"The principles from ancient Egypt is hogwash. Egypt copied a lot of stuff from Israel."
It's a nice try, too bad there are writtings of Osiris that predate the Hebrews as slaves in Egypt. And too bad there is a story of an Egyptian magi parting the sea which predates the birth of Moses by over 500yrs.
My purpose is the same as that of every other creature. To further my species. More specifically to further them in ways that lend to survival, of the species, not an individual.
The science you disclaim involves experiments and studies which clash with religions. You like the end result (that more babies live) but you don't like and ignore the means (everything which saves the life of a child now once had to be tested on children in the past... for everything that works, there were dozens which did not and failed to save lives, or even caused deaths).
As for hate, you won't find any here, my views are the result of proper cold reasoning.
Intolerance? I seem to recall it's religious fanatics who are intolerant of the practices required to advance science. Not science which is indifferent to their religious practices.
Anyone who believes religious fairy tales? The possibility that everything was created by a magicman in the sky can't be proven or disproven in itself. But pretty much all of the fables which form the basis for religion can and have been.
Or do you not find there to be a problem with following a religion which adapted almost all of it's basic principles from Ancient Egypt, including the parting of the red sea, and the idea of a savior who died and was reborn to bring man the chance of eternal life.
Or that claims that god stopped the sun (gee those people must have believed the sun revolved around the earth, odd that, maybe we've forgotten why certain people were burned as heretics when they discovered otherwise).
And worse of all, a religion which actually teaches that you cannot question it and that the greatest and first sin was gaining KNOWLEDGE.
The entire religion is designed to teach people to be cattle, going as far as calling the followers sheep to be led by the shepard. And the worse part is the idiots go along with it happily.
A new liver for one thing. That's the point. Intelligent humans don't believe in your magical soul thing. Show me the fully developed and functional brain capable of anything more than synaptic responses to agitated nerves and I'll call it human.
A dog is closer to a human than a fetus, at least a dog has a brain and thinks. It's intelligence which is significant, not a physical shape or structure.
There is no such thing as a baby in the womb. Babies are by definition something which is born. The ridiculous sentiments which are attached to them should be reduced as much as possible, not encouraged.
The cells are alive of course, but once they've formed into anything (like a far developed fetus) they are useless. By definition once the fetus has reached the point at which it's no longer a collection of cells but a human it is worthless for the research we are talking about.
At the point where these cells are useful they are less human than the living cells in a blade of grass. Or do you feel there are moral issues to consider when debating mowing your lawn?
"arguments that deny a baby's humanity based on a perceived lack of independence"
My argument is that it's the same science your trying to hinder that allows these babies to live in the first place. I suppose you want your cake and to eat it too?
19 weeks, hmm ok so that is over 4 months in which it is perfectly fine to take a collection of cells which are ONLY interesting BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT A BABY.
Science and technology is what allows a rather massive number of babies to survive, including pretty much any baby that isn't carried to full term. Either you support that or you do not.
I'll skip the argument that when "wish you were never born" is synonimous with "wish you never existed" for a reason.
The argument that we don't know how developed the child must be to survive outside he womb so we have to assume conception is ridiculous. We know fairly well how long, and we know that it's WAY after conception and far far closer to 9months. If you remove artificial means simulating some of the conditions of the womb and keeping the baby alive it's birth and sometimes not even then.
In regards to the stem cells, not all stem cells are created equal. Other sources of stem cells either are not plentiful enough to be useful, or are not the right type of stem cell for most research. The potential result for fetal stem cells is practically anything. Other stem cells are more limited and not fully maleable.
Personally I like the chinese way better, after all. Half of you religious nuts believe it's questionable if clones have souls anyway right?
Buddy you didn't get any attitude until you'd already given it here. I don't know about any other forums or chats you posted in.
"UNIX support"
People who know what they are doing rarely call support and certainly don't learn what they are doing there;) People who know what they are doing, generally have a natural talent at finding information on their own.
"Microsoft - despite all their faults - remains the professional desktop solution. "
Right, you do know what professional means? It means not only are you being paid, but that it's your primary souce of income. So yes, Microsoft is professional and linux is not. But if you are meaning to imply something about the quality of support... well personally if I'm not going to get an answer, I'd rather spend 30 secs posting to a message board than 45minutes on hold and $30 to not get it. I've never known anyone to have a single issue EVER successfully resolved by MS support.
Close I guess, a generic mode should really only come into play if X fails to detect your specific monitor.
If X checked to see if the monitor had changed and tried to setup the new monitor automatically upon loading then we could have the best of both worlds. The display benefits of having the exact details of the monitor in use and the convience of generic modes when that fails.
There are a couple reasons this an issue. Unlike other hardware details, I don't know anyone who keeps the information that comes with the monitor and VERY FEW monitors have the refresh printed on them. Most monitor manufacturers also don't publish those details on their website.
Coming from a windows world, you NEVER need those details about your monitor and most don't have the slightest clue where to find it.
In a tech shop environment it's completely unworkable, because customer brings in the tower only. You plug it into the monitor on your workbench, X doesn't load, you run X setup. Now in the midst of the 8 repairs your working on, you have to remember to restore their old settings. It doesn't work for the same reason you turn away a power cord if the customer brings one in.
The PC cannot aquire a monopoly by the legal definition, in the same way linux can never be a monopoly in the legal sense. In the marketshare sense however you'll find Microsoft's to have paralleled the growth of pc's.
While there were other OS's, they sucked just as bad and were generally dos clones. They also weren't the IBM blessed software to run on PC clones.
Microsoft didn't compete and win, Microsoft was the default winner under the circumstances and no other company successfully changed the default.
No it's the idiots arguing against hardware detection and graphical installers being added (not to replace text mode installers or the ability to change the modules loaded).
It's the people who argue against graphical install wizards that sit above the package management system. It's the people who are against adding graphical configuration utils that modify the text conf files.
Those are the people who want to keep things more difficult where it gains nothing.
"Yet is was during this era when Windows was unsuitable for the home desktop that Microsoft aquired its monopoly on the home desktop."
You'd have more of a point if Microsoft aquired it's monopoly on the home desktop. The pc aquired a monopoly on the desktop and windows was the only viable system that ran on a pc at the time.
In regards to Yast (I didn't read your whole rant) and nvidia drivers. Simply open Yast, open "Online Update" NOT "system update" or "install and remove software" or any of the other confusingly similar named choices.
It asks you to pick a mirror the first time you go in I believe. After that there IS an option to install the nvidia drivers.
I agree, sort of. This is one thing I think windows does a much better job on. X should figure out the card AND MONITOR on the fly, and if unable to then load up in generic vga mode. At that point a graphical util comes into play to correct what it picked up on or to tell it what you have.
Either way, since almost all monitors support a fairly small subset of standard modes nowdays there is no excuse for X not being able to handle me plugging in a different monitor every hour in a fashion which is 99% transparent to me... what it does now is fail to load the gui if I plug in a different monitor.
The difference between a winmodem and a real modem is $50-100 and the performance to go with it.
Cross OS compatiblity comes next on the list, but doesn't even begin to be the reason to desire a real modem.
Modems are mostly a thing of the past anyway, nobody really seems to spend time working on the issue and they shouldn't, it's a waste of time.
You really don't see modems much anymore, it's called broadband, those who live in the civilized world already have it... those who do not, chose not to have functional non-obsolete technology and chose not to have conviences when they chose to live outside the civilized world.
Fedora gracefully resolves the windows partition issues. As for winmodems, while I'd agree they can't be brushed aside because they aren't real modems... I'd hardly call modems a showstopper. They are largely things of the past after all, practically obsolete.
WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government
Slashdot Mirror
"The principles from ancient Egypt is hogwash. Egypt copied a lot of stuff from Israel."
It's a nice try, too bad there are writtings of Osiris that predate the Hebrews as slaves in Egypt. And too bad there is a story of an Egyptian magi parting the sea which predates the birth of Moses by over 500yrs.
My purpose is the same as that of every other creature. To further my species. More specifically to further them in ways that lend to survival, of the species, not an individual.
The science you disclaim involves experiments and studies which clash with religions. You like the end result (that more babies live) but you don't like and ignore the means (everything which saves the life of a child now once had to be tested on children in the past... for everything that works, there were dozens which did not and failed to save lives, or even caused deaths).
As for hate, you won't find any here, my views are the result of proper cold reasoning.
Intolerance? I seem to recall it's religious fanatics who are intolerant of the practices required to advance science. Not science which is indifferent to their religious practices.
"Who's a nut?"
Anyone who believes religious fairy tales? The possibility that everything was created by a magicman in the sky can't be proven or disproven in itself. But pretty much all of the fables which form the basis for religion can and have been.
Or do you not find there to be a problem with following a religion which adapted almost all of it's basic principles from Ancient Egypt, including the parting of the red sea, and the idea of a savior who died and was reborn to bring man the chance of eternal life.
Or that claims that god stopped the sun (gee those people must have believed the sun revolved around the earth, odd that, maybe we've forgotten why certain people were burned as heretics when they discovered otherwise).
And worse of all, a religion which actually teaches that you cannot question it and that the greatest and first sin was gaining KNOWLEDGE.
The entire religion is designed to teach people to be cattle, going as far as calling the followers sheep to be led by the shepard. And the worse part is the idiots go along with it happily.
A new liver for one thing. That's the point. Intelligent humans don't believe in your magical soul thing. Show me the fully developed and functional brain capable of anything more than synaptic responses to agitated nerves and I'll call it human.
A dog is closer to a human than a fetus, at least a dog has a brain and thinks. It's intelligence which is significant, not a physical shape or structure.
There is no such thing as a baby in the womb. Babies are by definition something which is born. The ridiculous sentiments which are attached to them should be reduced as much as possible, not encouraged.
The cells are alive of course, but once they've formed into anything (like a far developed fetus) they are useless. By definition once the fetus has reached the point at which it's no longer a collection of cells but a human it is worthless for the research we are talking about.
At the point where these cells are useful they are less human than the living cells in a blade of grass. Or do you feel there are moral issues to consider when debating mowing your lawn?
"arguments that deny a baby's humanity based on a perceived lack of independence"
My argument is that it's the same science your trying to hinder that allows these babies to live in the first place. I suppose you want your cake and to eat it too?
19 weeks, hmm ok so that is over 4 months in which it is perfectly fine to take a collection of cells which are ONLY interesting BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT A BABY.
Science and technology is what allows a rather massive number of babies to survive, including pretty much any baby that isn't carried to full term. Either you support that or you do not.
I'll skip the argument that when "wish you were never born" is synonimous with "wish you never existed" for a reason.
The argument that we don't know how developed the child must be to survive outside he womb so we have to assume conception is ridiculous. We know fairly well how long, and we know that it's WAY after conception and far far closer to 9months. If you remove artificial means simulating some of the conditions of the womb and keeping the baby alive it's birth and sometimes not even then.
In regards to the stem cells, not all stem cells are created equal. Other sources of stem cells either are not plentiful enough to be useful, or are not the right type of stem cell for most research. The potential result for fetal stem cells is practically anything. Other stem cells are more limited and not fully maleable.
Personally I like the chinese way better, after all. Half of you religious nuts believe it's questionable if clones have souls anyway right?
Who said anything about children? We aren't talking about people, or babies, or children.
We are talking about something that literally was never been (an expression synonimous with "never existed").
It's something that could potentially turn into a baby, or a number of other things (which is what makes it useful).
Next thing you know people will be crying baby-killer if a man masterbates or uses a condom.
I think you mean the fetus, after all, you can't kill something thats never been born.
What do you mean if you say you wish someone had never been born?
So your thinking a book is only good if an idiot can't understand it? Kind of like an elite club?
"I get attitude, I give attitude."
;) People who know what they are doing, generally have a natural talent at finding information on their own.
Buddy you didn't get any attitude until you'd already given it here. I don't know about any other forums or chats you posted in.
"UNIX support"
People who know what they are doing rarely call support and certainly don't learn what they are doing there
"Microsoft - despite all their faults - remains the professional desktop solution. "
Right, you do know what professional means? It means not only are you being paid, but that it's your primary souce of income. So yes, Microsoft is professional and linux is not. But if you are meaning to imply something about the quality of support... well personally if I'm not going to get an answer, I'd rather spend 30 secs posting to a message board than 45minutes on hold and $30 to not get it. I've never known anyone to have a single issue EVER successfully resolved by MS support.
Close I guess, a generic mode should really only come into play if X fails to detect your specific monitor.
If X checked to see if the monitor had changed and tried to setup the new monitor automatically upon loading then we could have the best of both worlds. The display benefits of having the exact details of the monitor in use and the convience of generic modes when that fails.
There are a couple reasons this an issue. Unlike other hardware details, I don't know anyone who keeps the information that comes with the monitor and VERY FEW monitors have the refresh printed on them. Most monitor manufacturers also don't publish those details on their website.
Coming from a windows world, you NEVER need those details about your monitor and most don't have the slightest clue where to find it.
In a tech shop environment it's completely unworkable, because customer brings in the tower only. You plug it into the monitor on your workbench, X doesn't load, you run X setup. Now in the midst of the 8 repairs your working on, you have to remember to restore their old settings. It doesn't work for the same reason you turn away a power cord if the customer brings one in.
The PC cannot aquire a monopoly by the legal definition, in the same way linux can never be a monopoly in the legal sense. In the marketshare sense however you'll find Microsoft's to have paralleled the growth of pc's.
While there were other OS's, they sucked just as bad and were generally dos clones. They also weren't the IBM blessed software to run on PC clones.
Microsoft didn't compete and win, Microsoft was the default winner under the circumstances and no other company successfully changed the default.
Where exactly did I say RTFM in my post? In fact I explicitly told you I didn't read your entire winded post.
After that kind of an attitude do you really expect me to try to help you any further?
Nobody in those forums or these owes you anything. Further you haven't contributed a single thing to the community yet.
You need to drop your own attitude or nobody will ever help you.
No it's the idiots arguing against hardware detection and graphical installers being added (not to replace text mode installers or the ability to change the modules loaded).
It's the people who argue against graphical install wizards that sit above the package management system. It's the people who are against adding graphical configuration utils that modify the text conf files.
Those are the people who want to keep things more difficult where it gains nothing.
"Yet is was during this era when Windows was unsuitable for the home desktop that Microsoft aquired its monopoly on the home desktop."
You'd have more of a point if Microsoft aquired it's monopoly on the home desktop. The pc aquired a monopoly on the desktop and windows was the only viable system that ran on a pc at the time.
Gentoo isn't exactly a distro which could be either setup or used by a new user even if the documentation was there.
What documentation there is however, I have no trouble saying is the best I've ever seen (across all software).
Users who want everyone to learn the hard way annoy me as well.
The only thing that annoys me more are users who want my help and don't want to learn at all.
In regards to Yast (I didn't read your whole rant) and nvidia drivers. Simply open Yast, open "Online Update" NOT "system update" or "install and remove software" or any of the other confusingly similar named choices.
It asks you to pick a mirror the first time you go in I believe. After that there IS an option to install the nvidia drivers.
I agree, sort of. This is one thing I think windows does a much better job on. X should figure out the card AND MONITOR on the fly, and if unable to then load up in generic vga mode. At that point a graphical util comes into play to correct what it picked up on or to tell it what you have.
Either way, since almost all monitors support a fairly small subset of standard modes nowdays there is no excuse for X not being able to handle me plugging in a different monitor every hour in a fashion which is 99% transparent to me... what it does now is fail to load the gui if I plug in a different monitor.
The difference between a winmodem and a real modem is $50-100 and the performance to go with it.
Cross OS compatiblity comes next on the list, but doesn't even begin to be the reason to desire a real modem.
Modems are mostly a thing of the past anyway, nobody really seems to spend time working on the issue and they shouldn't, it's a waste of time.
You really don't see modems much anymore, it's called broadband, those who live in the civilized world already have it... those who do not, chose not to have functional non-obsolete technology and chose not to have conviences when they chose to live outside the civilized world.
Fedora gracefully resolves the windows partition issues. As for winmodems, while I'd agree they can't be brushed aside because they aren't real modems... I'd hardly call modems a showstopper. They are largely things of the past after all, practically obsolete.
WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government
You realized that we are a natural element and that anything we do is a mechanism of natural development?
Not according to the Microsoft EULA, and it will cost you more than $250,000 fine to fight it even if you win ;)