U.S. Federal agencies have requested Dr Manhattan to assist them in their enquiries regarding the supernova incident, after anomalies were detected on Mars....
I have also had to deal with firms that have pirated software.
Most do not understand the issue until it is explained to them and squawk a bit when they know the costs of fixing it but ultimately do the right thing either by replacing pirate software with FOSS or by purchasing the appropriate licenses.
When this doesn't occur it has been my experience that they are cheating in other areas of business, ie doing dodgy things with accounts and safety standards, etc. I would serious reconsider working for them either as an employee or as a contractor because it will be there intent to rip you off where they can. It seems to be the same mentality.
There has been a recent court decision in New South Wales (a state in Australia), where images of Bart and Lisa Simpson engaged in sex acts are considered child porn and a citizen has been fined for having such images on computer he owned.
If the national filter is to prevent child porn the scale of filtering is just mind boggling.
(There are various references to the court decision... here is one example http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24771973-16947,00.html )
To me it is obvious that ID should not be labeled "science", because it doesn't make the grade.
That doesn't mean that it can't be taught. To me teaching is more than quoting a book. Teaching is about developing skills in the pursuit of knownledge. If ID is not science where can you teach it? Philosophy is a good starting place. I think a discussion that starts "How do I know something?" or "What is the nature of truth?" are very good places to examine statements that depend on an Intelligent Designer.
I would expect discussions to include: What does it mean to be intelligent? What is the meaning of something being "designed" and having a "design"? What properties of a creature (or part of a creature) are nescessary for intelligent design to be the only possible alternative for it's existance? What assumptions have you made while determining the answers to the above questions?
I think it could also be discussed within psychology in the context of how beliefs filter and distort our perception of the world.
ID *must not* be is treated as if logic doesn't apply! It must be shown to fail. Then it is being taught. It is not being taught if by that you mean that a collection of rabblings labeled "Intelligent Design" are acceptable as a scientific theory.
(I also think that anyone with a *belief* that inteligent design is comparable to evolution will not be interested in a discussion about it. The belief will overshadow any facts that get in the way.)
Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Federal agencies have requested Dr Manhattan to assist them in their enquiries regarding the supernova incident, after anomalies were detected on Mars....
I have also had to deal with firms that have pirated software.
Most do not understand the issue until it is explained to them and squawk a bit when they know the costs of fixing it but ultimately do the right thing either by replacing pirate software with FOSS or by purchasing the appropriate licenses.
When this doesn't occur it has been my experience that they are cheating in other areas of business, ie doing dodgy things with accounts and safety standards, etc. I would serious reconsider working for them either as an employee or as a contractor because it will be there intent to rip you off where they can. It seems to be the same mentality.
Your brain has to be prepared - Diced.... But don't worry we will give you a replacement - a simple one should suffice :-)
There has been a recent court decision in New South Wales (a state in Australia), where images of Bart and Lisa Simpson engaged in sex acts are considered child porn and a citizen has been fined for having such images on computer he owned. If the national filter is to prevent child porn the scale of filtering is just mind boggling. (There are various references to the court decision... here is one example http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24771973-16947,00.html )
Dim
Why not put both together... dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/sda1 :-)
don't they mean Mars?
To me it is obvious that ID should not be labeled "science", because it doesn't make the grade.
That doesn't mean that it can't be taught. To me teaching is more than quoting a book. Teaching is about developing skills in the pursuit of knownledge. If ID is not science where can you teach it?
Philosophy is a good starting place. I think a discussion that starts "How do I know something?" or "What is the nature of truth?" are very good places to examine statements that depend on an Intelligent Designer.
I would expect discussions to include:
What does it mean to be intelligent?
What is the meaning of something being "designed" and having a "design"?
What properties of a creature (or part of a creature) are nescessary for intelligent design to be the only possible alternative for it's existance?
What assumptions have you made while determining the answers to the above questions?
I think it could also be discussed within psychology in the context of how beliefs filter and distort our perception of the world.
ID *must not* be is treated as if logic doesn't apply! It must be shown to fail. Then it is being taught. It is not being taught if by that you mean that a collection of rabblings labeled "Intelligent Design" are acceptable as a scientific theory.
(I also think that anyone with a *belief* that inteligent design is comparable to evolution will not be interested in a discussion about it. The belief will overshadow any facts that get in the way.)