The problem is that you have to remember those passwords.
There are a few places where unique passwords are mandatory (everything related to money, your email account(s), and anything where you keep private data). But for anything else, a break is annoying, but not downright dangerous. OK, so if someone broke my password on Wikipedia, he might be able to get into my account on several other Wikis (assuming they correctly guessed which username I used there; I'm usually not using the same user name on different web sites, nor do I generally reveal my identity on those sites - for example, the only place where I use the nickname "maxwell demon" is Slashdot. Good luck guessing my Wikipedia login name; but then, my passwords on Slashdot and Wikipedia are different anyway).
We know from science that nothing ever goes out of existence.
That depends on your definition of "something going out of existence". If you burn a painting, all of its atoms are still there, and in principle even the information about how they were arranged is still in the universe. However it's distributed in a way that it is no longer recoverable, and the structure that the painting had is gone. And it is the structure which ultimately makes the painting, and therefore the painting really is gone. And ultimately there's still the not yet settled question of observation in quantum mechanics; depending on which interpretation you believe in there may well be an irreversible loss of information ("collapse of the wave function").
Anyway, even if you prefer an interpretation where there's no "observational loss" and use a definition of "existence" which is satisfied with the information being there without caring about the structure, the very same rules that say that nothing ever goes out of existence also say that nothing ever comes into existence. There's no interpretation that allows creation of information, but not destruction of information.
The rest of your post is about religious (or, more exactly, Christian) believe, and thus not affected by this; however, you cannot use it as argument because it simply doesn't fit. It would make an argument if you believed in reincarnation; there you would also have existed before your birth (or more exactly, before your conception), just in another body. That would fit. Creation but no destruction is something not found in science (well, except possibly for the universe as a whole).
Anyway, this thread was started by an atheist who said to be afraid of death, and someone else asking whether it makes sense. Therefore in this context, a religious argumentation is not appropriate because the question is whether it is rational to be afraid of death if you are atheist.
Anyway, if you are religious, and you're not a bad person, you shouldn't need to fear death either, should you?
But humans make useful servants. What other species on the planet has managed to get another species a hundred times larger than themselves to bring them food, water and clean their homes for them?
Science fiction, as opposed to regular fiction, [and religion] has an element of believability and/or possibility.
I don't know what you mean with "regular fiction", but most fiction has an element of believability and/or possibility. Indeed, I'd say most genres have generally more of it that the typical Science Fiction novel. The only genre which has consistently less is Fantasy. Because otherwise it wouldn't be Fantasy.
But isn't there something just a little wrong with the idea that there are morally no limits to what the State can extract from a for-profit corporation?
Well, if Microsoft doesn't like the taxes it has to pay there, it can easily go elsewhere. I don't see the big difference to a land owner demanding rent from anyone using the land.
The question is not whether society will adapt. It will adapt, just it adapts to everything else. The question is if the society will be better or worse afterwards.
Will all these stupid new TLDs even be used? Right now, how often do you go to a legitimate website (non-spam, non-scam, non-malware) that doesn't use.com,.net,.org,.gov or.edu ? I'll bet it's pretty rare.
The bigger problem with having an Israeli stamp on your passport means if you try and enter other countries in the region you are subject to being denied entry or detained simply for having been to Israel.
Mostly hellhole misogynistic anti-semitic countries you shouldn't be spending your money in anyway.
Last time I was in the Middle East I went from Israel to Jordan to Egypt. No troubles crossing the borders at all. In fact, the biggest hassle was subsequently getting into the USA with Arabic Egyptian and Jordanian visas in my passport. (I'm Canadian.) Eventually I just got a new passport.
Does that mean the USA are a hellhole misogynistic anti-semitic country you shouldn't be spending your money in?:-)
If Britain, its Dominions and Empire hadn't stood up to the Germans in 1940, the Germans and Russians would have carved up Europe between them. Then could you imagine Stalin and Hitler having any sort of "peaceful co-existence"?
So the Brits forced Hitler to attack Russia?
Hitler never was interested in a "peaceful coexistence" with Stalin. All he was interested in was that Stalin thought he'd be safe from Hitler until Hitler actually attacked.
Ah, that's the problem. You really should get hourly builds if you want to be up to date. Nightly tends to be already completely outdated in the morning.
One aspect in the big bang is that you can borrow energy from quantum mechanics if you give it back within a short time (the time needs to be shorter the more energy you borrow). Combine this with extremely fast inflation and you can run away with the energy you borrowed.
So you are saying the early universe was just like our financial system?;-)
The big bang as we currently assume it is clearly not symmetric under translation in time. There's a clear distinction between "before big bang" (doesn't exist) and "after big bang" (does exist). Therefore Nöther's Theorem doesn't predict energy conservation at the big bang.
Well, HTML worked pretty well (and still does) for the purpose it was originally invented for: Presenting you text and images, without caring about the exact look of the presentation. It's just that few people are content with that.
The faster your program has to react, the simpler it must be. I don't think Watson would have the slightest chance in HFT. I don't think the HFT traders have secret computer chips that are orders of magnitude faster than the usual ones. A machine instruction takes a certain time, and there's no way around it. Note that this is also a theme in human behaviour: In situations where you have to react quickly, you don't think. You just act on stored procedures (either genetically fixed, or learned). Note that it is even a different part of your brain which executes those learned procedures (cerebellum) than the part which is there for thinking (cerebrum).
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that you have to remember those passwords.
There are a few places where unique passwords are mandatory (everything related to money, your email account(s), and anything where you keep private data). But for anything else, a break is annoying, but not downright dangerous. OK, so if someone broke my password on Wikipedia, he might be able to get into my account on several other Wikis (assuming they correctly guessed which username I used there; I'm usually not using the same user name on different web sites, nor do I generally reveal my identity on those sites - for example, the only place where I use the nickname "maxwell demon" is Slashdot. Good luck guessing my Wikipedia login name; but then, my passwords on Slashdot and Wikipedia are different anyway).
That depends on your definition of "something going out of existence". If you burn a painting, all of its atoms are still there, and in principle even the information about how they were arranged is still in the universe. However it's distributed in a way that it is no longer recoverable, and the structure that the painting had is gone. And it is the structure which ultimately makes the painting, and therefore the painting really is gone. And ultimately there's still the not yet settled question of observation in quantum mechanics; depending on which interpretation you believe in there may well be an irreversible loss of information ("collapse of the wave function").
Anyway, even if you prefer an interpretation where there's no "observational loss" and use a definition of "existence" which is satisfied with the information being there without caring about the structure, the very same rules that say that nothing ever goes out of existence also say that nothing ever comes into existence. There's no interpretation that allows creation of information, but not destruction of information.
The rest of your post is about religious (or, more exactly, Christian) believe, and thus not affected by this; however, you cannot use it as argument because it simply doesn't fit. It would make an argument if you believed in reincarnation; there you would also have existed before your birth (or more exactly, before your conception), just in another body. That would fit. Creation but no destruction is something not found in science (well, except possibly for the universe as a whole).
Anyway, this thread was started by an atheist who said to be afraid of death, and someone else asking whether it makes sense. Therefore in this context, a religious argumentation is not appropriate because the question is whether it is rational to be afraid of death if you are atheist.
Anyway, if you are religious, and you're not a bad person, you shouldn't need to fear death either, should you?
But humans make useful servants. What other species on the planet has managed to get another species a hundred times larger than themselves to bring them food, water and clean their homes for them?
Go into the next pet shop, and you'll find a few.
Does the body somehow hinder intelligence, or why is it assumed that a brain of the same mass is less intelligent if it sits in a larger body?
I don't know what you mean with "regular fiction", but most fiction has an element of believability and/or possibility. Indeed, I'd say most genres have generally more of it that the typical Science Fiction novel. The only genre which has consistently less is Fantasy. Because otherwise it wouldn't be Fantasy.
You could have saved yourself some typing by just stating that good fiction focuses on the characters, no matter what the genre.
The bad thing isn't that they demand files. The bad thing is that they demand Excel files.
Well, if Microsoft doesn't like the taxes it has to pay there, it can easily go elsewhere. I don't see the big difference to a land owner demanding rent from anyone using the land.
Or in other words, they measured the placebo effect, with the twist that god was used as additional placebo.
Actually, no. Death is a state where you don't exist, just like before your birth. What was so terrible about the time before you were born?
The question is not whether society will adapt. It will adapt, just it adapts to everything else. The question is if the society will be better or worse afterwards.
Actually I go to a lot of websites using .de.
The bigger problem with having an Israeli stamp on your passport means if you try and enter other countries in the region you are subject to being denied entry or detained simply for having been to Israel.
Mostly hellhole misogynistic anti-semitic countries you shouldn't be spending your money in anyway.
Last time I was in the Middle East I went from Israel to Jordan to Egypt. No troubles crossing the borders at all. In fact, the biggest hassle was subsequently getting into the USA with Arabic Egyptian and Jordanian visas in my passport. (I'm Canadian.) Eventually I just got a new passport.
Does that mean the USA are a hellhole misogynistic anti-semitic country you shouldn't be spending your money in? :-)
So the Brits forced Hitler to attack Russia?
Hitler never was interested in a "peaceful coexistence" with Stalin. All he was interested in was that Stalin thought he'd be safe from Hitler until Hitler actually attacked.
Web advertising is not traditional advertising. Traditional advertising didn't track you.
I'm on Nightly, you insensitive clod!!
Ah, that's the problem. You really should get hourly builds if you want to be up to date. Nightly tends to be already completely outdated in the morning.
How was "as we currently assume it" not careful enough?
One aspect in the big bang is that you can borrow energy from quantum mechanics if you give it back within a short time (the time needs to be shorter the more energy you borrow). Combine this with extremely fast inflation and you can run away with the energy you borrowed.
So you are saying the early universe was just like our financial system? ;-)
The big bang as we currently assume it is clearly not symmetric under translation in time. There's a clear distinction between "before big bang" (doesn't exist) and "after big bang" (does exist). Therefore Nöther's Theorem doesn't predict energy conservation at the big bang.
Well, HTML worked pretty well (and still does) for the purpose it was originally invented for: Presenting you text and images, without caring about the exact look of the presentation. It's just that few people are content with that.
It lacks goto. :-)
Are you going to take the "Java" part of "JavaScript" literal too?
Why aren't you complaining about "Python" being too snakey?
It's not too snakey, it's just not monty enough. ;-)
The key to perfect estimates is to not use wall time, but events:
"How long will it take you to do this project?" - "Until it is finished."
Unfortunately very few manages will like that answer ... :-)
The faster your program has to react, the simpler it must be. I don't think Watson would have the slightest chance in HFT. I don't think the HFT traders have secret computer chips that are orders of magnitude faster than the usual ones. A machine instruction takes a certain time, and there's no way around it. Note that this is also a theme in human behaviour: In situations where you have to react quickly, you don't think. You just act on stored procedures (either genetically fixed, or learned). Note that it is even a different part of your brain which executes those learned procedures (cerebellum) than the part which is there for thinking (cerebrum).
You still think the financial crisis is man made? No, it's the first strike of Skynet!