I like your points, and I think they will prevent "anonymous" services from being a dominant player. But, what if, say, Xerox, chooses to contract a third party to set this up in house? Xerox could use this internally (and, BTW, allow workers from home the same access). This solves most of your concerns - bandwith is controlled at the local level, security, slashdot effect, liability - not issue if your company is forcing you to do this!
Could make West coast/East coast collaboration easier, which I know is an issue for Xerox. Probably many other companies as well.
And, it allows all the different groups in these companies the freedom to choose their hardware/OS.
Everyone's got their core applications they can't live without. Swtiching to Linux requires that, on a user-by-user basis, those core applications work on Linux. For me, the core is
Java Browser MS-doc/xls support
At this point, I'm just waiting for Java 1.2, and then I'm gone from the world of windows.
For your everyday user, the core probably goes something like this:
Browser MS-doc/xls games
(note, I'm not counting things like email, ftp, newsreading, webserving, code developement, cause those things are unquestionably available on Linux).
Probably the two things on virtually everyone's list is MS-doc/xls and Browser. So, absolutely, we have to have those things.
I've been using StarOffice for 2 months now. It works well, though is buggier than MS word or excel. Mostly harmless, annoying bugs only (haven't hit any show-stopper yet, the worst is that it is constantly popping up an alert box to tell me of an unsupported format - which it then goes on to support anyway).
I had no idea browser was an issue. It surprises me, since we're always hearing of more and more sites going to Linux/Apache. Shouldn't the problem of platform dependent websites be decreasing? I respect this article, but it's anecdotal. Are there any facts and statistics available?
One of the reasons the IT industry may be so over-stressed and over-rushed is that to win in the market place often means getting there first. And getting the opening market share. Like VCR's, it's best for people to buy what everyone else is buying, not what's best. Because you get the most support that way (more videos are made for the popular VCR, more software is made for the popular computer....).
So, the first company out the door with a product, whether it's better or not, wins.
On the plus side, open standards are also an advantage in this type of arena. So, I believe we will see public software (whether GPL or whatever) win out as time goes by.
C is not 100% portable. Most C programs that currently don't need any source code change to go from, say, Linux to Windows are either A) 100% ANSI C (and thus, no GUI), or B) have extensive pre-compiler commands. If a brand new architecture comes out, the ANSI C programs can probably be made to work without change, but the pre-compiler commands will be useless. A new set will be necessary for the new platform. Maybe this isn't particularly difficult, but it's probably significant. Plus, you add in all the code that's not so well written to make porting easy......
As I said, the interpreter needs to be ported - then you're done. "all the C programs" is another thing entirely. You can port the compiler - that's one job. Then, you probably still need to port all those individual programs. Thousands, millions of them. But the interpreted source code doesn't need to change at all.
However, before that happens, I'd like to see some web sites get comprehensive about getting out information on candidates and issues. Where can I go to read an in depth written interview of a local candidate? Where can I go to read, in detail, all of George Bush's views on various topics, and his answers to my questions? Where can I go to see voting records?
I'm sure there are places on the net for this, but I don't know them (well, I have been to congress's site, but reading about all the stupid things they voted on was absolutely mind-numbing!). How about slashdot interviewing some candidates? Hell, that's not even slashdot's job, but someone should do it, and I think the slashdot style interview woud be great for that.
If we do someday get a radically new hardware paradigm that is significantly advanced enough that there is no question that people will switch to it ASAP, might not that spell the death of architecture specific technologies?
For instance, take interpreted computing vs native compiled. For all those interpreted programs running out there on current hardware, to "port" them over to the new hardware, one only needs port the interpreter. To port a natively compiled program, the compiler and the program needs to be ported. All those programs written in interpreted languages will beat the others to this new market - by far! I think that may be the second most interesting outcome of a radical shift in the underlying hardware of everyday computers.
The most interesting outcome, might be a sudden dominance of the Open Source software model, for much the same reasons. If we're all forced essentially, to "start anew", OS might win in some key areas.
For instance, if a brand new operating system had to be developed from scratch to accomodate the new architecture, would an Open Source OS win right off the bat because of it's greater speed to market, so to speak? And it's speedier fixing of bugs and implementation of new features?
To ask it another way, if suddenly all PC's were replaced by Amiga's, who would be first with a stable, high-quality operating system: Microsoft, or the Linux community?
And what kind of software would be ported to it first? Java, Perl, Python programs, or C, assembly, Pascal programs?
Let's see... Could I ask, "What exactly would the code for a full blown ecommerce system, written in, say, Java, look like?"
Or, how about a perfect crypto system?
Now that would be cool!
ESR says every question is trivial to someone..... in that case, can anyone out there tell me how to achieve warp speed?
I don't see how this is any different than newsgroups, except someone wants to make a buck. I like to think the information age will lead us into a new kind of economy. Maybe not a gift economy, but something like it. Of course, I'm an idealistic wacko....
When I hear this argument, it seems like I'm mostly hearing fear talking. Loss of manufacturing jobs means those who used to do manufacturing are left trying to work in fields they weren't trained for. This local "bad" is then generalized and feared as a global "bad". But I don't think the extrapolation is accurate. What's bad for some is not necessarily bad for all. It's cruel sometimes, but I think that's the way it is.
Individuals have to be adaptable to the times. The fact that our economy demands a better and different education than the industrial era demanded is not a bad thing. Industrial type education (where children are basically prepared to be good workers in factories - where attendance and discipline are the most important aspects of a worker) won't do a service economy much good. But if we get over our fear of change, I think things wouldn't seem bad, just different. Maybe even better.
I was reading Rob's comments about the internet being a brain-drain. The implication being that the intelligence and effort going into the internet might be more efficiently put to use in other industries. It made me think of the time in US history when most of the railroads were built. All the effort and the resources put to that, if put into something else at that time, could have produced something really amazing, but instead, we got railroads. The way I see it, we're building infrastructure now. That's what we're in the middle of. The true benefits of this infrastructure won't really be reaped for many years to come.
Someone else made the comment about each generation having it's industry magnet that draws the learners, the college degrees. I will weigh now as saying that the next generation's magnet will be bio-tech. Of this I have no doubt.
Think about it. 77 Million baby boomers will be retiring in 10-30 years. They have a lot of money. They have a vested interest in staying alive as long as possible. Bio-tech is making huge strides and showing they can deliver on a lot of promises. So, that's where the boom will be, 20-30 years from now. Maybe sooner.
Also, regulations of drug testing and FDA approval will be relaxed. Drugs will get to market quicker, thus making bio-tech more profitable. Why? Cause the larger elderly population will a)have all the political power and b)be impatient for medical improvements.
By this reasoning, we won't be ramping up space exploration, though:-(
I think one of the most interesting effects of an aging population may be inflation. <ramble> Social Security in the US works on the premise that those currently working pay for those who are retired. Many people bemoan this since it can't survive the future trends - that older populations will come to outnumber the younger populations.
So, eventually, it seems Social Security must die, if these trends continue. But, older people will still want to retire. There'll be two possibilities - earn and save and grow your money with interest until it is enough to support your retirement, or work forever.
With current inflation rates and economic growth (in the markets), it is not difficult to amass enough money in 30-40 years to support indefinite retirement. Consider what happens as more and more people do this, and the younger, working generations dwindle in number. You end up that the younger workers are still paying for all those retirees - just the mechanics are different. The workers create wealth, the wealth is reflected in the market, thus feeding the elderly. Except, it's not forced. The numbers will eventually add up, and inflation will result. Fewer workers - huge demand - higher wages, bingo - inflation. Wages will absolutely have to go up to high enough levels that retirees are enticed to go back to work. Inflation will go up and force some retirees to go back to work.
I just find it interesting, since many point out the difference in the value of children between agrarian societies and industrial. In the end, we all live off the backs of the young in our old age, unless you keep working. If the population size of the young decreases dramatically, there must follow inflation since demand will stay roughly the same, and supply will dwindle.
UNLESS, as the truly conservative economists like to argue, productivity rises to the challenge and keeps supply high even as the number of workers goes way down. That would mean large-scale automation of tasks, far beyond what we see currently. Follow this trend and we end up with a sci-fi like future of total leisure as the robots do all the work and a whopping 5% of the population is under the age of 50...... </ramble> Extrapolation is sooooo much fun.....
You can have modularized bot code - each process links in it's own DOOM AI code. Writers of software not only have to write their software, they better write good DOOM AI or their processes just won't live long enough.......
In terms of open source-edness, they don't match, you are right. However, openness is a common goal in other areas. One of Java's goals is to make software independent of hardware/OS. This serves to make the field more open for alternate technologies. One of the reasons Linux had a tough road was because of proprietary standards. File formats, executable code, etc.... It was hard to migrate over to Linux from Windows. Java, or more accurately, the VM architecture, puts a buffer between the platform and the executable, and effectively decouples the two. Adoption of new technologies becomes easier. The Linux community should see the value of that, and in that sense, their goals do match up well.
Chess has a point rating system determined by sancitoned tournament play. The higher ranked your opponent the more points you can gain from beating them. If I remember correctly Grandmaster is 100 thousand points. I might be very very wrong about that, but it's what I remember.
Mostly right up to the 100 thousand points part. Kasparov probably has a rating somewhere between 2600-2800. Actually, to get GrandMaster status, you need a combination of rating and a certain amount of success in sanctioned tournaments. Ratings go something like this: 2000 = expert 2200 = master 2400 = ???
After achieving Master rating, you can become an International Master, and/or a grandmaster by entering enough sanctioned tournaments and doing well enough in them. To keep Grandmaster status, you need to keep it up.
I'm probably wrong on some details, but that's the gist of it.
People seem to want it both ways. First, this is a great test of "collective thinking" against the world champion, and then second, they get upset because the Krush/Kasparov duel got interrupted for technical reasons and they were forced to think for themselves.
My understanding is that it's a BBS bulletin board that Krush "leads" that came up with the fact that move 58 chosen by the other analysts was a losing move. Not Krush alone. So, they were thinking for themselves, and then their move wasn't one available to vote for. That would piss me off too.
So, yes, Krush and "The World" can rival Kasparov... as long as he isn't trying his hardest
Kasparov apologetics? I'm not buying it. I bet Kasparov wouldn't either. He knew he was going to have to go for an alternate in the opening, he chose the one he was happiest with.
You aren't looking too hard. The fact that you've read more than 1 Star Wars book proves that.
Try some of these authors: Gregory Benford, Nancy Kress, David Brin, Greg Egan, Stephen Donaldson, Jonathan Lethem, Lois McMaster Bujold, Harry Turtledove.....
It's been said, but it bears repeating: There's still _some_ private information going from your browser to the vendor telling them how to charge you for the product, whether it's a CC number or a Passport ID.
And, it's removing responsibility for care and caution from the user and putting with a large corporation. How long before the _capability_ of using care and caution is removed from most individuals? We're moving in the wrong direction. Instead of hiding things more and more from the user, we should be empowering the user, and teaching them. Making things easier and more understandable does not have to mean less empowering and flexible.
Which reminds me, I'd like to see a Linux distro whose main purpose was user-training. A distribution with help and training info built in as you go, so that the process of installion is necessarily also a process of learning the Linux system.
Or, applying the first person engine to something slightly different, like sports games (playing football first person with 21 other people on-line seems like it would be a great time).
People are stupid and close-minded. This is true. Whether you give them a scientific study that finds some slight statistical leaning in a certain direction or you tell them God said X, they will take it and run with it, and never look around them.
Science, however, is about finding evidence and developing the best explanation possible to fit that evidence, and is completely open to re-interpretation and re-formulation at any time, given new evidence. It's validity as a method has nothing to do with the stupidity and ignorance of people.
So, I agree with your statement about people (usually there is no difference between those who believe in evolution or creationism - they're both accepting it on faith, one in God, the other in Science. Mind you, that excuses neither), I think it's important to understand it has nothing to do with the scientific method - it hasn't changed. And the study of evolution is far from closed-off.
That said, and to let people know where I stand, I think for thinking, open-minded people, there is little to persuade one to believe creationism. I've read the bible. I believe it was written by humans, not god. That right there takes away 99.999% of it's credibility. I've read Christian Apologetic textbooks that claim to "prove" things. They're all garbage.
Yeah, it really sounded like he was advocating "write what you think is true, apologize later." Getting facts would count as a form of censorship according to what he said there.
Course, I think it was a through-out comment and he wasn't wording carefully - or, he was just following he own advice?
Slashdot Mirror
I like your points, and I think they will prevent "anonymous" services from being a dominant player. But, what if, say, Xerox, chooses to contract a third party to set this up in house? Xerox could use this internally (and, BTW, allow workers from home the same access). This solves most of your concerns - bandwith is controlled at the local level, security, slashdot effect, liability - not issue if your company is forcing you to do this!
Could make West coast/East coast collaboration easier, which I know is an issue for Xerox. Probably many other companies as well.
And, it allows all the different groups in these companies the freedom to choose their hardware/OS.
Everyone's got their core applications they can't live without. Swtiching to Linux requires that, on a user-by-user basis, those core applications work on Linux. For me, the core is
Java
Browser
MS-doc/xls support
At this point, I'm just waiting for Java 1.2, and then I'm gone from the world of windows.
For your everyday user, the core probably goes something like this:
Browser
MS-doc/xls
games
(note, I'm not counting things like email, ftp, newsreading, webserving, code developement, cause those things are unquestionably available on Linux).
Probably the two things on virtually everyone's list is MS-doc/xls and Browser. So, absolutely, we have to have those things.
I've been using StarOffice for 2 months now. It works well, though is buggier than MS word or excel. Mostly harmless, annoying bugs only (haven't hit any show-stopper yet, the worst is that it is constantly popping up an alert box to tell me of an unsupported format - which it then goes on to support anyway).
I had no idea browser was an issue. It surprises me, since we're always hearing of more and more sites going to Linux/Apache. Shouldn't the problem of platform dependent websites be decreasing? I respect this article, but it's anecdotal. Are there any facts and statistics available?
I wish I could help with Mozilla though......
In
One of the reasons the IT industry may be so over-stressed and over-rushed is that to win in the market place often means getting there first. And getting the opening market share. Like VCR's, it's best for people to buy what everyone else is buying, not what's best. Because you get the most support that way (more videos are made for the popular VCR, more software is made for the popular computer....).
So, the first company out the door with a product, whether it's better or not, wins.
On the plus side, open standards are also an advantage in this type of arena. So, I believe we will see public software (whether GPL or whatever) win out as time goes by.
C is not 100% portable. Most C programs that currently don't need any source code change to go from, say, Linux to Windows are either A) 100% ANSI C (and thus, no GUI), or B) have extensive pre-compiler commands. If a brand new architecture comes out, the ANSI C programs can probably be made to work without change, but the pre-compiler commands will be useless. A new set will be necessary for the new platform. Maybe this isn't particularly difficult, but it's probably significant. Plus, you add in all the code that's not so well written to make porting easy......
As I said, the interpreter needs to be ported - then you're done. "all the C programs" is another thing entirely. You can port the compiler - that's one job. Then, you probably still need to port all those individual programs. Thousands, millions of them. But the interpreted source code doesn't need to change at all.
Personally, I like the idea of internet voting...
However, before that happens, I'd like to see some web sites get comprehensive about getting out information on candidates and issues. Where can I go to read an in depth written interview of a local candidate? Where can I go to read, in detail, all of George Bush's views on various topics, and his answers to my questions? Where can I go to see voting records?
I'm sure there are places on the net for this, but I don't know them (well, I have been to congress's site, but reading about all the stupid things they voted on was absolutely mind-numbing!). How about slashdot interviewing some candidates? Hell, that's not even slashdot's job, but someone should do it, and I think the slashdot style interview woud be great for that.
If we do someday get a radically new hardware paradigm that is significantly advanced enough that there is no question that people will switch to it ASAP, might not that spell the death of architecture specific technologies?
For instance, take interpreted computing vs native compiled. For all those interpreted programs running out there on current hardware, to "port" them over to the new hardware, one only needs port the interpreter. To port a natively compiled program, the compiler and the program needs to be ported. All those programs written in interpreted languages will beat the others to this new market - by far! I think that may be the second most interesting outcome of a radical shift in the underlying hardware of everyday computers.
The most interesting outcome, might be a sudden dominance of the Open Source software model, for much the same reasons. If we're all forced essentially, to "start anew", OS might win in some key areas.
For instance, if a brand new operating system had to be developed from scratch to accomodate the new architecture, would an Open Source OS win right off the bat because of it's greater speed to market, so to speak? And it's speedier fixing of bugs and implementation of new features?
To ask it another way, if suddenly all PC's were replaced by Amiga's, who would be first with a stable, high-quality operating system: Microsoft, or the Linux community?
And what kind of software would be ported to it first? Java, Perl, Python programs, or C, assembly, Pascal programs?
Let's see...
Could I ask, "What exactly would the code for a full blown ecommerce system, written in, say, Java, look like?"
Or, how about a perfect crypto system?
Now that would be cool!
ESR says every question is trivial to someone..... in that case, can anyone out there tell me how to achieve warp speed?
I don't see how this is any different than newsgroups, except someone wants to make a buck. I like to think the information age will lead us into a new kind of economy. Maybe not a gift economy, but something like it. Of course, I'm an idealistic wacko....
When I hear this argument, it seems like I'm mostly hearing fear talking. Loss of manufacturing jobs means those who used to do manufacturing are left trying to work in fields they weren't trained for. This local "bad" is then generalized and feared as a global "bad". But I don't think the extrapolation is accurate. What's bad for some is not necessarily bad for all. It's cruel sometimes, but I think that's the way it is.
Individuals have to be adaptable to the times. The fact that our economy demands a better and different education than the industrial era demanded is not a bad thing. Industrial type education (where children are basically prepared to be good workers in factories - where attendance and discipline are the most important aspects of a worker) won't do a service economy much good. But if we get over our fear of change, I think things wouldn't seem bad, just different. Maybe even better.
I was reading Rob's comments about the internet being a brain-drain. The implication being that the intelligence and effort going into the internet might be more efficiently put to use in other industries. It made me think of the time in US history when most of the railroads were built. All the effort and the resources put to that, if put into something else at that time, could have produced something really amazing, but instead, we got railroads.
:-(
The way I see it, we're building infrastructure now. That's what we're in the middle of. The true benefits of this infrastructure won't really be reaped for many years to come.
Someone else made the comment about each generation having it's industry magnet that draws the learners, the college degrees. I will weigh now as saying that the next generation's magnet will be bio-tech. Of this I have no doubt.
Think about it. 77 Million baby boomers will be retiring in 10-30 years. They have a lot of money. They have a vested interest in staying alive as long as possible. Bio-tech is making huge strides and showing they can deliver on a lot of promises. So, that's where the boom will be, 20-30 years from now. Maybe sooner.
Also, regulations of drug testing and FDA approval will be relaxed. Drugs will get to market quicker, thus making bio-tech more profitable. Why? Cause the larger elderly population will a)have all the political power and b)be impatient for medical improvements.
By this reasoning, we won't be ramping up space exploration, though
Follow the money, and the future is clear....
Out production server regularly gets so f****ed up it won't reboot. Just try and shut it down - it never does. So, do I win?
Also, does it count if you're doing a chkdsk on 3 200GB Raids during boot-up?
I think one of the most interesting effects of an aging population may be inflation.
<ramble>
Social Security in the US works on the premise that those currently working pay for those who are retired. Many people bemoan this since it can't survive the future trends - that older populations will come to outnumber the younger populations.
So, eventually, it seems Social Security must die, if these trends continue. But, older people will still want to retire. There'll be two possibilities - earn and save and grow your money with interest until it is enough to support your retirement, or work forever.
With current inflation rates and economic growth (in the markets), it is not difficult to amass enough money in 30-40 years to support indefinite retirement. Consider what happens as more and more people do this, and the younger, working generations dwindle in number. You end up that the younger workers are still paying for all those retirees - just the mechanics are different. The workers create wealth, the wealth is reflected in the market, thus feeding the elderly. Except, it's not forced. The numbers will eventually add up, and inflation will result. Fewer workers - huge demand - higher wages, bingo - inflation. Wages will absolutely have to go up to high enough levels that retirees are enticed to go back to work. Inflation will go up and force some retirees to go back to work.
I just find it interesting, since many point out the difference in the value of children between agrarian societies and industrial. In the end, we all live off the backs of the young in our old age, unless you keep working. If the population size of the young decreases dramatically, there must follow inflation since demand will stay roughly the same, and supply will dwindle.
UNLESS, as the truly conservative economists like to argue, productivity rises to the challenge and keeps supply high even as the number of workers goes way down. That would mean large-scale automation of tasks, far beyond what we see currently. Follow this trend and we end up with a sci-fi like future of total leisure as the robots do all the work and a whopping 5% of the population is under the age of 50......
</ramble>
Extrapolation is sooooo much fun.....
You can have modularized bot code - each process links in it's own DOOM AI code. Writers of software not only have to write their software, they better write good DOOM AI or their processes just won't live long enough.......
The sysadmin's weapon needs many different settings:
1. BFG setting
2. Kill
3. Stun
4. Raise priority
5. Lower priority
6. Get info
7. Make unkillable
8. Make killable
Probably can think of more....
In terms of open source-edness, they don't match, you are right. However, openness is a common goal in other areas. One of Java's goals is to make software independent of hardware/OS. This serves to make the field more open for alternate technologies. One of the reasons Linux had a tough road was because of proprietary standards. File formats, executable code, etc.... It was hard to migrate over to Linux from Windows. Java, or more accurately, the VM architecture, puts a buffer between the platform and the executable, and effectively decouples the two. Adoption of new technologies becomes easier. The Linux community should see the value of that, and in that sense, their goals do match up well.
Chess has a point rating system determined by sancitoned tournament play. The higher ranked your opponent the more points you can gain from beating
them. If I remember correctly Grandmaster is 100 thousand points. I might be very very wrong about that, but it's what I remember.
Mostly right up to the 100 thousand points part. Kasparov probably has a rating somewhere between 2600-2800. Actually, to get GrandMaster status, you need a combination of rating and a certain amount of success in sanctioned tournaments. Ratings go something like this:
2000 = expert
2200 = master
2400 = ???
After achieving Master rating, you can become an International Master, and/or a grandmaster by entering enough sanctioned tournaments and doing well enough in them. To keep Grandmaster status, you need to keep it up.
I'm probably wrong on some details, but that's the gist of it.
People seem to want it both ways. First, this is a great test of "collective thinking" against the world champion, and then second, they get upset because the Krush/Kasparov duel got interrupted for technical reasons and they were forced to think for themselves.
My understanding is that it's a BBS bulletin board that Krush "leads" that came up with the fact that move 58 chosen by the other analysts was a losing move. Not Krush alone. So, they were thinking for themselves, and then their move wasn't one available to vote for. That would piss me off too.
So, yes, Krush and "The World" can rival Kasparov... as long as he isn't trying his hardest
Kasparov apologetics? I'm not buying it. I bet Kasparov wouldn't either. He knew he was going to have to go for an alternate in the opening, he chose the one he was happiest with.
Somebody please moderate the above as "Funny". I really hope that's how it was meant......
You aren't looking too hard. The fact that you've read more than 1 Star Wars book proves that.
Try some of these authors:
Gregory Benford, Nancy Kress, David Brin, Greg Egan, Stephen Donaldson, Jonathan Lethem, Lois McMaster Bujold, Harry Turtledove.....
Just for starters
Dostoevsky said it best: "If God does not exist, then all things are permissable."
The converse is also true - "If all things are permissable, then God does not exist".
And, in fact, all things are permissable. I'll demonstrate if you like? Oh, I'm sorry, Hitler already did.
There is no God.
It's been said, but it bears repeating:
There's still _some_ private information going from your browser to the vendor telling them how to charge you for the product, whether it's a CC number or a Passport ID.
And, it's removing responsibility for care and caution from the user and putting with a large corporation. How long before the _capability_ of using care and caution is removed from most individuals? We're moving in the wrong direction. Instead of hiding things more and more from the user, we should be empowering the user, and teaching them. Making things easier and more understandable does not have to mean less empowering and flexible.
Which reminds me, I'd like to see a Linux distro whose main purpose was user-training. A distribution with help and training info built in as you go, so that the process of installion is necessarily also a process of learning the Linux system.
Or, applying the first person engine to something slightly different, like sports games (playing football first person with 21 other people on-line seems like it would be a great time).
People are stupid and close-minded. This is true. Whether you give them a scientific study that finds some slight statistical leaning in a certain direction or you tell them God said X, they will take it and run with it, and never look around them.
Science, however, is about finding evidence and developing the best explanation possible to fit that evidence, and is completely open to re-interpretation and re-formulation at any time, given new evidence. It's validity as a method has nothing to do with the stupidity and ignorance of people.
So, I agree with your statement about people (usually there is no difference between those who believe in evolution or creationism - they're both accepting it on faith, one in God, the other in Science. Mind you, that excuses neither), I think it's important to understand it has nothing to do with the scientific method - it hasn't changed. And the study of evolution is far from closed-off.
That said, and to let people know where I stand, I think for thinking, open-minded people, there is little to persuade one to believe creationism. I've read the bible. I believe it was written by humans, not god. That right there takes away 99.999% of it's credibility. I've read Christian Apologetic textbooks that claim to "prove" things. They're all garbage.
Gee, literacy does suffer on the net!
:-|
Yeah, it really sounded like he was advocating "write what you think is true, apologize later." Getting facts would count as a form of censorship according to what he said there.
Course, I think it was a through-out comment and he wasn't wording carefully - or, he was just following he own advice?