Bill G.'s just learned from Ingvar Kamprad, founder of IKEA and also one of the richest men in the world, about how there's nothing as good as avoiding taxes.
If you do a google search for "scientific proof," you'll notice an odd thing: every mention is either in quotes or has (in all likelihood, as I have not read the links) nothing to do with science ("Scientific proof that we all need love", "Scientific Proof That Men Get Distracted By Women", "Scientific Proof Of God"). This is because anyone who's bothered to think about it, like yourself, quickly realizes that 'proof' is an impossible goal when we're dealing with the real world. Just as in the court system, things are proved beyond reasonable doubt, not beyond all doubt. It happens that many concepts in science have established themselves very, very well, and every day more evidence is discovered and weighed.
5% is signficant, but it's not going crazy. Also, the vast majority of digital cameras at the moment wouldn't fit in with this definition anyway--800x600 at 23 fps?
I don't really think you can fault Joe. This is why you have expiration dates printed on bottles. If you choose to buy expired milk from the guy down the street, well, that's really your own problem.
The thing is, science is concerned with objective reality, while your experience is purely subjective. In order to discover objective reality, we try to eliminate the possibility of faulty memories and flawed convictions by using such tools as repeatability and blind experiment. If you base your view of reality entirely on personal experience and memory*, you must accept that your version may not be compatible with anybody else's.
*The obvious objection here being "well, what else is there?" which is a good one. Thinking scientifically does require you to make certain assumptions-- that you are capable of logical thought and accurate memory (though these may be faulty at times) and that other people exist, think, and that their views are more-or-less as valid as your own. It also requires belief in the existence of an objective reality, and in the ability to perceive it with some accuracy. I think these are things that most people would not take issue with.
We may be talking at cross-purposes here. I basically agree with the phrase "You will have to accept that there is an area - a very large area in fact - of mystic and psychadelic experience that is beyond scientific inquiry" (large being a relative term). The trouble is that telepathy (in the usual meaning of the word) is not beyond scientific inquiry: after all, it's not very difficult to set up a test for it.
Is this really the case? If I buy a box with an OEM copy of windows I don't need, can I return it for a refund? How much of one? This would be pretty big-- it would allow people to get out of the "windows-tax".
Since the term "created" implies both change and some dependence on time...
That's the problem I have with this line of reasoning. Why would an eternal and unchanging God decide to create a universe? An unchanging God can't "come to a decision" or "take action" because those events imply change.
Also, this administration is a capitalist one and as such would not want socialists/marxists helping to shape international policy.
...
those who support Kerry over Bush either are not capitalists or do not care very much about capitalism
More likely the metric units are correct (since these would be commonly used) but the conversion was done backwards (since they'd be unfamiliar with it).
Slashdot Mirror
These communities do continue to exist, they just don't advertise and they're not written up in the paper as the latest trend.
Bill G.'s just learned from Ingvar Kamprad, founder of IKEA and also one of the richest men in the world, about how there's nothing as good as avoiding taxes.
It's the manager's responsibility to make sure the computer has a record of each variety in stock.
If you do a google search for "scientific proof," you'll notice an odd thing: every mention is either in quotes or has (in all likelihood, as I have not read the links) nothing to do with science ("Scientific proof that we all need love", "Scientific Proof That Men Get Distracted By Women", "Scientific Proof Of God"). This is because anyone who's bothered to think about it, like yourself, quickly realizes that 'proof' is an impossible goal when we're dealing with the real world. Just as in the court system, things are proved beyond reasonable doubt, not beyond all doubt. It happens that many concepts in science have established themselves very, very well, and every day more evidence is discovered and weighed.
San Francisco's resolution is 'advisory' and non-binding.
5% is signficant, but it's not going crazy. Also, the vast majority of digital cameras at the moment wouldn't fit in with this definition anyway--800x600 at 23 fps?
I don't really think you can fault Joe. This is why you have expiration dates printed on bottles. If you choose to buy expired milk from the guy down the street, well, that's really your own problem.
Salon has an agreement not to sell at all, only to use on their customers, and thus gets the products at a discount.
Because the other guy will do the same.
The thing is, science is concerned with objective reality, while your experience is purely subjective. In order to discover objective reality, we try to eliminate the possibility of faulty memories and flawed convictions by using such tools as repeatability and blind experiment. If you base your view of reality entirely on personal experience and memory*, you must accept that your version may not be compatible with anybody else's.
*The obvious objection here being "well, what else is there?" which is a good one. Thinking scientifically does require you to make certain assumptions-- that you are capable of logical thought and accurate memory (though these may be faulty at times) and that other people exist, think, and that their views are more-or-less as valid as your own. It also requires belief in the existence of an objective reality, and in the ability to perceive it with some accuracy. I think these are things that most people would not take issue with.
We may be talking at cross-purposes here. I basically agree with the phrase "You will have to accept that there is an area - a very large area in fact - of mystic and psychadelic experience that is beyond scientific inquiry" (large being a relative term). The trouble is that telepathy (in the usual meaning of the word) is not beyond scientific inquiry: after all, it's not very difficult to set up a test for it.
although it's not impossible. Can you provide some more info?
Is this really the case? If I buy a box with an OEM copy of windows I don't need, can I return it for a refund? How much of one? This would be pretty big-- it would allow people to get out of the "windows-tax".
The presidio is south of the bridge.
Since the term "created" implies both change and some dependence on time... That's the problem I have with this line of reasoning. Why would an eternal and unchanging God decide to create a universe? An unchanging God can't "come to a decision" or "take action" because those events imply change.
Light is, of course, radiation.
I think that's actually pretty much what he said.
Also, this administration is a capitalist one and as such would not want socialists/marxists helping to shape international policy.
...
those who support Kerry over Bush either are not capitalists or do not care very much about capitalism
More likely the metric units are correct (since these would be commonly used) but the conversion was done backwards (since they'd be unfamiliar with it).
More likely the metric units are correct (since these would be commonly used) but the conversion was bungled (since they're not familiar with it).
SAP sends a different soundtrack but uses the same video, so that wouldn't work.
The "fancy transmission system" only reduces the RPM range from "huge" to "large," not "small."
Replace all instances of kW with kWh. kW are power (1 horsepower ~= .75 kW). kWh are units of energy (1 kWh = 3600 kJ ~= 3412 BTU).
...and then consider the $15000 ipod you bought.
"Lets see, the fastest bullet trains travel a bit over 100 mph" eh? Closer to 200 mph. The TGV's record is 236 mph.
I've seen this. Paris, I think, and there were stations with projected tv in Prague.
It's a novelty for 15 minutes, and after that it's annoying as all fuck. Lots of commercials and crap you don't want to see. No way to turn it off.
They're doing this because they've got a captive audience and advertisers will pay for that.
A "pound" in metric countries is the same as a half-kilo. For the convenience of traditionalists, mainly.