, it's what I look for. But if you presume to have the key to superior wisdom, there is much you don't know. All I can suggest is that you have encountered the many religious normals who don't understand their faith and think that that is a necessary state of being. They don't realise that for their religion to be true it _must_ be rational.