It may not be Facebook, but it's still Google, and Google is still a company whose entire business model revolves around mining user data and using it to sell advertising. Google also shares Facebook's general disdain for privacy.
True, but Google doesn't share Facebook's disdain for user control of their own data, so that at least is something.
Some or all of your eternal soul. Also your... inalienable right to non-targeted advertising, I guess.
Google+ might not cost you your eternal soul, but it most definitely costs you your inalienable right to non-targeted advertising. Then again, we already lost that right to Google anyway, so we might as well use Google+ now.
But what would happen if the EU had a law that prohibits such access to cloud data? (This might already be the case, actually. The EU does have some privacy laws.) It sounds like no company with cloud services could have a base in both the EU and the US.
Dapper Drake was a fine name. So was Hardy Heron. But Oneiric Ocelot? Couldn't they have given it a slightly simpler name? Why not Old Ox or something?
By the time you see the warning it would be too late.
Of course not. The point of the warning is that it is blocked until you give permission.
Though I admit I don't know whether USB actually supports this. If any device can automatically choose to be mouse, keyboard, storage or something else, and the OS has no choice to accept it without any possibility of knowing what it is, then USB is simply an inherently unsafe standard and should be abolished.
Far better to not go plugging strange hardware into devices you care about.
Obviously, but people will do it anyway.
Even worse the stick could just have a bunch of caps in it. Charge off the USB port and fry the data lanes. If you were truly evil you might even use that power to set off an explosive or start a fire.
Frying the machine costs money, but doesn't really hurt the security of the data all that much. I mean, you could also just mail a bomb to the company if that's what you want. The problem here is the installation of a trojan without anyone noticing that something strange ever happened.
What would be nice is if the OS gave a warning if it detected a second keyboard or mouse. If you plugged in a USB stick and get a warning that an extra keyboard has been detected, you know something's wrong.
This makes a lot of sense. Lately I've been coming to understand that we shouldn't follow Jesus' commandments of love in order to attain salvation, because salvation has already been given to us if we want it. We should follow them simply because they are the right thing to do. In fact, we cannot help but follow them if we accept God's love. Really following Jesus means that you automatically love all your fellow humans. That, I think, is what it means that Christians are recognized by their deeds.
That is why you will find that most Christians are loving caring people, and rather wanting to be associated with the heirarcichal prison of religion, will just profess to have a faith! I myself despise religion, as it is just a way for people to control 'minions', and faith is freedom and love.
There's one problem here: many people calling themselves Christians, especially if they do so loudly, don't seem all that loving and caring. And this gives non-Christians a very wrong view of what Christianity is about. It's like Gandhi said: "I like your Christ but I do not like your Christians".
If you think that modern Christians don't go back to the OT for Rules and Regulations, you don't know actual Christians, just their textbook.
I happen to know quite a lot of modern Christians. In fact, I'm one myself. The OT gets milked a lot for its wisdom, for perspective, for context, but the rules and regulations in it get mostly ignored. Especially Leviticus.
I'm pretty sure the idea is that Jesus and the apostles set out new laws that overrode the old ones (though I'm 99.999% sure that the Ten Commandments still apply).
I'd make that 90%. Very, very few Christians hold the Sabbath (though many confuse Sunday with the Sabbath).
If "the Old Testament, as it stands, is now a history book that we can learn from, not a body of law that we are to strictly follow" then why do people keep quoting it while claiming that we are violating God's laws? If the Old Testament is not binding law, then why is it quoted to say that homosexuality is wrong? Why is it quoted to say same-sex marriage is an abomination?
No idea, but it's certainly not something you'll hear from me. I prefer to quote stuff about "love your neighbour as yourself", "love your enemy", and the many other verses about the importance of love in the NT.
It would see that you are still "picking and choosing" bits and pieces that you want to follow because you agree with them, and then throwing away the bits and pieces you don't agree with.
The major bit he's picking and choosing is Jesus. To a Christian, the gospels aren't just some books no greater than any of the lesser prophets. They contain the words of God himself, spoken directly to many people around him.
Either the bible is a body of laws to follow in which you must follow it all, or the bible is not a body of laws to follow in which don't follow the laws in it. You can't claim that it's just a history book and not a body of law....except for the parts that we want to still be laws...
That could well be what you believe, but your religion is not necessarily his religion. Why should he not be allowed to value the words of Jesus above any other? Does it upset you so much when someone hold a different opinion than you?
Good luck getting some followers, then! I'm sure they will value your words above any other. Similarly, any follower of Jesus will value his words above those of the (rather heavily edited, any credible scholar will admit) OT. It doesn't automatically mean that the OT is wrong, but the NT does put the OT in a completely different light. As it should, according to the words of Jesus.
Does that mean we can drop the whole creationism debate?
Please, yes. Also please point out to any creationists that the bible contains two different and slightly contradictory creation stories from very different times.
All the excessive biblical literalism is getting pretty tiresome.
There's a lot of different interpretations possible for that support. He clearly had no problem violating a lot of the Jewish rules at that time, including gathering food at the sabbath, which was explicitly forbidden in Exodus. He also said that while he didn't come to change or abolish the law, he did come to fulfill it. What that means exactly is anyone's guess, but unless he was a flaming hypocrite in that one regard, he probably didn't mean that the law would remain as binding as it had been in the past.
Of course the Old Testament means jack to quite a lot of people too. But calling it the Old Testament suggests there's also a new one. If I'm not mistaken, Jews call it the Tenach, right?
Exactly. Kevin Mitnick is a far better example of this than anyone else. Though there are a lot more hackers who came from the security cracking scene and went on to become rich internet entrepreneurs. Rop Gonggrijp is a pretty famous example.
Depends on what you call "extreme societal control", I suppose. The OT had rather harsh punishments for pretty silly things, but that doesn't automatically mean there's actual control. But it could be that I'm thinking more in terms of governmental control instead of societal control. But societal control sounds weird to me, because society itself is rather uncontrollable.
Now read the rest of the NT please. You're only ripping a single verse out of context, and not looking at the context. If you'd read the rest of the NT, you'd have known that Jesus and the apostles regularly point out how the old restrictions, especially the ones that we find incomprehensible, are not binding (at least not anymore).
Clearly you've never read the bible. Endless killing of people of other religions is "OK" even encouraged by God. On the other hand, extreme societal control of what goes on in "private" bedrooms is mandatory.
Considering you've been modded Insightful instead of Funny, I feel the need to point that this is not actually in the bible.
Slashdot Mirror
Without even a room to put it in?
It'll get you a 2 bedroom apartment in Amsterdam.
That won't stop Apple from taking credit for this incredible innovation before it tanks.
It may not be Facebook, but it's still Google, and Google is still a company whose entire business model revolves around mining user data and using it to sell advertising. Google also shares Facebook's general disdain for privacy.
True, but Google doesn't share Facebook's disdain for user control of their own data, so that at least is something.
Some or all of your eternal soul. Also your... inalienable right to non-targeted advertising, I guess.
Google+ might not cost you your eternal soul, but it most definitely costs you your inalienable right to non-targeted advertising. Then again, we already lost that right to Google anyway, so we might as well use Google+ now.
But what would happen if the EU had a law that prohibits such access to cloud data? (This might already be the case, actually. The EU does have some privacy laws.) It sounds like no company with cloud services could have a base in both the EU and the US.
I'd rather we didn't do that. I don't know for sure whether anyone in my neighbourhood has an infected PC, but I'd rather not take that chance.
Dutch companies are working on plasma printing as well.
Sounds awesomer than inkjet printing. I say we go with plasma printing.
Dapper Drake was a fine name. So was Hardy Heron. But Oneiric Ocelot? Couldn't they have given it a slightly simpler name? Why not Old Ox or something?
By the time you see the warning it would be too late.
Of course not. The point of the warning is that it is blocked until you give permission.
Though I admit I don't know whether USB actually supports this. If any device can automatically choose to be mouse, keyboard, storage or something else, and the OS has no choice to accept it without any possibility of knowing what it is, then USB is simply an inherently unsafe standard and should be abolished.
Far better to not go plugging strange hardware into devices you care about.
Obviously, but people will do it anyway.
Even worse the stick could just have a bunch of caps in it. Charge off the USB port and fry the data lanes. If you were truly evil you might even use that power to set off an explosive or start a fire.
Frying the machine costs money, but doesn't really hurt the security of the data all that much. I mean, you could also just mail a bomb to the company if that's what you want. The problem here is the installation of a trojan without anyone noticing that something strange ever happened.
What would be nice is if the OS gave a warning if it detected a second keyboard or mouse. If you plugged in a USB stick and get a warning that an extra keyboard has been detected, you know something's wrong.
This makes a lot of sense. Lately I've been coming to understand that we shouldn't follow Jesus' commandments of love in order to attain salvation, because salvation has already been given to us if we want it. We should follow them simply because they are the right thing to do. In fact, we cannot help but follow them if we accept God's love. Really following Jesus means that you automatically love all your fellow humans. That, I think, is what it means that Christians are recognized by their deeds.
That is why you will find that most Christians are loving caring people, and rather wanting to be associated with the heirarcichal prison of religion, will just profess to have a faith! I myself despise religion, as it is just a way for people to control 'minions', and faith is freedom and love.
There's one problem here: many people calling themselves Christians, especially if they do so loudly, don't seem all that loving and caring. And this gives non-Christians a very wrong view of what Christianity is about. It's like Gandhi said: "I like your Christ but I do not like your Christians".
If you think that modern Christians don't go back to the OT for Rules and Regulations, you don't know actual Christians, just their textbook.
I happen to know quite a lot of modern Christians. In fact, I'm one myself. The OT gets milked a lot for its wisdom, for perspective, for context, but the rules and regulations in it get mostly ignored. Especially Leviticus.
I'm pretty sure the idea is that Jesus and the apostles set out new laws that overrode the old ones (though I'm 99.999% sure that the Ten Commandments still apply).
I'd make that 90%. Very, very few Christians hold the Sabbath (though many confuse Sunday with the Sabbath).
If "the Old Testament, as it stands, is now a history book that we can learn from, not a body of law that we are to strictly follow" then why do people keep quoting it while claiming that we are violating God's laws? If the Old Testament is not binding law, then why is it quoted to say that homosexuality is wrong? Why is it quoted to say same-sex marriage is an abomination?
No idea, but it's certainly not something you'll hear from me. I prefer to quote stuff about "love your neighbour as yourself", "love your enemy", and the many other verses about the importance of love in the NT.
It would see that you are still "picking and choosing" bits and pieces that you want to follow because you agree with them, and then throwing away the bits and pieces you don't agree with.
The major bit he's picking and choosing is Jesus. To a Christian, the gospels aren't just some books no greater than any of the lesser prophets. They contain the words of God himself, spoken directly to many people around him.
Either the bible is a body of laws to follow in which you must follow it all, or the bible is not a body of laws to follow in which don't follow the laws in it. You can't claim that it's just a history book and not a body of law....except for the parts that we want to still be laws...
That could well be what you believe, but your religion is not necessarily his religion. Why should he not be allowed to value the words of Jesus above any other? Does it upset you so much when someone hold a different opinion than you?
Good luck getting some followers, then! I'm sure they will value your words above any other. Similarly, any follower of Jesus will value his words above those of the (rather heavily edited, any credible scholar will admit) OT. It doesn't automatically mean that the OT is wrong, but the NT does put the OT in a completely different light. As it should, according to the words of Jesus.
Does that mean we can drop the whole creationism debate?
Please, yes. Also please point out to any creationists that the bible contains two different and slightly contradictory creation stories from very different times.
All the excessive biblical literalism is getting pretty tiresome.
There's a lot of different interpretations possible for that support. He clearly had no problem violating a lot of the Jewish rules at that time, including gathering food at the sabbath, which was explicitly forbidden in Exodus. He also said that while he didn't come to change or abolish the law, he did come to fulfill it. What that means exactly is anyone's guess, but unless he was a flaming hypocrite in that one regard, he probably didn't mean that the law would remain as binding as it had been in the past.
Of course the Old Testament means jack to quite a lot of people too. But calling it the Old Testament suggests there's also a new one. If I'm not mistaken, Jews call it the Tenach, right?
Exactly. Kevin Mitnick is a far better example of this than anyone else. Though there are a lot more hackers who came from the security cracking scene and went on to become rich internet entrepreneurs. Rop Gonggrijp is a pretty famous example.
Who are you to call me a poser? And what exactly is your authority concerning what it means to follow what's in the bible?
It sounds to me like you're trying to impose your misunderstandings on people you disagree with anyway.
Depends on what you call "extreme societal control", I suppose. The OT had rather harsh punishments for pretty silly things, but that doesn't automatically mean there's actual control. But it could be that I'm thinking more in terms of governmental control instead of societal control. But societal control sounds weird to me, because society itself is rather uncontrollable.
Now read the rest of the NT please. You're only ripping a single verse out of context, and not looking at the context. If you'd read the rest of the NT, you'd have known that Jesus and the apostles regularly point out how the old restrictions, especially the ones that we find incomprehensible, are not binding (at least not anymore).
You haven't read the New Testament, have you? Nothing in the Old Testament is mandatory anymore.
But even in the OT, there was no such thing as extreme societal control.
Clearly you've never read the bible. Endless killing of people of other religions is "OK" even encouraged by God. On the other hand, extreme societal control of what goes on in "private" bedrooms is mandatory.
Considering you've been modded Insightful instead of Funny, I feel the need to point that this is not actually in the bible.