I should note that this one seems informative. It *does* take time to set up: I'd say about 2 months in real time, using your spare hours, to get it started, and then as much time as it takes you to do it.
Best of all, Koha works right now.
That said, the user base is friendly and helpful; the system is straightforward. You can access it from the web if you have a solid IP address.
However, I don't know that a computer program is actually the solution to your problem. Instead, let me suggest something different: devote a room or a corner to library shelves, and order your books according to (fiction - his, fiction hers) and then by topic. Don't forget large shelves. Then once it is all organized, use little stickers on the binding to tell you where each goes. More than anything, *sell stuff in a yard sale, or throw stuff out.* If you're not going to use it, get rid of it. In reality, you should have 1.5 times as much stuff that you use today, as you have that you use this week; and 1.5 times as much stuff that you use this week as you use this month. Then another 1.5 or so for this year, within 2 years, within 3 years, within 4, and within 5. If you're not going to use it in five years and it isn't of a very personal nature, get rid of it. Why? Because it is cheaper to buy it new, later when you need it, than it is to buy new everything you need every day, and can't find.
Later, if you want you can computerize your library. That's the small and least organizing part.
In other words, CentOS is for those who would otherwise use Debian, but feel the need to undermine the business of a company that has supported Linux from long ago.
I suppose some of those who prefer CentOS might be those who get upset that anyone should make a profit off of something that is free (imagine that... farmers making a profit off of apples; or people selling mistletoe around Christmastime).
Then, some of those who support CentOS might be microsoft fan-boys, who imagine that harming Red Hat will aid Microsoft dominance. (Bill and Paul, I didn't exactly mean you, but you might be among them.)
Then, there might be those who dropped out of Debian for whatever reason, and still want a distribution of their own.
And of course there will be those who think that being in on a startup branch is neat.
Have I left anyone out?
But for me, I think I would like it if they started up free small operating systems instead -- especially ones that were reliable for real-time applications. We have Debian already. We don't have FreeQNX, though. That would be a lot more significant, in my book.
All this Patriot Act stuff is just a Yale political science research project to determine which rights actually are inalienable.
So far, they're getting lots of good data; indeed, it may be that the Declaration of Independence needs to be reworded, with phrases such as "conditionally inalienable"; "all men, equally, are created"; "That for security, Men are institutionalized by Government", "deriving their just powers from the labors of the governed," and so on.
However, this research project doesn't extend that far. Its purpose is succinct and well defined -- the question of which rights are actually inalienable. Future research projects will test out other aspects of the Declaration
Actually, I don't think big donors even really have true access. I think it's more on the level that lobby groups that proactively write the legislation they want have true access. Assuming that they do either donate or publicize the Congressmen who support their legislation, those lobby groups will typically get their legislation passed, eventually. The others won't.
Likewise, I think that new legislation is more likely to be passed, than that old legislation will be repealed. I think the phrase that works in favor of this is "you can't turn back the clock." I know, I'd really like to know why too. I thought that Daylight Savings Time's only purpose was to allow people to practice turning back the clock at least once per year.
(1) www.timessquarechurch.org (well, no... but listen to this enough, and you'll find that that's more important. It's more like opting through rather than opting out, though.) I prefer this one, myself.
(2) www.escapeartist.com (really. Their book is helpful and useful, especially if you have enough money, or your own mini-business that is relocatable, and are young enough).
(3) here or here. I'm of the mind that it doesn't matter which, and both is better.
That's why, whenever I want to post something questionable, I always use my *screen* name of Linus Torvalds, instead of my real name of Jim H. MickLinux.
Capsacin has not yet been shown to definitively prevent hot coffee; however, there is a marked decrease in coffee consumption (as an associated behavior) among those who have just eaten 4-5 jalopeno peppers.
Actually, that's not hard to believe at all. There is a crater that is centered at Cape Charles, VA; the outer ring crosses Route 13 in the middle of a town that is a good hour to the north. It might be 4 feet high at most, and especially with crops, construction, I never would have noticed it on my own. Indeed, only after reading about it in Cape Charles, did I manage to see what I think might be it. It isn't nearly so definite as Civil war time foxholes (say, north of Newport News, near Fort Eustace), irrigation ditches, or a lot of other features that exist everywhere.
I don't have a fast computer, so I can't use Google earth. However, I wonder how small a scale it goes? For example, just North of Silute Lithuania, is a hill named Barzdunas Kalnas (Barzdunas Hill.) On that hill is a set of craters, some of which look like they were bomb craters from WWII, when American planes were making bombing runs at a German munitions factory.
They look like . ^ . ^ .
However, near them is another set of 3 craters, like
* */ * /
with a road running across where the slashes are.
Those 3 40'-diameter craters are separated by 50 cubits and 100 cubits respectively, and one has a single linear ditch coming out of one of them at 30 degrees. The main axis runs straight down a hill, where it then runs over a 20'-high mound, and meets a canal coming straight at it. The 20' high mound curves with the hill, around this set of three craters. It all looks incredibly like a hill fort to me, and Silute should have one such fort in the region, but it is as yet unknown. However, local historical authorities say no, this isn't any such thing. I wonder if you can see all that on Google Earth, though.
You will be happy to be informed that Microsoft code does not have problems with this difficulty of the Sarb.-Oxley law. ALL of Microsoft Code which was not developed by and in Microsoft, was cleaned of previous ownership through *adverse posession* laws. Therefore, if it is a Microsoft Product, you can list it as being purely owned by Microsoft. The same applies to your computer, which you can list as being purely 0wN3D by Microsoft.
*** Note to Modders: Please, please, please do not make the same kind of mistake as you have so often made before, and mod this +5 informative ***
I really don't think that this was uber-top-secret, and some group was pursuing this full time, and got close.
That, considering that for the 1987 Bourget Airshow, NASA contracted with Va Tech to have built an 80' model of the NASP (National Air/Space Plane). People walked under it as they entered the US Pavillion, and a bunch of students stood under it, explaining in extremely broken French (or English, as possible) what the display was all about.
I know, I was there. The labor in building the thing, plus $300+$200 personal purchase money, for a 1-week trip to France was a pretty good deal.
No matter the task, video, audio, or photos, we have a site that works great for what you want to do and uses all the great features of Web 2.0 technology.'"
I was SO looking forward to being able to go to a website, bedauble into the microphone, and have a Musical/MIDI score come out exactly as I *intended* it to be. *And* to have it posted on ebay for sale, and see 10% of the proceeds come back.
Man... and I even installed a microphone in the shower, just waitin' for those Web 2.0 apps!
No, no, no. There's no need to turn anything in. The patent submitter simply needs to clarify that this is a business model for computer usage that he's patenting.
The current rate of increase per year comes out to be 5.8% -- but they note that the rate has increased. So a good estimate is 10% per year, or doubling every 7 years.
This year, the water levels went up 3 mm, 1/2 mm of which was Greenland. (Let's not forget that as we raise these water levels, we affect the rate of melt for ice worldwide). So after 50 years, we could estimate that the water levels go up 6 feet, 1 of which was greenland. After 70 years, the water levels go up 48 feet, 8 of which was greenland.
That's the same numbers, but a different perspective. It assumes a exponential increase. Actually, even that assumption, though better founded than your constant-rate equation, isn't correct.
The reality well might be worse than exponential growth in melting at the current time. And later, as the Gulf Stream stops, it might be not so bad: closer to your linear model -- or even reversing the melting, as the warm Gulf Stream stops delivering heat to moderate Greenland's summer temperatures. I'm not saying that either of these cases is correct. I'm saying we can't tell, but your estimate of a linear melt rate is insanely ludicrous. It just has no bearing on anything.
... I don't care what you recommend, I want MS Windows on this computer because the Government, with whom I have too many contracts, uses Windows/MS Office.
And MS will do whatever is necessary to see that the governments use their product, including giving it away free or less than free.
All a reasonable person needs to do is carve a single finger shape out of wood, complete with finger prints, and then cast rubber in the shape. Then, label it "Anonymous Password".
Then, tie one to every computer in the building.
Now, make up another finger, with a different design, and label it "Admin". Distribute it only to admins (note that changing fingers will be required as you hire and fire).
Then, for each specific user group, manufacture a set of rubber fingers, and label them accordingly. Now distribute the fingers on a keychain...
You should have told him exactly what that line did, not with reference to the whole program.
"Add BX,AX
" alphachan = swap(&a, &b)
For another story, when I was in Jr High, I entered the school science fair with a project in which I built a small battery powered boat with floral plastic, wood, rubber bands, threaded rod, tinker toys, sheet metal, and a small motor. I then tested different propeller designs that I also made myself. At the school fair, I was beaten in my section "aerodynamics" by a friend who built a number of plastic kit models, and explained the aerodynamics of what you saw in the wings. Just barely, my "2nd place" was good enough to allow me to go to the regional science fair as an alternate. At the regional science fair, I was asked a few questions : "You show a mean of a data set there. What does that mean? You show a standard deviation. What does standard deviation mean?" I answered both questions fairly well for a junior high student, and as a result won the "junior" regional science fair (which means you get a nice trophy, and go no farther.)
At that same scinece fair, one of the winners of the senior division developed some methods for calculating the performance of helicopter blades and tested them experimentally, if I remember correctly. He won a Navy prize that included a full four-year scholarship to the college of his choice. I think they also entered negotiations to purchase his work outright and license his methods. So I'd say it isn't *all* BS. You can fool some people some of the time, and maybe some people can fool all of the people some of the time, but if you can fool the US Armed Forces into buying your research, you're a pretty good fit for the research path.
PS... I said that the mean was the most likely correct result, based upon the number of tests I ran; and for standard deviation, I said that if you do the test many times, you're not going to get the same result, because things will change from test to test. The standard deviation tells you about how far a subsequent test is likely to be from the mean.
Aside from that, if you build the tower first, you can launch from the tower to build the rope, and start getting significant returns much sooner.
Last of all, it's easier to blow the second example free in a case of terrorist attack. It's rather hard to do much to the first. And if it does break free, it does tons less damage in the first case (the tower+rope).
I don't doubt that Verizon wants to (and may well succeed) at shutting down the internet to all who won't pay them high fees. I don't doubt that they'll try to use the passage of new laws to do it, as well. But maybe some good will come out of it.
As we all know, the internet was first a US government project. Then the web was supposed to let anyone publish. Then the ISPs bottlenecked that down, letting anyone read, but few publish.
I could imagine where this move by Verizon drives the cost of the internet up high enough that people start developing their own networks using anything from IR crosslinks to phone lines to radio dishes (and of course, when available, the original internet). But in the process, it could make the internet "free" as in speech again.
I base this on the note that when a monopoly seizes control of something, it usually drives people to alternatives.
I've seen grasshopers jump into puddles and other bodies of water, swim to the other side, and climb out. It seemed to me that they were "bathing", if you will.
So I don't know that that's all that unusual.
What is unusual is that this time, when the cricket goes to bathe, a worm comes out and it dies.
Having read enough of the article (more specifically, the large PDF file linked to at the bottom right), I can say that his idea is that locally, time points in a single direction, much as gravity does. But elsewhere, time points in a different direction.
I can't say whether I agree or disagree with him. I'd have to see his maths.
If I did, I'd have to conclude that I couldn't say whether I agreed or disagreed with him -- I'd have to understand his maths.
If I did that, I probably couldn't say whether I disagreed or agreed with him. I'd only be able to make strange aardvark-like noises.
However, as for my own current understanding of time, I'd have to say that time appears to be a log of the order of interactions, and secondary derivative interactions, and so on... thus making it locally constant, and globally pointless.
I guess my counterargument would be that the leveling effect of bringing the "outside" in doesn't damage the cause of censors if the "outside" gets as bad as (or equivalent to) the "inside".
I'm not convinced that things will get better there, partly because I see that things are getting worse out here. At some point, if the bad guys squash rivals everywhere, then the good guys lose.
Now, as a Christian, I have a certain faith that will not happen. But as an observer, I'm not real convinced. I see the US progressing to a stage where it is willing to do all the things the bad guys do. I see governments that are nominally Democratic and Free N Fair controlled by corporations, and doing some of those same bad things.
Nor am I convinced that Democracy provides a real answer, or helps governments stay off the "bad side". It isn't just the fact that Nazi Germany was previously a democratic power.
It has to do with things like the article
here that question whether Democracy can stay rational and balanced. It has to do with the extreme undermining effect of corruption on society, and the fact that corruption seems to be inherent to unleashing power among those who desire it.
These things make me wonder if, as the density of our world population rises, the most stable (and therefore ultimate) situation might not be the rule of terror in a superautocratic society. By entropy, one might postulate that nobody could stay on top for long, but that doesn't mean that the system might not be stable.
If that were the case, it would not be a pleasant world to live in. Yes, people could still live virtuous lives. As a Christian, I'm sure that salvation would still be a serious issue for many people, and therefore Christianity would remain strong. But this is kindof saying that a dying man's thoughts are of eternity.
But skipping back to your closing statement, how do you know that? >p>
Let me take it as a statement of your faith that Now That We Have Modern Accomplishments (TM), that good guys will win, and indeed must win.
I like the sounds of that. It reminds me of WWI, the War to End all Wars(TM). Clearly, though, their technology was not as advanced as ours, and so the ultimate human spirit didn't shine through. Or maybe poverty, which was supposed to go away with the New Deal type programs (or with the UN), hadn't quite vanished by then, since Poverty is the Source of All Evil(TM).
But I have seen conflicting statements of faith that just might go against that. For example, certain evangelical Baptists think that China will rise up with a million-man army for a final battle in the Middle East. That doesn't sound like Technology in Service of Humanity(TM) to me.
So exactly which statement of faith should I believe, and why?
Because right now, I'm not convinced that Technology Solves the Problem of Human Evil. Call me a skeptic.
Slashdot Mirror
I should note that this one seems informative. It *does* take time to set up: I'd say about 2 months in real time, using your spare hours, to get it started, and then as much time as it takes you to do it.
Best of all, Koha works right now.
That said, the user base is friendly and helpful; the system is straightforward. You can access it from the web if you have a solid IP address.
However, I don't know that a computer program is actually the solution to your problem. Instead, let me suggest something different: devote a room or a corner to library shelves, and order your books according to (fiction - his, fiction hers) and then by topic. Don't forget large shelves. Then once it is all organized, use little stickers on the binding to tell you where each goes. More than anything, *sell stuff in a yard sale, or throw stuff out.* If you're not going to use it, get rid of it. In reality, you should have 1.5 times as much stuff that you use today, as you have that you use this week; and 1.5 times as much stuff that you use this week as you use this month. Then another 1.5 or so for this year, within 2 years, within 3 years, within 4, and within 5. If you're not going to use it in five years and it isn't of a very personal nature, get rid of it. Why? Because it is cheaper to buy it new, later when you need it, than it is to buy new everything you need every day, and can't find.
Later, if you want you can computerize your library. That's the small and least organizing part.
In other words, CentOS is for those who would otherwise use Debian, but feel the need to undermine the business of a company that has supported Linux from long ago.
I suppose some of those who prefer CentOS might be those who get upset that anyone should make a profit off of something that is free (imagine that... farmers making a profit off of apples; or people selling mistletoe around Christmastime).
Then, some of those who support CentOS might be microsoft fan-boys, who imagine that harming Red Hat will aid Microsoft dominance. (Bill and Paul, I didn't exactly mean you, but you might be among them.)
Then, there might be those who dropped out of Debian for whatever reason, and still want a distribution of their own.
And of course there will be those who think that being in on a startup branch is neat.
Have I left anyone out?
But for me, I think I would like it if they started up free small operating systems instead -- especially ones that were reliable for real-time applications. We have Debian already. We don't have FreeQNX, though. That would be a lot more significant, in my book.
All this Patriot Act stuff is just a Yale political science research project to determine which rights actually are inalienable.
So far, they're getting lots of good data; indeed, it may be that the Declaration of Independence needs to be reworded, with phrases such as "conditionally inalienable"; "all men, equally, are created"; "That for security, Men are institutionalized by Government", "deriving their just powers from the labors of the governed," and so on.
However, this research project doesn't extend that far. Its purpose is succinct and well defined -- the question of which rights are actually inalienable. Future research projects will test out other aspects of the Declaration
Actually, I don't think big donors even really have true access. I think it's more on the level that lobby groups that proactively write the legislation they want have true access. Assuming that they do either donate or publicize the Congressmen who support their legislation, those lobby groups will typically get their legislation passed, eventually. The others won't.
Likewise, I think that new legislation is more likely to be passed, than that old legislation will be repealed. I think the phrase that works in favor of this is "you can't turn back the clock." I know, I'd really like to know why too. I thought that Daylight Savings Time's only purpose was to allow people to practice turning back the clock at least once per year.
Okay, here's the list:
(1) www.timessquarechurch.org (well, no... but listen to this enough, and you'll find that that's more important. It's more like opting through rather than opting out, though.) I prefer this one, myself.
(2) www.escapeartist.com (really. Their book is helpful and useful, especially if you have enough money, or your own mini-business that is relocatable, and are young enough).
(3) here or here. I'm of the mind that it doesn't matter which, and both is better.
That's why, whenever I want to post something questionable, I always use my *screen* name of Linus Torvalds, instead of my real name of Jim H. MickLinux.
Capsacin has not yet been shown to definitively prevent hot coffee; however, there is a marked decrease in coffee consumption (as an associated behavior) among those who have just eaten 4-5 jalopeno peppers.
Actually, that's not hard to believe at all. There is a crater that is centered at Cape Charles, VA; the outer ring crosses Route 13 in the middle of a town that is a good hour to the north. It might be 4 feet high at most, and especially with crops, construction, I never would have noticed it on my own. Indeed, only after reading about it in Cape Charles, did I manage to see what I think might be it. It isn't nearly so definite as Civil war time foxholes (say, north of Newport News, near Fort Eustace), irrigation ditches, or a lot of other features that exist everywhere.
I don't have a fast computer, so I can't use Google earth. However, I wonder how small a scale it goes? For example, just North of Silute Lithuania, is a hill named Barzdunas Kalnas (Barzdunas Hill.) On that hill is a set of craters, some of which look like they were bomb craters from WWII, when American planes were making bombing runs at a German munitions factory.
They look like . ^ . ^ .
However, near them is another set of 3 craters, like
* */
* /
with a road running across where the slashes are.
Those 3 40'-diameter craters are separated by 50 cubits and 100 cubits respectively, and one has a single linear ditch coming out of one of them at 30 degrees. The main axis runs straight down a hill, where it then runs over a 20'-high mound, and meets a canal coming straight at it. The 20' high mound curves with the hill, around this set of three craters. It all looks incredibly like a hill fort to me, and Silute should have one such fort in the region, but it is as yet unknown. However, local historical authorities say no, this isn't any such thing. I wonder if you can see all that on Google Earth, though.
You will be happy to be informed that Microsoft code does not have problems with this difficulty of the Sarb.-Oxley law. ALL of Microsoft Code which was not developed by and in Microsoft, was cleaned of previous ownership through *adverse posession* laws. Therefore, if it is a Microsoft Product, you can list it as being purely owned by Microsoft. The same applies to your computer, which you can list as being purely 0wN3D by Microsoft.
*** Note to Modders: Please, please, please do not make the same kind of mistake as you have so often made before, and mod this +5 informative ***
I really don't think that this was uber-top-secret, and some group was pursuing this full time, and got close.
That, considering that for the 1987 Bourget Airshow, NASA contracted with Va Tech to have built an 80' model of the NASP (National Air/Space Plane). People walked under it as they entered the US Pavillion, and a bunch of students stood under it, explaining in extremely broken French (or English, as possible) what the display was all about.
I know, I was there. The labor in building the thing, plus $300+$200 personal purchase money, for a 1-week trip to France was a pretty good deal.
What!?! No BDubler.com?!?
No matter the task, video, audio, or photos, we have a site that works great for what you want to do and uses all the great features of Web 2.0 technology.'"
I was SO looking forward to being able to go to a website, bedauble into the microphone, and have a Musical/MIDI score come out exactly as I *intended* it to be. *And* to have it posted on ebay for sale, and see 10% of the proceeds come back.
Man... and I even installed a microphone in the shower, just waitin' for those Web 2.0 apps!
Well, I bet we'll see it with Web 3.0
No, no, no. There's no need to turn anything in. The patent submitter simply needs to clarify that this is a business model for computer usage that he's patenting.
The current rate of increase per year comes out to be 5.8% -- but they note that the rate has increased. So a good estimate is 10% per year, or doubling every 7 years.
This year, the water levels went up 3 mm, 1/2 mm of which was Greenland. (Let's not forget that as we raise these water levels, we affect the rate of melt for ice worldwide). So after 50 years, we could estimate that the water levels go up 6 feet, 1 of which was greenland. After 70 years, the water levels go up 48 feet, 8 of which was greenland.
That's the same numbers, but a different perspective. It assumes a exponential increase. Actually, even that assumption, though better founded than your constant-rate equation, isn't correct.
The reality well might be worse than exponential growth in melting at the current time. And later, as the Gulf Stream stops, it might be not so bad: closer to your linear model -- or even reversing the melting, as the warm Gulf Stream stops delivering heat to moderate Greenland's summer temperatures. I'm not saying that either of these cases is correct. I'm saying we can't tell, but your estimate of a linear melt rate is insanely ludicrous. It just has no bearing on anything.
... I don't care what you recommend, I want MS Windows on this computer because the Government, with whom I have too many contracts, uses Windows/MS Office.
And MS will do whatever is necessary to see that the governments use their product, including giving it away free or less than free.
All a reasonable person needs to do is carve a single finger shape out of wood, complete with finger prints, and then cast rubber in the shape. Then, label it "Anonymous Password".
Then, tie one to every computer in the building.
Now, make up another finger, with a different design, and label it "Admin". Distribute it only to admins (note that changing fingers will be required as you hire and fire).
Then, for each specific user group, manufacture a set of rubber fingers, and label them accordingly. Now distribute the fingers on a keychain...
"Add BX,AX
" alphachan = swap(&a, &b)
For another story, when I was in Jr High, I entered the school science fair with a project in which I built a small battery powered boat with floral plastic, wood, rubber bands, threaded rod, tinker toys, sheet metal, and a small motor. I then tested different propeller designs that I also made myself. At the school fair, I was beaten in my section "aerodynamics" by a friend who built a number of plastic kit models, and explained the aerodynamics of what you saw in the wings. Just barely, my "2nd place" was good enough to allow me to go to the regional science fair as an alternate. At the regional science fair, I was asked a few questions : "You show a mean of a data set there. What does that mean? You show a standard deviation. What does standard deviation mean?" I answered both questions fairly well for a junior high student, and as a result won the "junior" regional science fair (which means you get a nice trophy, and go no farther.)
At that same scinece fair, one of the winners of the senior division developed some methods for calculating the performance of helicopter blades and tested them experimentally, if I remember correctly. He won a Navy prize that included a full four-year scholarship to the college of his choice. I think they also entered negotiations to purchase his work outright and license his methods. So I'd say it isn't *all* BS. You can fool some people some of the time, and maybe some people can fool all of the people some of the time, but if you can fool the US Armed Forces into buying your research, you're a pretty good fit for the research path.
PS... I said that the mean was the most likely correct result, based upon the number of tests I ran; and for standard deviation, I said that if you do the test many times, you're not going to get the same result, because things will change from test to test. The standard deviation tells you about how far a subsequent test is likely to be from the mean.
If McCarthy could have steamed open every letter in the US...
Oh, Wow, man. Like, you mean, the Communists wouldn't own the MPAA, RIAA and ClearChannel, today?
That's kindof hard to imagine.
Come to think of it, do you think Microsoft might also be a little different, a little less controlling?
..\/
_/\_
has a lesser mass than
/....\
\..../
_\/_
Aside from that, if you build the tower first, you can launch from the tower to build the rope, and start getting significant returns much sooner.
Last of all, it's easier to blow the second example free in a case of terrorist attack. It's rather hard to do much to the first. And if it does break free, it does tons less damage in the first case (the tower+rope).
There's also one in the Childrens' museum in Portsmouth Virginia, USA. Anyone else know of other locations where they have this?
I don't doubt that Verizon wants to (and may well succeed) at shutting down the internet to all who won't pay them high fees. I don't doubt that they'll try to use the passage of new laws to do it, as well. But maybe some good will come out of it.
As we all know, the internet was first a US government project. Then the web was supposed to let anyone publish. Then the ISPs bottlenecked that down, letting anyone read, but few publish.
I could imagine where this move by Verizon drives the cost of the internet up high enough that people start developing their own networks using anything from IR crosslinks to phone lines to radio dishes (and of course, when available, the original internet). But in the process, it could make the internet "free" as in speech again.
I base this on the note that when a monopoly seizes control of something, it usually drives people to alternatives.
I've seen grasshopers jump into puddles and other bodies of water, swim to the other side, and climb out. It seemed to me that they were "bathing", if you will. So I don't know that that's all that unusual. What is unusual is that this time, when the cricket goes to bathe, a worm comes out and it dies.
Having read enough of the article (more specifically, the large PDF file linked to at the bottom right), I can say that his idea is that locally, time points in a single direction, much as gravity does. But elsewhere, time points in a different direction.
I can't say whether I agree or disagree with him. I'd have to see his maths.
If I did, I'd have to conclude that I couldn't say whether I agreed or disagreed with him -- I'd have to understand his maths.
If I did that, I probably couldn't say whether I disagreed or agreed with him. I'd only be able to make strange aardvark-like noises.
However, as for my own current understanding of time, I'd have to say that time appears to be a log of the order of interactions, and secondary derivative interactions, and so on... thus making it locally constant, and globally pointless.
I guess my counterargument would be that the leveling effect of bringing the "outside" in doesn't damage the cause of censors if the "outside" gets as bad as (or equivalent to) the "inside".
I'm not convinced that things will get better there, partly because I see that things are getting worse out here. At some point, if the bad guys squash rivals everywhere, then the good guys lose.
Now, as a Christian, I have a certain faith that will not happen. But as an observer, I'm not real convinced. I see the US progressing to a stage where it is willing to do all the things the bad guys do. I see governments that are nominally Democratic and Free N Fair controlled by corporations, and doing some of those same bad things.
Nor am I convinced that Democracy provides a real answer, or helps governments stay off the "bad side". It isn't just the fact that Nazi Germany was previously a democratic power.
It has to do with things like the article here that question whether Democracy can stay rational and balanced. It has to do with the extreme undermining effect of corruption on society, and the fact that corruption seems to be inherent to unleashing power among those who desire it.
These things make me wonder if, as the density of our world population rises, the most stable (and therefore ultimate) situation might not be the rule of terror in a superautocratic society. By entropy, one might postulate that nobody could stay on top for long, but that doesn't mean that the system might not be stable.
If that were the case, it would not be a pleasant world to live in. Yes, people could still live virtuous lives. As a Christian, I'm sure that salvation would still be a serious issue for many people, and therefore Christianity would remain strong. But this is kindof saying that a dying man's thoughts are of eternity.
Yes, and Both Romes fell, the third endures, and a fourth there will never be , which was a statement of the Orthodox Church, but also was used to support the Ultimate Victory of Communism(TM) for a time.
But skipping back to your closing statement, how do you know that? >p> Let me take it as a statement of your faith that Now That We Have Modern Accomplishments (TM), that good guys will win, and indeed must win.
I like the sounds of that. It reminds me of WWI, the War to End all Wars(TM). Clearly, though, their technology was not as advanced as ours, and so the ultimate human spirit didn't shine through. Or maybe poverty, which was supposed to go away with the New Deal type programs (or with the UN), hadn't quite vanished by then, since Poverty is the Source of All Evil(TM).
But I have seen conflicting statements of faith that just might go against that. For example, certain evangelical Baptists think that China will rise up with a million-man army for a final battle in the Middle East. That doesn't sound like Technology in Service of Humanity(TM) to me.
So exactly which statement of faith should I believe, and why?
Because right now, I'm not convinced that Technology Solves the Problem of Human Evil. Call me a skeptic.