I find it ironic that people think companies have some kind of moral responsibility to their customers. The system is set up in such a way that companies never have, and never will give a crap about their customers. The bottom line will always be how much money can we squeeze out of these faceless morons while still looking like we care. Eveyone is out for number one, this should be no surprise to anybody.
I suppose it would be worth while to ask the question is pornography speech? It must be proven that pornography is a form of speech before it can be claimed that baning it is a violation of your countries first amendment. If it is, it certainly doesn't say much. It likely has properties closer to crack than speech. Perhaps we need to define more carefully what we consider "speech" so that it doesn't become a defense for every vile and evil thing under the sun.
Christianity is not about forcfully imposing morality on others. It's most definitly about free will, choice, and our relationships with God and others. At some point along the way stating our opinions and beliefs started to be considered forcefull imposition of morals.
In a sense it is true that everyone can do whatever they want but they must accept the consequence that those choices entail. I personaly may not have the right to tell you what you can and cannot do but the government can in some cases, even in a Democracy. The government tells you what taxes you have to pay, it makes laws about how you can use the road, how much alcohol you can have before you drive, what drugs you can and cannot have/take. Why does the governemt tell you what to do in these cases? Because it believes that it is better for society as a whole, that is the function of a government. It sounds like what your after is anarchy.
It's crazy to ask politions to put aside their morals when they're making laws, for many the very fabric of who they are and what they believe is right and wrong, and possibly the reason they were voted into power in the first place. I cannot believe that society is better off with Pornography and as such I will support Politions who wish to ban it. That is my right in a democracy and if such a Government get's into power that is it's right as a Government.
It could be argued that many of these behaviors indirectly harm people, for example "I can smoke if I want to it doesn't harm anyone but me", well... at least that's what people used to think.
The phsycological impact on society that Porn has could be considerd harmful. The lack of respect for women, the mindset that it puts men into could increase the chances of abuse. Clearly this is not a proven fact but IMHO I think it might be worth while to investigate. I do know for a fact that Porn has ruined marriages, that people get addicted to it, and that it can ruin your life. So I guess now that it's harming someone we can safely ban it.
It is not just about individual people it's also about what's best for society as a whole. I think you'll be hard pressed to find any benefits of Porn besides being a multibillion dollar industry. Of course Porn in itself isn't the real problem, the problem is far deeper then that, but then I'm certain your not interested in my crazy Christian notions about morality.:)
In that case chances are your taking the course because you like the course or it applies to your future career. If you don't like the course you could just quit and go elseware. The text book is part of the course and your prof's have likely picked it because they believe it covers the material well. I fail to see a difference. I'd also point out that no on is forcing you to buy the text book. You could certainly go out and by any other book that you believe covers the material or you could just go it alone.
Companies seem to enjoy ripping students off. Coke has bought our university and they charge outrageous prices for their products. On the order of $1.75 for a bottle of coke just under 600 ml, and $1.25 for a Can. The sad part is there is no alternative on campus because the university gets funded by Coke. Most students don't have vehicals to go else ware for soft drinks and so pay the gouging prices.
I disagree. Pixar has done a beautiful Job of making it's own name well known. Good computer animation is instantly associated with Pixar, and this alone makes it an instant must see without Disney's name slapped on it. Infact I would venture to say that most people don't even think Disney when they think toy story, and finding nemo . I've met a people who thought Shrek was pixar because of the quality of animation even though it was dreamworks.So I say don't underestimate Pixar's name Brand
That's disgusting, we had a microsoft representive come to our university promoting it as an open company because it provided open standards, and saying that it was unfairly labeled a closed company. Open, yeah right. It appears microsoft has it's own definition of what open standards are.
It's petty simple, demand for Linux employees is high these days, while the supply of Linux workers comming out of universities is very low, hence the higher price of the employee. Too many microsoft fan boys in the market means cheaper microsoft labour.
I would encourage you to take a look at the current public school system, and then tell me who's stuffing what down who's throat. And don't tell me there isn't an atheist movement that wishes to see all "religion" and faiths outlawed; blaming said faiths for wars and such, as opposed to the more obvious cause, mans evilness. One need only look at the reactions on slashdot.
I think we should be very careful about controlling climate, one of my main concerns would be what effect it would have on the climates of other locations. I don't think you can change the climate in one area without having a significant effect in another. It's a global system that should be very well understood, before we start screwing around with it.
I think the problem is a lack of trust in men and corporations who have a tendancy of making mistakes. So:) if you'll gladly voluneeter to test their wonderful new invention and let me know how it goes, I just might eat it in 40 years.
Absolutely right. To highschool students computers are more of a source of entertainment than learning tools. Online chatting, Computer Games, Downloading music and movies, comics, checking TV scheduals. Computers certainly have their place as a tool that needs to be learned and used to simplify work, but their usefulness in developing a person's intellect is suspect.
I don't see a problem with them trying to make money from support. It sounds similar to suns plan for star office. That's their whole marketing plan. When you buy star office your not paying for the software, you can get that from open office. It's the support your paying for. I don't see it as a bad buisness plan.
I don't think it's a bad thing to push linux devolopers to be more inovative in the UI department. I don't think that linux even comes close to scratching the surface of it's future potential. It's awesome as it is, but it's not without it's problems. I hope that the linux community will embrace the challange and become the market leaders in inovation.
Obviously you didn't take much time with the site since it is impossible that you went over all the material in such a short amount of time. Perhaps you didn't notice the Q&A section which contains the bulk of what you are looking for. This also suggests that you
"think they(insert you) already KNOW the answer and don't want to hear any argument".
I also highly doubt you've taken a lot at the previously mentioned book.
"These are not the words of a group interested in doing real science. These are the words of people who think they already KNOW the answer and don't want to hear any argument."
The problem is that the same is true of those who believe in evolution. They claim to KNOW that God did not create the universe and that the universe was created by observable processes. Sure they are open to various different models of this, but the bottom line is it wasn't God. Creationists in the same manner are open to difference's in their models because it is impossible to determine the exact method of creation since the process is no longer observable (ie. we don't observe universes being created anymore), and there are some healthy disagreements among creation scientests, but the bottom line is it was God who created it. The question is who has the most compelling evidence?
http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-242.htm
Come again? Creationists don't try to prove anything?
How about appologetics? It's all about proving and defending the faith.
Slashdot Mirror
I find it ironic that people think companies have some kind of moral responsibility to their customers. The system is set up in such a way that companies never have, and never will give a crap about their customers. The bottom line will always be how much money can we squeeze out of these faceless morons while still looking like we care. Eveyone is out for number one, this should be no surprise to anybody.
I suppose it would be worth while to ask the question is pornography speech? It must be proven that pornography is a form of speech before it can be claimed that baning it is a violation of your countries first amendment. If it is, it certainly doesn't say much. It likely has properties closer to crack than speech. Perhaps we need to define more carefully what we consider "speech" so that it doesn't become a defense for every vile and evil thing under the sun.
Christianity is not about forcfully imposing morality on others. It's most definitly about free will, choice, and our relationships with God and others. At some point along the way stating our opinions and beliefs started to be considered forcefull imposition of morals. In a sense it is true that everyone can do whatever they want but they must accept the consequence that those choices entail. I personaly may not have the right to tell you what you can and cannot do but the government can in some cases, even in a Democracy. The government tells you what taxes you have to pay, it makes laws about how you can use the road, how much alcohol you can have before you drive, what drugs you can and cannot have/take. Why does the governemt tell you what to do in these cases? Because it believes that it is better for society as a whole, that is the function of a government. It sounds like what your after is anarchy. It's crazy to ask politions to put aside their morals when they're making laws, for many the very fabric of who they are and what they believe is right and wrong, and possibly the reason they were voted into power in the first place. I cannot believe that society is better off with Pornography and as such I will support Politions who wish to ban it. That is my right in a democracy and if such a Government get's into power that is it's right as a Government.
It could be argued that many of these behaviors indirectly harm people, for example "I can smoke if I want to it doesn't harm anyone but me", well... at least that's what people used to think. :)
The phsycological impact on society that Porn has could be considerd harmful. The lack of respect for women, the mindset that it puts men into could increase the chances of abuse. Clearly this is not a proven fact but IMHO I think it might be worth while to investigate. I do know for a fact that Porn has ruined marriages, that people get addicted to it, and that it can ruin your life. So I guess now that it's harming someone we can safely ban it.
It is not just about individual people it's also about what's best for society as a whole. I think you'll be hard pressed to find any benefits of Porn besides being a multibillion dollar industry. Of course Porn in itself isn't the real problem, the problem is far deeper then that, but then I'm certain your not interested in my crazy Christian notions about morality.
:) Wish I could mod you up
In that case chances are your taking the course because you like the course or it applies to your future career. If you don't like the course you could just quit and go elseware. The text book is part of the course and your prof's have likely picked it because they believe it covers the material well. I fail to see a difference. I'd also point out that no on is forcing you to buy the text book. You could certainly go out and by any other book that you believe covers the material or you could just go it alone.
Companies seem to enjoy ripping students off. Coke has bought our university and they charge outrageous prices for their products. On the order of $1.75 for a bottle of coke just under 600 ml, and $1.25 for a Can. The sad part is there is no alternative on campus because the university gets funded by Coke. Most students don't have vehicals to go else ware for soft drinks and so pay the gouging prices.
I disagree. Pixar has done a beautiful Job of making it's own name well known. Good computer animation is instantly associated with Pixar, and this alone makes it an instant must see without Disney's name slapped on it. Infact I would venture to say that most people don't even think Disney when they think toy story, and finding nemo . I've met a people who thought Shrek was pixar because of the quality of animation even though it was dreamworks.So I say don't underestimate Pixar's name Brand
:) hmm so I suppose this opinion isn't good since it 's on slashdot. Nothing to see here, move on folks.
That's disgusting, we had a microsoft representive come to our university promoting it as an open company because it provided open standards, and saying that it was unfairly labeled a closed company. Open, yeah right. It appears microsoft has it's own definition of what open standards are.
It's petty simple, demand for Linux employees is high these days, while the supply of Linux workers comming out of universities is very low, hence the higher price of the employee. Too many microsoft fan boys in the market means cheaper microsoft labour.
I would encourage you to take a look at the current public school system, and then tell me who's stuffing what down who's throat. And don't tell me there isn't an atheist movement that wishes to see all "religion" and faiths outlawed; blaming said faiths for wars and such, as opposed to the more obvious cause, mans evilness. One need only look at the reactions on slashdot.
How is it that sun manages to make gnome, one of the most beautiful desktop environments known to man, look so ugly?
I'm gonna go ahead and say that it has been cracked already.
I think we should be very careful about controlling climate, one of my main concerns would be what effect it would have on the climates of other locations. I don't think you can change the climate in one area without having a significant effect in another. It's a global system that should be very well understood, before we start screwing around with it.
I think the problem is a lack of trust in men and corporations who have a tendancy of making mistakes. So :) if you'll gladly voluneeter to test their wonderful new invention and let me know how it goes, I just might eat it in 40 years.
Does this mean I can have my steak grown in any shape I want?
Isn't that what they said about PCB"s??
Absolutely right. To highschool students computers are more of a source of entertainment than learning tools. Online chatting, Computer Games, Downloading music and movies, comics, checking TV scheduals. Computers certainly have their place as a tool that needs to be learned and used to simplify work, but their usefulness in developing a person's intellect is suspect.
I don't see a problem with them trying to make money from support. It sounds similar to suns plan for star office. That's their whole marketing plan. When you buy star office your not paying for the software, you can get that from open office. It's the support your paying for. I don't see it as a bad buisness plan.
Lot's of coulds, maybes, and probablys. Not exactly thrilling or scientific. Sounds more like working with an agenda.
I don't think it's a bad thing to push linux devolopers to be more inovative in the UI department. I don't think that linux even comes close to scratching the surface of it's future potential. It's awesome as it is, but it's not without it's problems. I hope that the linux community will embrace the challange and become the market leaders in inovation.
Yay!! for Canada. Probably not to good for the economy though. Especially after calling George W a moron.
Obviously you didn't take much time with the site since it is impossible that you went over all the material in such a short amount of time. Perhaps you didn't notice the Q&A section which contains the bulk of what you are looking for. This also suggests that you
"think they(insert you) already KNOW the answer and don't want to hear any argument".
I also highly doubt you've taken a lot at the previously mentioned book.
"These are not the words of a group interested in doing real science. These are the words of people who think they already KNOW the answer and don't want to hear any argument."
The problem is that the same is true of those who believe in evolution. They claim to KNOW that God did not create the universe and that the universe was created by observable processes. Sure they are open to various different models of this, but the bottom line is it wasn't God. Creationists in the same manner are open to difference's in their models because it is impossible to determine the exact method of creation since the process is no longer observable (ie. we don't observe universes being created anymore), and there are some healthy disagreements among creation scientests, but the bottom line is it was God who created it. The question is who has the most compelling evidence?
who's really pushing bad science
http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-242.htm Come again? Creationists don't try to prove anything? How about appologetics? It's all about proving and defending the faith.