I sincerely hope that people like yourself will eventually realize that this isn't about war, it's about freedom...and you have to remember that if you exercise your own freedom effectively, war is not necessary.
The problem here is there are people that don't believe in freedom fighting a war against people with freedom who believe in it. The people with freedom go down in burning buildings because they don't believe in fighting wars.
Its a nice utopian thought to think that war is not necessary, but in reality wars must be fought and won for freedom to prevail. There will always be people who want to control other people and restrict their freedoms. If you don't fight those people, you won't have freedom to excercise.
"For me personally, this doesn't really matter. I'm sticking with VMware, and I don't much give a damn what Microsoft does with Virtual PC. VMware ain't broke, so I ain't fixing it:-)"
I sure wish VMware ran on a Mac. From a Mac perspective, VMware is broke, and needs to be fixed quickly!
Is it ethical? NO. Does it matter if it's a big coroporation? NO. You have to look out for yourself, because nobody else will.
Watching out for yourself includes making ethical decisions. Two wrongs don't make a right. Two wrongs do however help crack away at the foundation of successful corporations.
Should there be mandated curriculum then? What should be in that curriculum? Evolutionary biology? People have devoted their entire life's work trying to prove the evolutionary biology theory and how it replaces creationism to define our existence. It's an unproven theory that is taught in our public schools as if it's fact. So you are telling a creationist now that a child won't be forced to conform to centuries old tradition yet, will be forced to be taught anti-creationism (aka evolutionary biology) as if it's fact. Does that mean you start creating government funded religious schools and government funded non-religous schools? No way, the constitution was written in such a way that the state was in no way supposed to be allowed to create laws preventing religious freedoms. If a child is allowed to be forced to learn evolutionary biology, then he should be forced to recite the pledge of allegiance due to it's patriotic nature.
P.S. - if this comment pissed you off, then contemplate living in a country that forces you to worship a God that you don't believe in. What part of the pledge of allegiance defines God as Christian, Jewish or any other religion? The fact of the matter is (and I'm being modest) 90% of the world believes in some type of God. A study conducted in 2001 showed that 71% of the US claimed to be Christian link. The pledge of allegiance is a patriotic tradition of our nation in the public schools and has been for a couple of centuries. To say this is "OUR country" and choose to stand up against such a tradition shows me that you really have a beef against popular religion.
The constitution says that congress shall not make any laws prohibiting or establishing religion. There are no laws that say "the pledge of allegiance must be recited in every classroom". Congress should also make no laws prohibiting it on the grounds that it's a religious activity. It should not make laws pertaining to religion. I would say the lawsuit should be aimed at the school district in hopes that the person be allowed to move their child to a different school district.
As a father, I'll have to teach my children about an interesting but unproven theory called evolutionary biology before they learn about it in public schools because they are going to be taught it in public schools or will be failed. As a parent, you have to prepare your child for the world and the fact is, 71% of that child's classmates will believe in and talk about God. That's if you remove religions besides Christianity. For the past couple of centuries God == America. In the past 50-70 years there has been a serious assault on that fact. If you look at statistics the majority of America claims to be religious and believe in a deity called God. To remove a patriotic tradition on the grounds that is has the word God is in reality the promotion of the !God religion.
That craving drives the all-important male hormone, testosterone.
Dr Kanazawa theorises after a man settles down, the testosterone level falls, as does his creative output.
Ok.. So this article is really talking about men geniuses... I bet the opposite is true for women. I know(being married myself) that it takes a ton more work and thought to attempt communication with my spouse on a daily basis than it does to mentally computing line of sight vectors at work. I also get weekends off at work. Marriage extends my work day from 8 hrs/5 days to 24/7. My brain is pegged full time.
I do have less sexual tention to worry about though...
It'd be cool to see such a balloon escape the gravitational pull of Earth. You'd have an enormous source of solid propulsion in space if you could keep pressurizing the balloon after it released some of it's helium. Not only that, the balloon could ease re-entry creating a slow descent and not risking burning up the crew.
Could you make the external material some type of radiation barrier? Trips to Mars for instance with the balloon being a solar/radiation shield for the inhabitants?
The discovery, based on measurements by the Hubble Space Telescope, challenged scientists to rethink theories of how, when and where planets form. It is tantalizing evidence, astronomers said, that planets began appearing billions of years earlier than previously thought and so may be more abundant.
It appears to have formed 12.7 billion years ago, within a billion years of the origin of the universe in the theorized Big Bang.
Dr. Alan P. Boss, a theoretical astrophysicist at the Carnegie Institution in Washington, who was not involved in the research, called the discovery a "stunning revelation" that will force scientists to revise their ideas of planetary formation. Does that mean he's not a real astrophysicist? Does it mean that scientists who claim their ideas as fact have to reinvent their facts? I wonder if the ever changing face of science has caused disbelief in absolute truth.
RE: My subject line- I'll change my theory when theoretical scientists retheorize the age of the universe to be a function of the age of God + 1 year that is.
Um, actually, lots of religions do claim to explain how God created everything -- ever heard of something called Genesis? I challenge you to find in Genesis where it describes how God created the Earth. It merely says that he created the Heavens the Earth and all the creatures on the Earth. It gives a rather aggressive timeline (6 days) which is the source of a ton of controversy, but never gives a scientific explanation of how the Earth was created.
but religion insists on making assertions about the nature of reality which contradict scientific observations.
I see daily scientists making assertions about the nature of reality which contradict scientific observation. I also see daily science making assertions about the nature of reality which contradict religious revelation. You choose to believe atheistic science.
Their beliefs are no more worthy of respect
than the belief that life was a result of random chance started by sparking a planet full of goo billions of years ago. It's as much of a faith jump believing that we are all part of some cosmic blunder as it is that we are created.
Religions give a divinely inspired reason for our existence. Atheist scientists create theories and attempt to prove their claims and make as dastardly claims as religious scientists seem to.
It's incredible you would call someone a fool for not believing your position. Maybe you and Saddam should go hide out and throw ideas back and forth and throw someone in a meet grinder for not agreeing with you.
If parents attempt to teach a child their values using video games then they're probably not going to be effective.
As a Christian parent I agree with your take one hundred percent. The article really didn't say that there weren't any wholesome games out there, merely that there aren't as many as there used to be. Also, the amount of wholesome games being sold is decreasing.
I myself don't use such tools to teach my children, but do try to find fun games that are also wholesome and good for their well being. I believe what the article was saying is that the mainstream games teach children negative lessons and that it's becoming hard to find games that don't.
Do the games target Protestants, Catholics, or some other group entirely?
Protestants and Catholics have something in common. They both believe Christ died for their sins so that when they die, they can spend eternity with God. Their beliefs are common when considering eternal salvation. Neither will contradict the statement, "The only way to the father is through a relationship with Jesus Christ." Often times we butt heads when it comes to the Religion part, meaning some believe that the way to do Religion is by going to confessional and having a religious hierarchy, whereas the other might believe that churches don't belong in buildings; rather, in homes. There are variations of Christianity just like there are variations of all other religions. Now getting back to the point I believe the article is trying to make. There are fewer and fewer games out today that are wholesome and good for my children. I'll tell ya though.. I sure do love playing Gran Turismo 3 with my wife and kids and plan on getting 4 when it comes out. You'll never see Grand Theft Auto in my house though... hehe For some reason, I'm thinking that picking up hookers, stealing cars, and running from the cops is not a good lesson for my kids to learn.
...and let parents teach values on their own time.
Another point I'd like to agree with in your post and offer alternative thought to as well. With the society increasing the way it is and the market pushing games like Grand Theft Auto the way it is, it's becoming increasingly difficult to not look like freaks. It would be nice to think that a parent can teach every lesson to a child and therefore have total dominance on the way they were raised, but in reality, children are taught many of their lessons from external sources that parents don't have control over. From my point of view, I have to minimize the negative impact that society can have on my child's mental development. I believe it's the parent's ultimate responsibility to teach children wholesome Christian values and not rely on video games to do it.
I can't see Christian video games being less controverial than other games, simply because there are so many different views of what 'Christian' is.
Well actually, society (in the US at least) still has it's Quaker roots and know right from wrong and define right and wrong from values that have heritage from those Quaker roots. A game like Grand Theft Auto and some of the "Break the Law" games are blatantly thumbing their nose to traditional morality which makes them VERY controversial and sadly generates a ton of free advertising. These games are designed that way from the beginning to generate revenue. SO... I'd say that a Christian game couldn't receive as much controversy as games like that unless it was labeled Christian and showed the opposite.
A huge chunk of you, perhaps all of you, was inside a star at one time.
You speak as if it's fact when actually it's a theory. I guess I don't know how God created the Universe down to the molecule.
Just about all of evolutionary biology theories are linked to the human race being some sort of goo way back when and via some sort of radical chemical change we became what we are today.
........ Ok.. There are several thousands of essential amino acids or protein chains that compromise the human body's essential structure. (For instance, there are cells that rely on an entire set of aminos to exist for the cell to live, if any one of those aminos are missing it means life can't occur) We have never successfully created enough aminos to build the very basic building blocks by "sparking" them in any petree dish. We can't create these things today which opens a gaping whole in claming evolutionary biology is fact.
Of course, my Slashdot user ID is follower_of_christ, so what am I going to obviously post? I'm merely going to pose the question this way. If part of us was absolutely part of some star at some point, then you presume absolute truth exists (Or maybe you really meant, "maybe we were part of some star"). We use certain laws like infinity that rely on absolute truth to make the same presumption as you made about us being a part of a star. If we multiply 1.0e-(google) chance that life could evolve in such a manor by infinity, the answer is infinity. Well, in that case if there is a 1.0e-(google) to the (google)th power percent that God exists, then using the same equation you get the same result. Or again, maybe mathematical truth is relative to the person calculating it....
Now, that knowledge will never make me any money.
What you have sir is not knowledge; it's merely unproven evolutionary biology theory. I'll tell ya one thing though. All of us being parts of various stars billions of years ago and colliding into one another and forming the Slashdot community sounds as crazy to some as religion might sound to another. It's most likely because religion is not taught in public school where these theories are sold as absolute truth (which is where also, they are told absolute truth doesn't exist).
The suit also adds illegal export issues stemming from the worldwide availability of open-source software. SCO claims IBM has breached its contract by making multiprocessor operating system technology available "for free distribution to anyone in the world," including residents of Cuba, Iran, Syria, North Korea and Libya, countries to which the United States controls exports.
I work for a company that had a 1 line technical detail that crept into a document that had 5k copies printed for a large conference (Comdex?). When our export compliance department got wind of it, they took the company jet, flew to that conference the night before it opened and literally took exacto knifes and carved that page from the document which was printed by the conference. Needless to say, the conference was pissed. It cost the company several 10s of thousands of dollars.
This part of SCOs claim is probably the only part that scares IBM. The US, if not the only country, is a country that considers a briefing where "technical data" (anything technically about a system developed by the US) is divulged to be an "foreign person". Just to be safe, my company has a general rule.... "If it's code, it's technical data. Don't even try it." A foreign person is ANYONE not living within the US borders. If you are working for a US corp, but are living and working in their European/Australian/(Other than the 50 US states) branch you are considered a foreign person. You can't even have a phone chat with the US technical support line, because that too is considered an export. Export laws are terribly tight and far stretching in the US. SO!!! There might be some merit to the claim that SCO has about export compliance. If IBM didn't get a contract with the US to make this an open source project then they probably violated export compliance law.
Now the big but!
I would think that IBM would be paying fees to the government and SCO would have no foundation to charge damages for the export of these goods, unless SCO was somehow charged fees by the government and were trying to regain these fees due to IBM being the ones at fault. But the US usually slaps the ones who own what was exported.
The game will also be welcomed by scientists, scholars, educators, and students who are focusing on personal exploration or optimal performance, according to Whitehouse.
Did they forget the military? (Keep pushing a soldiers buttons with an offshoot of this until you can't push'em anymore)
How about hackers that want to really screw with your mind?
How about cult leaders that require this type of game to "enlighten" someone?
How about game makers that really want to start toying with the user's emotions?
This game teaches you how to alter your mind and focus?
I listened to the MP3 from their web site and it seems that song's theme was much like the way people in Boulder Colorado(Where the game is being developed) think. The song has repeated many-a-time: Why do we kill people who kill people
To show people that killing people is wrong? Anti Capital punishment.
What might the themes of the future versions of these games teach our children? Our soldiers? Our next generation?
It makes me think of the episode on Star Trek the next Generation where the people of the ship were controlled by a mind altering game that was designed to break into the human mind and control it.
unsigned short numGraduates = values::grads / values::year; unsigned long int numJobs = values::someValue * 1000; unsigned long double currentSalaries = values::soonToBeSixFigs; unsigned int amtOfPartyingOfWootsHeardByCurrentEmployees = values::manyWoots; unsigned int time = values::current_time;
Die-hards see nothing wrong with any of this. "You don't have to actually lie," says Don Pavlish, host of DonsBossPage.com, a Web site for slackers. "You just let your e-mail program suggest you're working late."
Someone had to tell the computer to suggest it.
It's still false. Not True. Unethical.
A large percentage of this article is about altered perception by making it look as if you were accomplishing something you are not.
Deception is being taught here. It's frightening to think I have to compete with liers.
I'm all for people working remotely however. It's not always necessary to be physically present to accomplish a task.
Both Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are attempting to contract with both the Japanese and the European Space Agency to be aboard one of these vessels headed to Mars.
An interview was held with Former Iraqi Minister of Information Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf. He was quoted saying, 'DO NOT BELIEVE THE INFIDELS! There are no rovers! There is no Mars! They are lieing to you! Iraq still owns Mars! They are nowhere near it! We have spit on those snakes!'
"Why grant a miracle to heal one faithful person yet leave another to die?"
God is attempting to rescue as many people from the pit of hell as possible. God makes a commitment to use the lives of his believers for rescuing people. That doesn't mean he is going to use your life in the way that you think is best.
As you study the Bible and learn of God's unwavering desire to pull as many people into eternal salvation (aka heaven), you quickly find that your desire to serve God becomes sacrificial and if it takes you being sick and dieing to cause several people to come to God, you will view it as an honor instead of God not being impersonal and unlawful or inconsistent.
After all, the 75 years we spend as human beings on earth isn't even a blink of an eye compared to the infinity that you'll spend with healthy happy individuals in paradise.
The question may be asked from this post, 'Why doesn't God use his infinite wisdom and power to persuade you to give your life to him instead of letting people suffer and die?' My response is, God doesn't use the DMCA like we do. He doesn't force you to make any of your decisions. He made you and the universe and incorporated free choice. Even to the point that you can choose an eternity burning in hell.
I personally would rather have free choice.
Please email me if you care chat about God / Jesus / Eternity.
phatcoder@yahoo.com
Slashdot Mirror
The problem here is there are people that don't believe in freedom fighting a war against people with freedom who believe in it. The people with freedom go down in burning buildings because they don't believe in fighting wars.
Its a nice utopian thought to think that war is not necessary, but in reality wars must be fought and won for freedom to prevail. There will always be people who want to control other people and restrict their freedoms. If you don't fight those people, you won't have freedom to excercise.
I sure wish VMware ran on a Mac. From a Mac perspective, VMware is broke, and needs to be fixed quickly!
Watching out for yourself includes making ethical decisions. Two wrongs don't make a right. Two wrongs do however help crack away at the foundation of successful corporations.
P.S. - if this comment pissed you off, then contemplate living in a country that forces you to worship a God that you don't believe in.
What part of the pledge of allegiance defines God as Christian, Jewish or any other religion? The fact of the matter is (and I'm being modest) 90% of the world believes in some type of God. A study conducted in 2001 showed that 71% of the US claimed to be Christian link. The pledge of allegiance is a patriotic tradition of our nation in the public schools and has been for a couple of centuries. To say this is "OUR country" and choose to stand up against such a tradition shows me that you really have a beef against popular religion.
The constitution says that congress shall not make any laws prohibiting or establishing religion. There are no laws that say "the pledge of allegiance must be recited in every classroom". Congress should also make no laws prohibiting it on the grounds that it's a religious activity. It should not make laws pertaining to religion. I would say the lawsuit should be aimed at the school district in hopes that the person be allowed to move their child to a different school district.
As a father, I'll have to teach my children about an interesting but unproven theory called evolutionary biology before they learn about it in public schools because they are going to be taught it in public schools or will be failed. As a parent, you have to prepare your child for the world and the fact is, 71% of that child's classmates will believe in and talk about God. That's if you remove religions besides Christianity. For the past couple of centuries God == America. In the past 50-70 years there has been a serious assault on that fact. If you look at statistics the majority of America claims to be religious and believe in a deity called God. To remove a patriotic tradition on the grounds that is has the word God is in reality the promotion of the !God religion.
Dr Kanazawa theorises after a man settles down, the testosterone level falls, as does his creative output.
Ok.. So this article is really talking about men geniuses... I bet the opposite is true for women. I know(being married myself) that it takes a ton more work and thought to attempt communication with my spouse on a daily basis than it does to mentally computing line of sight vectors at work. I also get weekends off at work. Marriage extends my work day from 8 hrs/5 days to 24/7. My brain is pegged full time.
I do have less sexual tention to worry about though...
Could you make the external material some type of radiation barrier? Trips to Mars for instance with the balloon being a solar/radiation shield for the inhabitants?
All together this is an interesting concept.
It appears to have formed 12.7 billion years ago, within a billion years of the origin of the universe in the theorized Big Bang.
Dr. Alan P. Boss, a theoretical astrophysicist at the Carnegie Institution in Washington, who was not involved in the research, called the discovery a "stunning revelation" that will force scientists to revise their ideas of planetary formation.
Does that mean he's not a real astrophysicist? Does it mean that scientists who claim their ideas as fact have to reinvent their facts? I wonder if the ever changing face of science has caused disbelief in absolute truth.
RE: My subject line- I'll change my theory when theoretical scientists retheorize the age of the universe to be a function of the age of God + 1 year that is.
I challenge you to find in Genesis where it describes how God created the Earth. It merely says that he created the Heavens the Earth and all the creatures on the Earth. It gives a rather aggressive timeline (6 days) which is the source of a ton of controversy, but never gives a scientific explanation of how the Earth was created.
but religion insists on making assertions about the nature of reality which contradict scientific observations.
I see daily scientists making assertions about the nature of reality which contradict scientific observation. I also see daily science making assertions about the nature of reality which contradict religious revelation. You choose to believe atheistic science.
Their beliefs are no more worthy of respect than the belief that life was a result of random chance started by sparking a planet full of goo billions of years ago. It's as much of a faith jump believing that we are all part of some cosmic blunder as it is that we are created.
Religions give a divinely inspired reason for our existence. Atheist scientists create theories and attempt to prove their claims and make as dastardly claims as religious scientists seem to.
It's incredible you would call someone a fool for not believing your position. Maybe you and Saddam should go hide out and throw ideas back and forth and throw someone in a meet grinder for not agreeing with you.
Does this mean next time an interface looks different we can start predicting box mods for the new cases?
They probably had the first inter net too....
As a Christian parent I agree with your take one hundred percent. The article really didn't say that there weren't any wholesome games out there, merely that there aren't as many as there used to be. Also, the amount of wholesome games being sold is decreasing. I myself don't use such tools to teach my children, but do try to find fun games that are also wholesome and good for their well being. I believe what the article was saying is that the mainstream games teach children negative lessons and that it's becoming hard to find games that don't.
Do the games target Protestants, Catholics, or some other group entirely?
Protestants and Catholics have something in common. They both believe Christ died for their sins so that when they die, they can spend eternity with God. Their beliefs are common when considering eternal salvation. Neither will contradict the statement, "The only way to the father is through a relationship with Jesus Christ." Often times we butt heads when it comes to the Religion part, meaning some believe that the way to do Religion is by going to confessional and having a religious hierarchy, whereas the other might believe that churches don't belong in buildings; rather, in homes. There are variations of Christianity just like there are variations of all other religions. Now getting back to the point I believe the article is trying to make. There are fewer and fewer games out today that are wholesome and good for my children. I'll tell ya though.. I sure do love playing Gran Turismo 3 with my wife and kids and plan on getting 4 when it comes out. You'll never see Grand Theft Auto in my house though... hehe
For some reason, I'm thinking that picking up hookers, stealing cars, and running from the cops is not a good lesson for my kids to learn.
Another point I'd like to agree with in your post and offer alternative thought to as well. With the society increasing the way it is and the market pushing games like Grand Theft Auto the way it is, it's becoming increasingly difficult to not look like freaks. It would be nice to think that a parent can teach every lesson to a child and therefore have total dominance on the way they were raised, but in reality, children are taught many of their lessons from external sources that parents don't have control over. From my point of view, I have to minimize the negative impact that society can have on my child's mental development. I believe it's the parent's ultimate responsibility to teach children wholesome Christian values and not rely on video games to do it.
I can't see Christian video games being less controverial than other games, simply because there are so many different views of what 'Christian' is.
Well actually, society (in the US at least) still has it's Quaker roots and know right from wrong and define right and wrong from values that have heritage from those Quaker roots. A game like Grand Theft Auto and some of the "Break the Law" games are blatantly thumbing their nose to traditional morality which makes them VERY controversial and sadly generates a ton of free advertising. These games are designed that way from the beginning to generate revenue. SO... I'd say that a Christian game couldn't receive as much controversy as games like that unless it was labeled Christian and showed the opposite.
You speak as if it's fact when actually it's a theory. I guess I don't know how God created the Universe down to the molecule.
Just about all of evolutionary biology theories are linked to the human race being some sort of goo way back when and via some sort of radical chemical change we became what we are today.
Of course, my Slashdot user ID is follower_of_christ, so what am I going to obviously post?
I'm merely going to pose the question this way. If part of us was absolutely part of some star at some point, then you presume absolute truth exists (Or maybe you really meant, "maybe we were part of some star").
We use certain laws like infinity that rely on absolute truth to make the same presumption as you made about us being a part of a star. If we multiply 1.0e-(google) chance that life could evolve in such a manor by infinity, the answer is infinity. Well, in that case if there is a 1.0e-(google) to the (google)th power percent that God exists, then using the same equation you get the same result. Or again, maybe mathematical truth is relative to the person calculating it....
Now, that knowledge will never make me any money.
What you have sir is not knowledge; it's merely unproven evolutionary biology theory. I'll tell ya one thing though. All of us being parts of various stars billions of years ago and colliding into one another and forming the Slashdot community sounds as crazy to some as religion might sound to another. It's most likely because religion is not taught in public school where these theories are sold as absolute truth (which is where also, they are told absolute truth doesn't exist).
Ok... I'll go back to my church now..
I'd like to know so I don't accidently by a defective product.
I work for a company that had a 1 line technical detail that crept into a document that had 5k copies printed for a large conference (Comdex?). When our export compliance department got wind of it, they took the company jet, flew to that conference the night before it opened and literally took exacto knifes and carved that page from the document which was printed by the conference. Needless to say, the conference was pissed. It cost the company several 10s of thousands of dollars.
This part of SCOs claim is probably the only part that scares IBM. The US, if not the only country, is a country that considers a briefing where "technical data" (anything technically about a system developed by the US) is divulged to be an "foreign person". Just to be safe, my company has a general rule.... "If it's code, it's technical data. Don't even try it." A foreign person is ANYONE not living within the US borders. If you are working for a US corp, but are living and working in their European/Australian/(Other than the 50 US states) branch you are considered a foreign person. You can't even have a phone chat with the US technical support line, because that too is considered an export. Export laws are terribly tight and far stretching in the US. SO!!! There might be some merit to the claim that SCO has about export compliance. If IBM didn't get a contract with the US to make this an open source project then they probably violated export compliance law.
Now the big but!
I would think that IBM would be paying fees to the government and SCO would have no foundation to charge damages for the export of these goods, unless SCO was somehow charged fees by the government and were trying to regain these fees due to IBM being the ones at fault. But the US usually slaps the ones who own what was exported.
Now the bigger butt!
SCO
Hey God!
I found your rubgy ball!
Did they forget the military? (Keep pushing a soldiers buttons with an offshoot of this until you can't push'em anymore)
How about hackers that want to really screw with your mind?
How about cult leaders that require this type of game to "enlighten" someone?
How about game makers that really want to start toying with the user's emotions?
This game teaches you how to alter your mind and focus?
I listened to the MP3 from their web site and it seems that song's theme was much like the way people in Boulder Colorado(Where the game is being developed) think. The song has repeated many-a-time:
Why do we kill people who kill people To show people that killing people is wrong?
Anti Capital punishment.
What might the themes of the future versions of these games teach our children? Our soldiers? Our next generation?
It makes me think of the episode on Star Trek the next Generation where the people of the ship were controlled by a mind altering game that was designed to break into the human mind and control it.
unsigned short numGraduates = values::grads / values::year;
unsigned long int numJobs = values::someValue * 1000;
unsigned long double currentSalaries = values::soonToBeSixFigs;
unsigned int amtOfPartyingOfWootsHeardByCurrentEmployees = values::manyWoots;
unsigned int time = values::current_time;
if ( (++numJobs > --numGraduates) && ++time)
{
++currentSalaries;
++amtOfPartyingOfCurrentEmployees;
++amtOfWootsHeardByCurrentEmployees;
}
K... Determine your own values... And let out your own WOOT if yer a CS Major!
Someone had to tell the computer to suggest it.
It's still false. Not True. Unethical.
A large percentage of this article is about altered perception by making it look as if you were accomplishing something you are not.
Deception is being taught here. It's frightening to think I have to compete with liers.
I'm all for people working remotely however. It's not always necessary to be physically present to accomplish a task.
An interview was held with Former Iraqi Minister of Information Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf. He was quoted saying, 'DO NOT BELIEVE THE INFIDELS! There are no rovers! There is no Mars! They are lieing to you! Iraq still owns Mars! They are nowhere near it! We have spit on those snakes!'
God is attempting to rescue as many people from the pit of hell as possible. God makes a commitment to use the lives of his believers for rescuing people. That doesn't mean he is going to use your life in the way that you think is best.
As you study the Bible and learn of God's unwavering desire to pull as many people into eternal salvation (aka heaven), you quickly find that your desire to serve God becomes sacrificial and if it takes you being sick and dieing to cause several people to come to God, you will view it as an honor instead of God not being impersonal and unlawful or inconsistent. After all, the 75 years we spend as human beings on earth isn't even a blink of an eye compared to the infinity that you'll spend with healthy happy individuals in paradise.
The question may be asked from this post, 'Why doesn't God use his infinite wisdom and power to persuade you to give your life to him instead of letting people suffer and die?' My response is, God doesn't use the DMCA like we do. He doesn't force you to make any of your decisions. He made you and the universe and incorporated free choice. Even to the point that you can choose an eternity burning in hell.
I personally would rather have free choice.
Please email me if you care chat about God / Jesus / Eternity.
phatcoder@yahoo.com