Often this philosophical issue is determined by religion. I have several very religious friends that believe at the moment of conception there is "life" in the womb.
They're not very orthodoxly religious, then. Because according to Biblical tradition, life begins only at baptism (including any kind of birth-ceremony, like circumcision), or 30 days after birth.
Most ODs are suicide. But obviously this girl's life was not saved by the illegalization of heroin.
Many ODs are also accidental, because the potency of unregulated heroin is quite variable. If it were a legal drug, then the dosage in every hit would be the same, and accidents would be less common.
Also, if heroin were legal, addicts would be less likely to use it alone in hiding. More of them would use it in the company of others, or in clinic or cafe environments, where prompt medical response will be called if someone collapses.
The Death Penalty and War are not a part of the five non-negotiables, because unlike abortion, there are times when both are moral.
One reason that Americans mostly support legalized abortion even though they're the most churchgoing modern nation is the belief that abortion is sometimes moral.
The litmus test is to ask a hypothetical question about a 15-year old girl who was raped by her own brother. Very few career politicians will admit to opposing abortion in that instance.
But once someone agrees that abortion is justified in one instance, they've crossed the line into saying it isn't the murder of a child, and slip along into permitting it in many other circumstances.
Politicians: More government is always the solution. Non-politicians: Less government is always the solution.
Libertarians fall into the non-politician category, because they never win elections and take office. If that changed, their behavior would change too.
Theres not much unilateral issuing of orders to yourself in our millitary.
And that's exactly why we find it disgusting that Bush could get away with it. He applied twice for a transfer to Alabama. Both times he was turned down.
Then he moved to Alabama, and applied for a transfer again. That time, they decided to grant it, because the ANG didn't want to cause a big messy scandal by arresting an AWOL son of a Texan politican and dragging him back in handcuffs. The truth that they couldn't control their officers would've reflected badly on the unit's public image.
The airforce didnt begin performing drug tests with physicals untill considerably after his tour was up.
False. The ANG started drug testing Jan 71, Bush left the Guard in Oct 73, and his committment ended July 74. (Note that Bush wasn't in the Air Force, anyhow)
many of them have repeatedly told stories of how the North Vietnamese played tapes of John Kerry's senate testimony to break their wills.
If the truth disturbs you, that's your own problem.
The vets putting this documentary together number over a hundred
They're either Republicans, and against Kerry by party, or more likely want to pretend that the war which cost them so much pain was a noble purpose, and don't like seeing the fraud behind it pointed out.
Also, as noted in the article, adult stem cells show the most promise for spinal research.
That's a lie. Elizabeth Long "pointing it out" doesn't make it true.
If it were true, then Bush wouldn't have needed to deny funding for embryonic stem cells, because the biologists wouldn't have wanted to waste their time on unpromising research anyhow.
Unfortunately, this submitter used the wrong words. "MMO" means "massively multiplayer online", and "massive" typically means 200+. Obviously, no current sport can involve 200 players at a time. Also, "massive" normally implies "persistent", and that's not something useful for sports. MMO games like Everquest and CoH are too tremendously different from how any sport actually works. They are PvE.
MO (multiplayer online) games like Battlefield 1942 and Counterstrike are much closer to how a sport is played: in both cases, 2 teams of equal numbers compete to reach a victory condition before time runs out. It's PvP (really TeamVTeam)
Basically, an MMO sports game would face all the obstacles of an MO game, and then some more. So you should first design MO and then extend it to MMO later if it works out.
Fantasy and Sci-Fi... How about a Western based MMORPG?
To be successful, an MMORPG needs to be fun. Fun requires excitement. Excitement requires frequent combat. Combat means death with happen. Death will destroy fun unless people can come back to life.
In fantasy and scifi, there are reasonable explanations for how people can come back from the dead. Westerns have no ressurection mechanism available.
Look at EQ support classes like enchanters and clerics. People enjoy playing them,
Those classes are doing something continually during the battle- they always have a spell or something going all the time. That's quite different from sitting by the goal, nervously waiting for that split-second when you must block the ball.
In the US, you can copyright any document simply by putting the phrase "Copyright, [year], name of author" on it.
False. Even if you don't put that comment on, it's still copyrighted.
Back in 1983, it wasn't like that, and authors who accidently published something without a copyright marking could lose control. (In particular, "(C) 1981" was not a legally binding abbreviation for "Copyright")
You can still sue someone for a violation of unregistered copyright, in any court. But registration increases the damages the infringer can suffer.
better than anything you're likely to find, but still unconvincing.
It absolutely fails as a proof of God. Most of it uses some undeniable set-theory math, which is fine for what it is... but when he steps away from math notation into plain language, the unjustified conclusions creep in. The critical error is in the last line:
Let's call this phenomenon God.
Rebuttal: Let's not.
The word "Let's" has no place in a proof, except to introduce an abbreviation or solely internal variable. He's shown that, within those definitions, there exists G where G->V and G->G. Fine. But then to go on and say that G=God is invalid. "God", after all, is defined as a mystical creature of limitless intelligence, power, and compassion, who is interested in the fate of humanity's immortal souls, who gives dictation to prophets, etc. Nothing in the rest of that proof supports this conclusion.
Here's an equally-valid argument:
Proof that I can shoot lasers from my eyeballs:
A is 19
B is 55
Therefore, B>A
Let's call B>A "I can shoot ocular lasers"
Poof! You can prove anything you want, if you append it to an otherwise unrelated math problem.
every argument which is valid "assumes the conclusion", implicitly in its premises. if it did not,
Ok, they assume it implicitly, if you take the argument itself as the process of detailing that implication. By that standard, "X=1,Y=2" is an implicit conclusion that X+Y=3; a fairly meaningless distinction. Arguing that X+Y=3 from there is valid, for anyone who already believes "X=1,Y=2", or who is willing to go along for the time being. But claiming that Z=3 merely because Z=3 is irrelevant to existing believers, and uninteresting to everyone else.
So implicit assumptions are OK. Your problem is that you're assuming it explicitly:
temporal causality does not
apply to a factor or agency which has no temporal evolution.
In brief, that's saying "God doesn't need a cause, because God doesn't need a cause"
but from what I remember, in THEORY you cannot copyright something unless you provide the text.
No. You don't have to provide anything to anybody to copyright something. For example, this post will be copyrighted to me even before I click "Submit". The followup about "50 pages" is totally wrong too. There is no requirement to submit your work to any agency to have it copyrighted.
40 years ago, there was... ancient history though.
Ever heard the term "civil disobedience"? It's where you do something illegal (not immoral) for the right reasons, because the law is wrong.
You left out a step: civil disobidence also means performing the "crime" in full public view, daring the police to arrest you for it. It's all public relations- the protester is forcing the public to attach a face and a name to the law, making them question whether it's really just to punish someone for that.
lol, i kinda hate it when NPCs are made "invulnable" so you can't mess up the storyline.
The briefcase guy in half-life was also invulnerable. He would often show up behind invulnerable windows in places you'd already been- but you could leave satchel charges back there to blast him. Of course, he was immune to those.
Yes, but that was probably an overcompensation for the horrible ammo supply in the first game.
In case you can't remember, you played a top-secret government super-agent, and yet you couldn't even convince your shadowy bosses to reload your 9mm pistol in between missions. Looting ammo from the numerous heavily-armed opponents didn't work, because they'd turn out to only have 3-4 bullets in their assault rifles.
That problem greatly reduced the flexibilty of character development. For example, I'd like to train up on only the pistol and use that for all combat (except the occasional armored robot), but there's just not enough ammo around. You've got to carry 3 separate guns, just so you can be capable of shooting all the bullets you find.
I can't imagine any American animation depicting a woman pretending to be pregnant while smuggling highly illegal and dangerous drugs under her maternity dress.
Why not? South Park has depicted events 20 times more offensive!
Slashdot Mirror
Often this philosophical issue is determined by religion. I have several very religious friends that believe at the moment of conception there is "life" in the womb.
They're not very orthodoxly religious, then. Because according to Biblical tradition, life begins only at baptism (including any kind of birth-ceremony, like circumcision), or 30 days after birth.
Most ODs are suicide. But obviously this girl's life was not saved by the illegalization of heroin.
Many ODs are also accidental, because the potency of unregulated heroin is quite variable. If it were a legal drug, then the dosage in every hit would be the same, and accidents would be less common.
Also, if heroin were legal, addicts would be less likely to use it alone in hiding. More of them would use it in the company of others, or in clinic or cafe environments, where prompt medical response will be called if someone collapses.
The Death Penalty and War are not a part of the five non-negotiables, because unlike abortion, there are times when both are moral.
One reason that Americans mostly support legalized abortion even though they're the most churchgoing modern nation is the belief that abortion is sometimes moral.
The litmus test is to ask a hypothetical question about a 15-year old girl who was raped by her own brother. Very few career politicians will admit to opposing abortion in that instance.
But once someone agrees that abortion is justified in one instance, they've crossed the line into saying it isn't the murder of a child, and slip along into permitting it in many other circumstances.
Microsoft suit being killed? Good. Prosecute them if they violated any contracts or entered into illegal contracts.
Microsoft's entire business model is a government-enforced monopoly. How do Libertarians feel about that?
Politicians: More government is always the solution.
Non-politicians: Less government is always the solution.
Libertarians fall into the non-politician category, because they never win elections and take office. If that changed, their behavior would change too.
Theres not much unilateral issuing of orders to yourself in our millitary.
And that's exactly why we find it disgusting that Bush could get away with it. He applied twice for a transfer to Alabama. Both times he was turned down.
Then he moved to Alabama, and applied for a transfer again. That time, they decided to grant it, because the ANG didn't want to cause a big messy scandal by arresting an AWOL son of a Texan politican and dragging him back in handcuffs. The truth that they couldn't control their officers would've reflected badly on the unit's public image.
The airforce didnt begin performing drug tests with physicals untill considerably after his tour was up.
False. The ANG started drug testing Jan 71, Bush left the Guard in Oct 73, and his committment ended July 74. (Note that Bush wasn't in the Air Force, anyhow)
many of them have repeatedly told stories of how the North Vietnamese played tapes of John Kerry's senate testimony to break their wills.
If the truth disturbs you, that's your own problem.
The vets putting this documentary together number over a hundred
They're either Republicans, and against Kerry by party, or more likely want to pretend that the war which cost them so much pain was a noble purpose, and don't like seeing the fraud behind it pointed out.
Also, as noted in the article, adult stem cells show the most promise for spinal research.
That's a lie. Elizabeth Long "pointing it out" doesn't make it true.
If it were true, then Bush wouldn't have needed to deny funding for embryonic stem cells, because the biologists wouldn't have wanted to waste their time on unpromising research anyhow.
Unfortunately, this submitter used the wrong words. "MMO" means "massively multiplayer online", and "massive" typically means 200+. Obviously, no current sport can involve 200 players at a time. Also, "massive" normally implies "persistent", and that's not something useful for sports. MMO games like Everquest and CoH are too tremendously different from how any sport actually works. They are PvE.
MO (multiplayer online) games like Battlefield 1942 and Counterstrike are much closer to how a sport is played: in both cases, 2 teams of equal numbers compete to reach a victory condition before time runs out. It's PvP (really TeamVTeam)
Basically, an MMO sports game would face all the obstacles of an MO game, and then some more. So you should first design MO and then extend it to MMO later if it works out.
Fantasy and Sci-Fi... How about a Western based MMORPG?
To be successful, an MMORPG needs to be fun. Fun requires excitement. Excitement requires frequent combat. Combat means death with happen. Death will destroy fun unless people can come back to life.
In fantasy and scifi, there are reasonable explanations for how people can come back from the dead. Westerns have no ressurection mechanism available.
Look at EQ support classes like enchanters and clerics. People enjoy playing them,
Those classes are doing something continually during the battle- they always have a spell or something going all the time. That's quite different from sitting by the goal, nervously waiting for that split-second when you must block the ball.
AC: They're Canadian
No, they're Californian. But both California and Canada are part of America, so it really doesn't matter.
In the US, you can copyright any document simply by putting the phrase "Copyright, [year], name of author" on it.
False. Even if you don't put that comment on, it's still copyrighted.
Back in 1983, it wasn't like that, and authors who accidently published something without a copyright marking could lose control. (In particular, "(C) 1981" was not a legally binding abbreviation for "Copyright")
You can still sue someone for a violation of unregistered copyright, in any court. But registration increases the damages the infringer can suffer.
I'm pretty sure has been shown to be incorrect. :-)
It hasn't. There is a proof against local hidden variables, but theories like Bohm's superliminal linkage are nondisprovable (so far?)
It absolutely fails as a proof of God. Most of it uses some undeniable set-theory math, which is fine for what it is... but when he steps away from math notation into plain language, the unjustified conclusions creep in. The critical error is in the last line:
Rebuttal: Let's not.
The word "Let's" has no place in a proof, except to introduce an abbreviation or solely internal variable. He's shown that, within those definitions, there exists G where G->V and G->G. Fine. But then to go on and say that G=God is invalid. "God", after all, is defined as a mystical creature of limitless intelligence, power, and compassion, who is interested in the fate of humanity's immortal souls, who gives dictation to prophets, etc. Nothing in the rest of that proof supports this conclusion.
Here's an equally-valid argument:
Poof! You can prove anything you want, if you append it to an otherwise unrelated math problem.
Ok, they assume it implicitly, if you take the argument itself as the process of detailing that implication. By that standard, "X=1,Y=2" is an implicit conclusion that X+Y=3; a fairly meaningless distinction. Arguing that X+Y=3 from there is valid, for anyone who already believes "X=1,Y=2", or who is willing to go along for the time being. But claiming that Z=3 merely because Z=3 is irrelevant to existing believers, and uninteresting to everyone else.
So implicit assumptions are OK. Your problem is that you're assuming it explicitly:
apply to a factor or agency which has no temporal evolution.
In brief, that's saying "God doesn't need a cause, because God doesn't need a cause"
but from what I remember, in THEORY you cannot copyright something unless you provide the text.
No. You don't have to provide anything to anybody to copyright something. For example, this post will be copyrighted to me even before I click "Submit". The followup about "50 pages" is totally wrong too. There is no requirement to submit your work to any agency to have it copyrighted.
40 years ago, there was... ancient history though.
Ever heard the term "civil disobedience"? It's where you do something illegal (not immoral) for the right reasons, because the law is wrong.
You left out a step: civil disobidence also means performing the "crime" in full public view, daring the police to arrest you for it. It's all public relations- the protester is forcing the public to attach a face and a name to the law, making them question whether it's really just to punish someone for that.
Nuke the infected account, reinstall a recent backup, you're good.
You forgot to cancel all your credit cards, as well as every other painful step needed to recover from identity theft.
That's the natural result of the base song they selected.
They took "Dixieland" and made it "DC Land". The original frequently used "away":
In Dixieland I'll make a plan to live and die in Dixie
Away, away, away down south in Dixie
The only thing they could come up with for "away" was "I'm gay".
lol, i kinda hate it when NPCs are made "invulnable" so you can't mess up the storyline.
The briefcase guy in half-life was also invulnerable. He would often show up behind invulnerable windows in places you'd already been- but you could leave satchel charges back there to blast him. Of course, he was immune to those.
a) Reading a 200+ page PDF on an eye burning, radiation emmiting CRT
Buy an LCD.
Seriously, you can get a 640x400 PDA for $250 nowadays.
Later recounts showed he would have won had the existing (unconstitutional) recount completed
They also showed that if a recount had happened across the entire state of FL (much more than what the Democrats were asking for), Gore would've won.
Gore got more votes in FL, and yet Bush won the state.
the "universal ammunition" system is garbage,
Yes, but that was probably an overcompensation for the horrible ammo supply in the first game.
In case you can't remember, you played a top-secret government super-agent, and yet you couldn't even convince your shadowy bosses to reload your 9mm pistol in between missions. Looting ammo from the numerous heavily-armed opponents didn't work, because they'd turn out to only have 3-4 bullets in their assault rifles.
That problem greatly reduced the flexibilty of character development. For example, I'd like to train up on only the pistol and use that for all combat (except the occasional armored robot), but there's just not enough ammo around. You've got to carry 3 separate guns, just so you can be capable of shooting all the bullets you find.
I can't imagine any American animation depicting a woman pretending to be pregnant while smuggling highly illegal and dangerous drugs under her maternity dress.
Why not? South Park has depicted events 20 times more offensive!