Dear Microsoft - you lost me as a customer about 15 seconds into the 'Monkey Boy' video, the day of which I immediately went out and bought a Mac. (serious). My exact thought process was 'I seriously see no future in a company that has a f**king a**hole as a CEO.'
Now how to 'fix' your Vista 'issue' - cut the multiple versions bullsh*t and make 'Ultimate' the only version, and sell it for $120.
Be amazed as profits rocket.
That is all.
Dumbasses.
ps on second thoughts ignore all this and carry on as normal as it's really helping Linux and OSX gain ground.
why is this even an issue Because previously the police had to ask to see the footage which would have meant paperwork meaning that they would only ask if they had a reason to ask, namely in the event of investigating an actual crime that had happened.
Now they can just sit and watch and look for 'crime'. The main issue of course being that to pass laws and obtain funding to get the cameras fitted, they would have had to assure people that they would not be used for this purpose, yet strangely here we are with the exact situation taxpayers were assured wouldn't happen.
This does not bode well for the national road charging scheme that we have been 'assured' will not be used to prosecute people for speeding. Yeah riiiiggghht.
It's simply evolution taking its course - some distros will arise from the soup and start to out-reproduce the others. It's already happening with the likes of Fedora, Debian, SUSE, Red Hat, the-ones-you've-heard-of etc etc.
My bad. I guess one alleged but unproven lab only virus for Mac might be as bad as 0 to pwned in 20 minutes for pre-sp2 XP. Perhaps in earlier versions, but as I say - current Windows is XPSP2 and Vista which are firewalled by default - you cannot get infected remotely just sitting on the Internet with the firewall up.
...oblivious of reality, and thinks Mac users are sto stupid and will say absolutely anything Firstly speaking as a Mac user I wouldn't describe myself as an 'Apple hater' but I would accept the title 'idiot fanboi hater'.
Secondly my comment is based on experience. Have you never encountered a Mac zealot before or something? They really are that stupid and they really will say absolutely anything. They do more harm than good.
Viruses will infect a new Windows PC plugged into the Internet before its patches can be downloaded. Incorrect. A 'new' PC will be running XPSP2 or Vista, both of which have their firewall up by default.
That is not as bad as zero to pwned in 23 seconds average just by connecting XP to the Internet. I ain't apologising for Microsoft but your statement is inaccurate. Firstly it was 23 minutes not seconds, and secondly that was XP before SP2 (which s firewalled by default)
My money is on the issue being related to rendezvous / bonjour / zeroconf / whatever they call multicast DNS these days.
If iPhone is 'running OSX' (yeah right...) or rather enough of it to duplicate some of the network functionality, then we would expect to see similar network traffic that we see on a network of Macs which is usually made up of a constant stream of ARP requests as OSX constantly looks for other devices on the subnet to interrogate them.
None. This is a personal choice, based on faith alone. Have you been following my reasoning or is just trolling? But you must base this assumption on something?
I believe there's a God, Creator of Everything. The idea of Creator (cause) and Creatures (effects) isn't silly as your small pink pluto-orbiting elephant and even matches most of our observations of how the universe works. ...so my theory is less likely to be right because it is 'silly'? How is it any more silly than the idea that god might exist?
Good questions. I'll let Mr. Asimov hand you a possible answer: A good story, but doesn't answer my question.
I believe the Creator of Everything doesn't really care for the institutions man created to deal with the different cultures interpretations of His Laws. Ah so you are not a Christian then - you have invented your own religion.
As I said, believing in God requires no evidence because science can't possibly ever provide one by rigorously answering: is there God? So, since we can't rely on science, believing in God is a matter of faith. Blind faith, delusional faith, whatever... Indeed, however twice now you have asked for evidence that god doesn't exist before you will believe that, however you believe in god without any evidence.
Besides, I don't think you understand the scientific method. When you say: "it's not up to others to disprove everything that someone says" you seem to forget that science doesn't advance by scientists accepting blindly old theories and models and worshipping them, but by consistently trying to break down said models, to disprove them and replace with something more solid. Science and Religion are 2 sides of the same coin... Again, it's about evidence. If some evidence of gods existence were presented it would be tested. If every lunatic claimed that anything they said was true unless 'evidence' was provided to the contrary, and people were to take them seriously, this would not really be workable and many resources would be wasted testing for all kinds of weird and wonderful ravings.
Prove them wrong, then. Again the body of evidence must reside with those expecting people to accept the ridiculous claims, not for others to disprove every claim.
Why can't we just leave species to evolve in peace? Every time something mutates and potentially a new species is created, someone kidnaps the new creature and slices it up.
I never said it is the only. I clearly said chaos theory, quantum physics and fate can equally well explain that. IMO, it's God. But that's just me, don't feel shy to choose another option.;) But on what evidence are you basing this assumption?
I was making a point about acknowledging God doesn't exist because there's no proof of it, whily there isn't proof God doesn't exist either. There is no proof that itches are not caused by a small pink elephant orbiting Pluto - do you therefore believe this also?
You definetely doesn't understand God believers. For them, all which exists is work of God and evidence of His glory. You can show them QM formulae and they'll say it's the writting of God recorded into the very fabric of His Creation. I think I understand them - basically from what I see, if they don't understand something, it's easier to say 'god did it!' than try to work it out for themselves. The utter irrationality of it is that there is precisely zero evidence to support the existence of this 'god', which god is it they believe in anyway, and how did it get in a position to create a universe? Does this god have a god? Who created that one? Also there is an amazing coincidence that people in a community strangely all tend to believe in the same god. The religions all have different gods, so who is the right one? Surely if for example the Muslim god is the right one, then you can't be punished for being born in the wrong religion?
Unless QM, or anything that eventually overrides it, can provide a clear answer as to why God doesn't exist, believers'll continue their worship. Some, I believe, even regardless of any reasoning or proof, though I wouldn't be among them... Quite, however the body of evidence must reside with the person making the claim; it's not up to others to disprove everything that someone says, and again we come back to 'evidence' being demanded for the non-existence of god, while believing in god with no evidence whatsoever. Hypocrisy. The only reason the 'show me evidence of non-existece' argument exists is because the people asking the question do not think they will receive an answer.
I feel some need first and it is "magically" is satisfied ...therefore the only possible explanation is a supernatural entity created the universe?
That was in response to your suggestion that the Catholic Church supports evolution now: "Even the Catholic Church acknowledges evolution now." I don't think so, otherwise there wouldn't be ID or this article. oh, boy, we're getting recursive here... You asked me a question and I answered it. With regard to the Catholic Church and evolution, you may find this interesting.
By "How can I acknowledge something without proof?" I was trying to show that you can't proof God's existence or non-existence through science, which just seeks to explains the Rules for this Universe. I can't say "I acknowledge God doesn't exist because there's no proof It exists". There's no proof God doesn't exist either. But you can't claim to base reasoning on evidence for one side of an argument while conveniently ignoring a total and complete lack of evidence for the other side because it doesn't fit with the answer you want. That's called hypocrisy.
The difference between science and religion is really quite simple - science says 'here is the available data, what conclusions can we draw from it?'
Religion says 'here is the conclusion we want, what evidence can we find to support it?'
It'd be that way if what I was referring to was something "supernatural" or unexplicable by science today. But I was just referring to small, personal experiences that strike us subtly at some moments in our lifes that could either be explained by fate, chaos theory or God. Pick your poinson, as I did. So, for example, you win $10 on a lottery ticket, then happen to need $10 for whatever reason, therefore a supernatural being must surely exist and have created the universe?
"It's about the fact that ID is simply not science."
have I said otherwise? You asked 'What is TFA about then?' That was the answer.
How can I acknowledge something without proof? That is extremely valid reasoning. See, my problem here is that you will ask for 'proof' of gods non-existence, yet will quite happily accept the existence of god without any evidence whatsoever! Does that not appear just a little strange to you? Examine your own thought process - it's really quite irrational.
I see evidence of existence of God every morning as I open my eyes. The fact you can see objects and people does not prove that they were created by an imaginary supernatural entity any more than if you find $10 in the street this does not mean it was dropped by a yeti. Admittedly this does not mean that it could not have been dropped by a yeti, but factoring in things like climate, the fact there is no evidence to suggest yetis exist or use money, and the fact that people drop money all the time, means it's very likely that it was dropped by a person, regardless of what any individual might suspect.
I guess not. In my personal life experiences, I've been able to see God's hands and guidence several times. It's not just devil, but also God in the little details around us... some call that fate, others quantum chaos. I call that God's infinite wisdom. You may call me a delusional fool, if you will, not that I care... Would it not be more accurate to say you have seen things that you don't understand therefore feel the need to attribute them to some supernatural force? ID lies down that path.
Does it? What is TFA about then? Isn't ID the stupid Church response to Evolution and to real scientific method? It's about the fact that ID is simply not science. It's a half-assed attempt by religion to take a step back and say 'well ok, you got us - we can't deny this evidence.... but...but... GOD DID IT!' Pathetic perhaps, but a step in the right direction overall maybe. An eventual step hopefully being the acknowledgement that actually, no, god didn't exist after all.
God doesn't exist in this existential plane, He just created it and the rules. He's outside it, you won't ever find Him hidding behind submesons or whatnot. Though He can certainly interfere in His creation. God's not really unlike a computer programmer creating a complex simulation of a virtual world and populating it with AI: can these these virtual beings ever be aware that they are nothing but dreams out of a creative mind? Bit convenient don't you think? That's just a cop-out for the fact there is no evidence -at all- to support the existence of 'god'.
and being a mammal as I am, I feel an urge for a father figure for the world I'm in... So your delusional state is not consciously challenged because the fact that we are on our own disturbs you?
Biologic evolution doesn't preclude God, unless you're an ignorant literal Bible reader who thinks faith really can move literal mountains... See, that is because the evidence became undeniable. Even the Catholic Church acknowledges evolution now. That would have been unthinkable hundreds of years ago. Just as people now accept that the world is in fact spherical and the Sun does not revolve around it, it is logical that given enough time those same types of people will eventually accept that 'god' simply doesn't exist.
See the problem with creationist logic, is that for a being to have created the universe, then that being must have itself been created. By whom?
It's not about belief, it's about evidence. There is not a single shred of evidence supporting gods existence, but there is absolutely tons of evidence supporting evolution.
show me the proof of God's non-existence Why is it you people demand proof of non existence when confronted, yet are unable to provide any proof of god's existence yourselves?
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Microsoft - you lost me as a customer about 15 seconds into the 'Monkey Boy' video, the day of which I immediately went out and bought a Mac. (serious). My exact thought process was 'I seriously see no future in a company that has a f**king a**hole as a CEO.'
Now how to 'fix' your Vista 'issue' - cut the multiple versions bullsh*t and make 'Ultimate' the only version, and sell it for $120.
Be amazed as profits rocket.
That is all.
Dumbasses.
ps on second thoughts ignore all this and carry on as normal as it's really helping Linux and OSX gain ground.
Now they can just sit and watch and look for 'crime'. The main issue of course being that to pass laws and obtain funding to get the cameras fitted, they would have had to assure people that they would not be used for this purpose, yet strangely here we are with the exact situation taxpayers were assured wouldn't happen.
This does not bode well for the national road charging scheme that we have been 'assured' will not be used to prosecute people for speeding. Yeah riiiiggghht.
It's simply evolution taking its course - some distros will arise from the soup and start to out-reproduce the others. It's already happening with the likes of Fedora, Debian, SUSE, Red Hat, the-ones-you've-heard-of etc etc.
...oblivious of reality, and thinks Mac users are sto stupid and will say absolutely anything Firstly speaking as a Mac user I wouldn't describe myself as an 'Apple hater' but I would accept the title 'idiot fanboi hater'.Secondly my comment is based on experience. Have you never encountered a Mac zealot before or something? They really are that stupid and they really will say absolutely anything. They do more harm than good.
Jesus fucking Christ I've seen some Apple apologising in my time but that has to take the record.
Well just because it doesn't know names doesn't mean bonjour is not working - perhaps it's working but the bit that displays the names is broken.
My money is on the issue being related to rendezvous / bonjour / zeroconf / whatever they call multicast DNS these days.
If iPhone is 'running OSX' (yeah right...) or rather enough of it to duplicate some of the network functionality, then we would expect to see similar network traffic that we see on a network of Macs which is usually made up of a constant stream of ARP requests as OSX constantly looks for other devices on the subnet to interrogate them.
...though this cheaper phone could have more limited functionality. What - like you can't make phone calls? iPhone is extremely limited as it is.Can you define exactly what your god is?
Why can't we just leave species to evolve in peace? Every time something mutates and potentially a new species is created, someone kidnaps the new creature and slices it up.
The difference between science and religion is really quite simple - science says 'here is the available data, what conclusions can we draw from it?'
Religion says 'here is the conclusion we want, what evidence can we find to support it?'
have I said otherwise? You asked 'What is TFA about then?' That was the answer. How can I acknowledge something without proof? That is extremely valid reasoning. See, my problem here is that you will ask for 'proof' of gods non-existence, yet will quite happily accept the existence of god without any evidence whatsoever! Does that not appear just a little strange to you? Examine your own thought process - it's really quite irrational. I see evidence of existence of God every morning as I open my eyes. The fact you can see objects and people does not prove that they were created by an imaginary supernatural entity any more than if you find $10 in the street this does not mean it was dropped by a yeti. Admittedly this does not mean that it could not have been dropped by a yeti, but factoring in things like climate, the fact there is no evidence to suggest yetis exist or use money, and the fact that people drop money all the time, means it's very likely that it was dropped by a person, regardless of what any individual might suspect.
I was referring to the pr0n angle ;)
...and where did this entity come from?
See the problem with creationist logic, is that for a being to have created the universe, then that being must have itself been created. By whom?
It's not about belief, it's about evidence. There is not a single shred of evidence supporting gods existence, but there is absolutely tons of evidence supporting evolution.
I believe the killer app will be related to spam.
Well what about panspermia?
;)
And more importantly perhaps, what does this have to do with tanglble 3D displays?
You are delusional. Wake up.