Particularly since the ad/article makes such a big deal about the button placement and then fails to supply a single photo that clearly depicts where the right side button is.
The problem with your explanation is that ID discourages steps 1 and 2. As soon as you hit a gap you already have your answer. The designer did it. This means you don't have to test anything.
There have been many questions brought up along the same lines where science didn't have an answer (e.g. for years nobody could explain how kangaroos could hop). An ID proponent would say "god did it." A biologist would say "I don't know but I'm willing to accept grant money to find out."
As a result we know that kangaroos have unusual muscles capable of storing energy they absorb on landing.
Ask a biologist or a geneticist about how they'd spend money to advance the theory of evolution and they'll talk about an experiment.
Ask an IDer and they'll talk about education, legal challenges, and campaigning.
Make no mistake - ID is a social and cultural agenda, not a scientific one.
And when I want to alt-tab out to consult a FAQ or check my email or whatever, where does a bootable game distribution leave me?
Given a choice between a game that just works with my operating system as it is or one that requires me to reboot so it can take control of my machine I think the choice is pretty clear.
"I wouldn't make such an analogy anywhere other than slashdot, but I could feel that the load average on my brain was as high as it could be."
Such an analogy is actually perfectly appropriate. Cognitive load is a term used by human factors psychologists to describe what you're talking about.
As a driving researcher I have a suspicion it's going to be a while before a machine can match a human in handling the cognitive load for a task like driving - particularly in a wartime situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Great.
Now show me something from a road safety journal rather than a magazine.
Particularly since the ad/article makes such a big deal about the button placement and then fails to supply a single photo that clearly depicts where the right side button is.
How can the revolution be a gaffe of 2005? Surely something isn't a gaffe until the hardware is in the hands of the general public?
.jpgegs on the internet.
I don't think the revolution can actually be praised or condemned while it's a bunch of
This is just as silly as people on forums arguing over whether UT2007 is better than Team Fortress 2. Except somebody got paid to write this.
"did they originally overreact as well or are the two circumstances different from the get-go?"
Two words. Guildford Four.
The problem with your explanation is that ID discourages steps 1 and 2. As soon as you hit a gap you already have your answer. The designer did it. This means you don't have to test anything.
There have been many questions brought up along the same lines where science didn't have an answer (e.g. for years nobody could explain how kangaroos could hop). An ID proponent would say "god did it." A biologist would say "I don't know but I'm willing to accept grant money to find out."
As a result we know that kangaroos have unusual muscles capable of storing energy they absorb on landing.
Ask a biologist or a geneticist about how they'd spend money to advance the theory of evolution and they'll talk about an experiment.
Ask an IDer and they'll talk about education, legal challenges, and campaigning.
Make no mistake - ID is a social and cultural agenda, not a scientific one.
I know we're not supposed to read articles but nobody told me we we're supposed to stop reading comments too.
Dude, I know this is slashdot but you should still realise that what happens in prison showers isn't actually breeding.
And when I want to alt-tab out to consult a FAQ or check my email or whatever, where does a bootable game distribution leave me? Given a choice between a game that just works with my operating system as it is or one that requires me to reboot so it can take control of my machine I think the choice is pretty clear.
"I wouldn't make such an analogy anywhere other than slashdot, but I could feel that the load average on my brain was as high as it could be." Such an analogy is actually perfectly appropriate. Cognitive load is a term used by human factors psychologists to describe what you're talking about. As a driving researcher I have a suspicion it's going to be a while before a machine can match a human in handling the cognitive load for a task like driving - particularly in a wartime situation.