I mean, if this is being served to an anonymous user, it doesn't matter how much you do or don't share. And your Slashdot account is a lot more public than Facebook (which can be restricted to logged in users, people on your network, or even viewable by only your friends - on the latter level, people can't even find you at all, so I'd recommend that before you delete altogether...).
Absent an explanation for this gap, an external party modifying our ancestors to create us is not unreasonable.
Absent an explanation for this gap, it all being caused by magic bogies from my nose is not unreasonable?
Do you do this with other things too? "I have no explanation for where my bike has gone, or who has taken it. It is therefore not unreasonable to consider that it was magiced away by aliens."
If we don't have an explanation, it means just that: we don't have an explanation. This doesn't mean we can abandon all reason and evidence, and start making up whatever answers we like - there is no reason why your story is more likely to be true than any other.
Also, your answer has the same problem - there is no explanation for what this "external party" is, or how they came about, or how they created us. If you're okay to accept things that don't explain it, then why not accept simply "It happened through evolution, with no external party"?
Am I the only only one who doesn't like that everyone all the time know what I am doing, if i'm online or if i'm available for a chat? Or whatever other people are doing. I abandoned MSN messenger for that sole purpose a few years ago, and facebook too.
Except Facebook doesn't let people know if you're online, available for chat, or what you're doing. Unless you specifically enable the chat option, or tell people what you are doing.
And yes, using MSN messenger when you don't want to chat probably isn't a good idea. Next up on the news - people who don't like to play games, telling us they don't play games anymore.
(Don't get me wrong, I do agree, I just find it a bit of an odd thing to criticise applications, when the whole point of them is something that you're not interested in. A bigger problem I find is when I do want to chat, but only to a specific person - this is harder to manage with most IM clients, which usually advertise you being online to everyone one on your list, and even give out whether you've been "idle" or not, so you can't even pretend you went away from the computer...)
I agree. And they still have mod points? I haven't seen them in years. What with the state of moderation lately, I assumed they were all randomly generated now or something...
And how do any of those compare to say Motorola's RAZR?
Or what about Nokia's yearly phone sales (they don't have a single brand name, AFAIK)? Although yes, I suppose it's true that it's sad that Google and Palm can't even manage to outdo the Iphone.
The Pre and the G1 are already doing it 'the best way', according to you, and they're being left in the dust.
I'm not sure that correlation is causation, but either way, saying that the Iphone is only leaving behind in the dust even newer and (currently) smaller platforms doesn't really say much. how about the market of a billion or two phones that have been out there selling for years? Or if you want to look at individual models of more recent phones, the Blackberry is doing fine too. But the market leader is Nokia, and they're still the ones leaving the others in the dust.
For some reason on Slashdot, there's this misconception that the mobile market consists of Apple and Google. So Apple are number 1, because they sell more than Google! For a tech site, I find it worrying that there's so little coverage on the real picture of mobile phones.
I don't know if I would have modded your post 'troll', but it definitely wasn't very useful for doing much other than getting argued with by fanboys.
actually two of those don't affect performance. they aren't technical points
Ah, so you define "technical" to discount the things that are wrong with them. So to summarise, CRTs are "technically" great, except in all the ways they aren't.
It's still true that people don't want CRTs for very real, practical, relevant and important reasons. This can't be handwaved away as unimportant or "marketing" reasons, whatever they are.
Like mounting a display into a car, where space is limited.
Except the sheer sales figures of flat screens versus CRTs shows that many people do not share your view. The point is that people care about space not just in their car or their planes, but on their desks and in their living rooms. Evidently most people (myself included) value space and weight, over some alleged claim that one display is better. Since most people do not have an infinite amount of space, these are therefore still technical points.
Oh, and if I'm a developer wanting to ship my application without Apple approval, how exactly do I jail break everyone else's phone so that they can install my application?
Also just to add to the list, don't forget the billion or so Java phones out there. The distinction between "smart" phones and other phones doesn't really exist anymore, it's more just marketing, usually an attempt to redefine the market size, in order to artificially inflate market share (e.g., from a technical point of view I wouldn't count the Iphone as a smart phone; there are plenty of other touchscreen phones that don't get labelled "smart" either).
It's a Google Maps-like thing, to use on your Iphone-like device!
(I agree entirely, and I've seen this trend a few times recently - I mean, I seriously have seen people use the phrase "Iphone-like device" instead of the more common term phone. It's especially stupid, when you consider how geeks traditionally mocked people referred to the web as "Internet Explorer"...)
Ah yes, it's the "nations have a right to decide who can enter" argument. Last time I looked, nations weren't sentient. They're made up of people. Your evidence that everyone in the UK supports these plans?
I'm a British citizen, and I disagree with such plans.
Slashdot Mirror
And your Slashdot account too?
I mean, if this is being served to an anonymous user, it doesn't matter how much you do or don't share. And your Slashdot account is a lot more public than Facebook (which can be restricted to logged in users, people on your network, or even viewable by only your friends - on the latter level, people can't even find you at all, so I'd recommend that before you delete altogether...).
Oh sorry, care to explain what their viewpoint actually is, and how the difference matters? My Creationism 101 is a bit rusty.
Absent an explanation for this gap, an external party modifying our ancestors to create us is not unreasonable.
Absent an explanation for this gap, it all being caused by magic bogies from my nose is not unreasonable?
Do you do this with other things too? "I have no explanation for where my bike has gone, or who has taken it. It is therefore not unreasonable to consider that it was magiced away by aliens."
If we don't have an explanation, it means just that: we don't have an explanation. This doesn't mean we can abandon all reason and evidence, and start making up whatever answers we like - there is no reason why your story is more likely to be true than any other.
Also, your answer has the same problem - there is no explanation for what this "external party" is, or how they came about, or how they created us. If you're okay to accept things that don't explain it, then why not accept simply "It happened through evolution, with no external party"?
Am I the only only one who doesn't like that everyone all the time know what I am doing, if i'm online or if i'm available for a chat? Or whatever other people are doing. I abandoned MSN messenger for that sole purpose a few years ago, and facebook too.
Except Facebook doesn't let people know if you're online, available for chat, or what you're doing. Unless you specifically enable the chat option, or tell people what you are doing.
And yes, using MSN messenger when you don't want to chat probably isn't a good idea. Next up on the news - people who don't like to play games, telling us they don't play games anymore.
(Don't get me wrong, I do agree, I just find it a bit of an odd thing to criticise applications, when the whole point of them is something that you're not interested in. A bigger problem I find is when I do want to chat, but only to a specific person - this is harder to manage with most IM clients, which usually advertise you being online to everyone one on your list, and even give out whether you've been "idle" or not, so you can't even pretend you went away from the computer...)
No no no, surely nothing can beat Slashdot?
Please, enough of this, can we get back to the evolution v. creationism debate? Thanks.
I agree. And they still have mod points? I haven't seen them in years. What with the state of moderation lately, I assumed they were all randomly generated now or something...
And how do any of those compare to say Motorola's RAZR?
Or what about Nokia's yearly phone sales (they don't have a single brand name, AFAIK)? Although yes, I suppose it's true that it's sad that Google and Palm can't even manage to outdo the Iphone.
The Pre and the G1 are already doing it 'the best way', according to you, and they're being left in the dust.
I'm not sure that correlation is causation, but either way, saying that the Iphone is only leaving behind in the dust even newer and (currently) smaller platforms doesn't really say much. how about the market of a billion or two phones that have been out there selling for years? Or if you want to look at individual models of more recent phones, the Blackberry is doing fine too. But the market leader is Nokia, and they're still the ones leaving the others in the dust.
For some reason on Slashdot, there's this misconception that the mobile market consists of Apple and Google. So Apple are number 1, because they sell more than Google! For a tech site, I find it worrying that there's so little coverage on the real picture of mobile phones.
I don't know if I would have modded your post 'troll', but it definitely wasn't very useful for doing much other than getting argued with by fanboys.
Same to you.
And all the billions of phones before them, of course.
actually two of those don't affect performance. they aren't technical points
Ah, so you define "technical" to discount the things that are wrong with them. So to summarise, CRTs are "technically" great, except in all the ways they aren't.
It's still true that people don't want CRTs for very real, practical, relevant and important reasons. This can't be handwaved away as unimportant or "marketing" reasons, whatever they are.
Like mounting a display into a car, where space is limited.
Except the sheer sales figures of flat screens versus CRTs shows that many people do not share your view. The point is that people care about space not just in their car or their planes, but on their desks and in their living rooms. Evidently most people (myself included) value space and weight, over some alleged claim that one display is better. Since most people do not have an infinite amount of space, these are therefore still technical points.
Please explain why CRTs are outdated. My argument is that CRTs are fading away because of marketing reasons, and not technical ones.
People have already said: because they're huge, heavy, and are impractical for larger screen sizes beyond a certain point. Those are technical points.
Indeed - the other day, I saw a CRT outside someone's front door, with a note saying that it was free to anyone who wanted it.
He should be so lucky. I had to pay £20 to have mine taken away and properly disposed of.
Although I did wonder if he might have better luck getting it stolen, if he didn't put the note on it...
Same reason why Apple can legally get away with far worse - they're not a monopoly.
iPhone is pretty open after jail breaking it
Apple - It Just Works!
Oh, and if I'm a developer wanting to ship my application without Apple approval, how exactly do I jail break everyone else's phone so that they can install my application?
Also just to add to the list, don't forget the billion or so Java phones out there. The distinction between "smart" phones and other phones doesn't really exist anymore, it's more just marketing, usually an attempt to redefine the market size, in order to artificially inflate market share (e.g., from a technical point of view I wouldn't count the Iphone as a smart phone; there are plenty of other touchscreen phones that don't get labelled "smart" either).
It's a Google Maps-like thing, to use on your Iphone-like device!
(I agree entirely, and I've seen this trend a few times recently - I mean, I seriously have seen people use the phrase "Iphone-like device" instead of the more common term phone. It's especially stupid, when you consider how geeks traditionally mocked people referred to the web as "Internet Explorer"...)
Episodes of an 80s TV series were cripped by "political correctness" because they had Counseller Troy?
Blimey, is there anything that doesn't get labelled "political correctness" these days?
Ah, but those of us who are leg-twitchers as we sit at our desks, with phones in our pockets, will have phones that last forever!
Well I'm envious of his phone. My 3G-battery-sucker phone would be lucky to get 24 hours, when it's doing the strenuous task of sitting in a drawer.
It gets better battery life when it's switched off, though.
Is your plan to kick out all the people here who fail their GCSEs, too?
Typical Politically Correct Brigade double-talk: conflating unrelated ideas.
Not wanting them in your home is not the same as the rules on people travelling between countries.
I wouldn't invite you into my house, but I don't get to set the rules on the nation as a whole, which affects everyone else.
Their country, they make the rules.
What? The UK is my country, and I disagree with these plans.
Are you British? If not, why are you arguing for these rules when, by your own argument, you have no right to a say?
I'm British - I'm not Christian, and I doubt I share your values.
-snip ad hominem - cry 'racism' if you dare defdend your own culture
By all means argue for *your* culture, but don't try to pretend this is my culture, or "British" culture, or anything but your own views.
As a brit, I want the racists to f off.
Ah yes, it's the "nations have a right to decide who can enter" argument. Last time I looked, nations weren't sentient. They're made up of people. Your evidence that everyone in the UK supports these plans?
I'm a British citizen, and I disagree with such plans.