... getting back to the film, and what you said, think about this: Is living in the Matrix worth it if it's all a lie? compared to: Is believing in a higher power, a religion, worth it if it's all a lie? If it makes you a better person? Who cares if it's all a sham, ultimately, if it makes you be nice and not lie, steal, kill etc? Or would we be better off in a world where nobody believed any lies and just did whatever the heck they wanted and maybe they would rise to believe in something else and just do things out of some innate human decency... not because some priest told them to. In other words, in the absence of religion, would humanity descend into absolute chaos / anarchy and die? My cynical nature says it would. Granted, I see living "a lie" and having religion still produces a fair amount of killing and stupid crap because of religion, but I see it as the lesser of two evil. And, to conclude, would I rather be living in the Matrix, eating the steak that tastes like steak but I know it's not steak... you know, compared with the crappy post apocalyptic no sky people living in bathtubs world... give me the matrix any day.
I see a lot more in common with all these difference sects of Christianity than differences. That's all I am saying. I see no point in getting all hot and heavy with another Christian group just because they think abortion is okay or women should be ministers. I simply don't think that's worth getting all annoyed about.
I guess we'll have to watch Thursday and find out. But seriously, it's possible this could be another interpretation of the trilogy. It just depends on if Neo really is the One or if it is exposed as a sham. Needless to say I'd be pretty happy if at the end of Revolutions we find out all the prophecy and "one" stuff was a giant crock.
Having read the CSM sporadically over the past few years, they definitely have more "family" oriented articles and the occasional "do the right thing" article which to me, at least (your run of the mill liberal agnostic minority) find preachy and annoying. I guess it's just relative.
Everything else, IMHO is getting bogged down in the details. I see no basic difference between Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Southern Baptists, although each would give you a litany of reasons why they're not "real" Catholics or why they're better than the other. Does it really matter? Not to most non-religious people.
I did read the article. I acknowledge he mentions Buddhism but it is undeniably focused on the Christian aspects of the film. And rightly so, since most of the people reading the Christian Science Monitor, are, likely to be Christians.
... if somehow you were able to convince the masses there was / is no God. A lot of people simply can't imagine a life with no higher power as being positive, good, or worth living. Others who see the existence of God as keeping them in check would suddenly feel free to break all 10 commandments and enjoy it. So all these people would likely become depressed, suicidal, putting a huge burden on our healthcare system. Or, they might just go bonkers and start killing people, stealing, looting, pillaging, and practising all sorts of heathenous behaviors. Of course, once all these deluded people passed on we could get down to business, but there'd be about a hundred years of rough times. Religion has a purpose in society, even if it has none to you. Largely, it's to make an unbearable life worth living and as universal policeman. And if only for those reasons alone, I tolerate it. I just don't practice it myself.
There's also a fair amount of Buddhism mixed in the Matrix... more specifically the idea that the world is not real, and that anybody can find enlightenment through belief. But I guess since we don't have a "Buddhist Science Monitor" in this country we get a lot more observations on Christian "Wester Religion" themes. There's a good essay about Buddhism, Gnosticism and Christianity on the Matrix website...
Software is behind, not hardware
on
AI Going Nowhere?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
We will soon have hardware that has the number of connections or processing power of a human brain. The problem is nobody's come up with the software to run on it. In humans this is what makes the brain more than big organ... the "soul" if you are religiously inclined. Maybe a human soul can be reduced to nothing more than a program with an enourmous propesity to learn and adapt over years of training / habituation... say from the years 0 to 18.
I might be dating myself, but I remember when I was back in middle school / highschool, there was a big controversy about allowing us to have scientific calculators. Not that we would be checking email and loading websites on them, but that knowing our times tables and how to add and subtract BY HAND would be "more practical" for us. Needless to say the griping teachers and parents we silenced in the name of inevitable progress.
I also remember taking a typing class and they were all manual typewriters. There was just one electric typewriter, and all us kids would try to get to class early so we could get to sit at it and spare our fingers. Our teacher, totally knew nobody would be using a manual typewriter in a few years but put us through this torture because it would supposedly be better for us. I wonder if she had a cow when computers became ubiquitous.
Start with the fact that computers get obsolete pretty quickly when compared to many other things we buy. So maybe every three or four years, we're stuck with a lot of computer hardware that is hard to dispose of or get rid of. It's hard to sell a four year old computer since the technology moves so quickly: their resale value plummets with every faster model.
Next think about how on earth do you recycle a computer? It's not a soda can or paper. What often happens is the parts are sold off and shipped to China, where people in villages are paid to take the computer components apart to get at the trace metals... in the process leaking all kinds of toxins into the water supply. Great.
Last, I recall a study showing that the paperless office has been exposed to be a myth. While on the surface it would seem having computers everywhere would save paper, the truth of the matter is more paper is consumed. I'm sure you know of people (mostly execs and grandparents) that print out every email since they like reading on paper, not a screen. And how about people printing out their digital photos? If the paperless office were taking hold, we'd be seeing a lot less printer sales, where the opposite is the case: it's expected every computer you buy, comes with a printer.
I actually think as computer technology takes greater hold and becomes more ubiquitous, we will see more waste and more environmental destruction as a result. This has more to do with the fact it's just getting cheaper and cheaper at a faster rate. People toss cell phones in the trash now. I think the only thing that will stop this process is for technology to be made with easy recycling in mind from the start. But I think it will get a lot worse before it gets better.
It's all their fault! They're voting down taxes and handing a bankrupt economy to the younger generation. Ain't that the truth. I sure hope we get something to loot and pillage for our kids to deal with.
Here's one reason why a lot of these people have to shop at these places: they don't have cars and can't afford to get around. They don't have time to go across town and shop at the mall. Next, why is it that poor neighboorhoods stay poor? Because no developer wants to build a "good" store in a crappy neighboorhood. They use the excuse that nobody with any money is going to want to drive to these crappy areas and shop. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
Let's say, where "rich people" go to eat? Probably about 40-50 bucks a plate. I don't see many "rich yuppies" eating at Burger King, that's for sure. They're all standing in line at Slanted Door, or Zuni Cafe waiting for their lemon grass organic bluberry crepes.
You haven't seen the 10 dollar jars of spaghetti sauce at Whole Foods, have you.
Read Fast Food Nation, then take a drive in the crappiest neighboor hood in YOUR town, and report back on how many KFCs, Taco Bells, McDonald's there are vs. grocery stores.
I thought Oregonians were "liberal", oh well. Most people who eat fast food are low income; that's all they can afford. Also, have you noticed where a lot of fast food eateries are? In low income or rural areas. All the rich people can afford to shop at Trader Joes and Whole Foods... the poor folk are stuck eating Big Macs. A fast food tax is a dumb idea, and shouldn't fly if Democratic voters have a clue and can put a and b together. Now an internet tax, that's taxing the well to do, so it's "okay". Not many ghetto kids are buying DVDs online at Amazon, get it?
... would do anything of the above you mention. Forget it!
Probably similar to the computer wine taster
on
Sniffing Out Cancer
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I remember a couple of years ago seeing this documentary with a computer wine taster. It would sniff the vapors coming off of a glass of wine and identify the vintage. There are professional winetasters (humans) that do the same thing for a living... needless to say they had one of these winetasters on the show and the computer was more accurate than him. I'm glad they found a practical application of this idea, since, although the technology was cool in this wine example it seemed rather pointless... except to piss off the human winetaster.
That's the trend I see taking off. It's already here with mp3s. Having already digitized my entire cd library, I can hardly wait until storage space catches up with the size of DVDs... when I can have an entire video library on the computer. Take a loot at MAME... you can have everything that used to be in an arcade on your computer. An entire freaking arcade! I can hardly wait for the day when I can have several thousand DVD quality movies on a hard drive streaming to a TV.... yeah...
At least for me. Whenever I want a good laugh I pop up some old game I used to play via an Apple IIe emulator and be amazed at how primitive the graphics are. The first Ultima, Bolo, or... SuperQuest. I'd actually love to get an old IIe now that I have a huge amount of software (due to the internet) that I never had back then... but the pain of transferring all this stuff onto floppies somehow keeps this task at bay. Don't have time for that nightmare.
Uh, because movie screens in the theater are widescreen, and if movie people took you literaly, they'd be making movies at 640 X 480 that would look like garbaggio on the big screen. Film makers make films, otherwise, they'd be called... television directors.
That's the bottom line here... hardly anybody I know who owns a Mac is gonna want a case that looks like a PC. A fair amount of the fun of having a Mac is the wow factor when people come over and look at it. Superficial, yeah, but if you're gonna plunk down bucks to get a Mac you want it to LOOK like a Mac. My suggestion to whomever makes these cases: make it look cool and Mac like. Don't make it look like PC. Even them AlienWare designs... not good enough. Make it a big globe or a cylinder... anything but a copy of a PC case.
Slashdot Mirror
... getting back to the film, and what you said, think about this: Is living in the Matrix worth it if it's all a lie? compared to: Is believing in a higher power, a religion, worth it if it's all a lie? If it makes you a better person? Who cares if it's all a sham, ultimately, if it makes you be nice and not lie, steal, kill etc? Or would we be better off in a world where nobody believed any lies and just did whatever the heck they wanted and maybe they would rise to believe in something else and just do things out of some innate human decency ... not because some priest told them to. In other words, in the absence of religion, would humanity descend into absolute chaos / anarchy and die? My cynical nature says it would. Granted, I see living "a lie" and having religion still produces a fair amount of killing and stupid crap because of religion, but I see it as the lesser of two evil. And, to conclude, would I rather be living in the Matrix, eating the steak that tastes like steak but I know it's not steak ... you know, compared with the crappy post apocalyptic no sky people living in bathtubs world ... give me the matrix any day.
I see a lot more in common with all these difference sects of Christianity than differences. That's all I am saying. I see no point in getting all hot and heavy with another Christian group just because they think abortion is okay or women should be ministers. I simply don't think that's worth getting all annoyed about.
I guess we'll have to watch Thursday and find out. But seriously, it's possible this could be another interpretation of the trilogy. It just depends on if Neo really is the One or if it is exposed as a sham. Needless to say I'd be pretty happy if at the end of Revolutions we find out all the prophecy and "one" stuff was a giant crock.
Having read the CSM sporadically over the past few years, they definitely have more "family" oriented articles and the occasional "do the right thing" article which to me, at least (your run of the mill liberal agnostic minority) find preachy and annoying. I guess it's just relative.
Everything else, IMHO is getting bogged down in the details. I see no basic difference between Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Southern Baptists, although each would give you a litany of reasons why they're not "real" Catholics or why they're better than the other. Does it really matter? Not to most non-religious people.
I did read the article. I acknowledge he mentions Buddhism but it is undeniably focused on the Christian aspects of the film. And rightly so, since most of the people reading the Christian Science Monitor, are, likely to be Christians.
... if somehow you were able to convince the masses there was / is no God. A lot of people simply can't imagine a life with no higher power as being positive, good, or worth living. Others who see the existence of God as keeping them in check would suddenly feel free to break all 10 commandments and enjoy it. So all these people would likely become depressed, suicidal, putting a huge burden on our healthcare system. Or, they might just go bonkers and start killing people, stealing, looting, pillaging, and practising all sorts of heathenous behaviors. Of course, once all these deluded people passed on we could get down to business, but there'd be about a hundred years of rough times. Religion has a purpose in society, even if it has none to you. Largely, it's to make an unbearable life worth living and as universal policeman. And if only for those reasons alone, I tolerate it. I just don't practice it myself.
There's also a fair amount of Buddhism mixed in the Matrix ... more specifically the idea that the world is not real, and that anybody can find enlightenment through belief. But I guess since we don't have a "Buddhist Science Monitor" in this country we get a lot more observations on Christian "Wester Religion" themes. There's a good essay about Buddhism, Gnosticism and Christianity on the Matrix website...
We will soon have hardware that has the number of connections or processing power of a human brain. The problem is nobody's come up with the software to run on it. In humans this is what makes the brain more than big organ ... the "soul" if you are religiously inclined. Maybe a human soul can be reduced to nothing more than a program with an enourmous propesity to learn and adapt over years of training / habituation ... say from the years 0 to 18.
The only environmental benefit of all these computers: Have the kids stay at home. No more burning fossil fuels.
I might be dating myself, but I remember when I was back in middle school / highschool, there was a big controversy about allowing us to have scientific calculators. Not that we would be checking email and loading websites on them, but that knowing our times tables and how to add and subtract BY HAND would be "more practical" for us. Needless to say the griping teachers and parents we silenced in the name of inevitable progress.
I also remember taking a typing class and they were all manual typewriters. There was just one electric typewriter, and all us kids would try to get to class early so we could get to sit at it and spare our fingers. Our teacher, totally knew nobody would be using a manual typewriter in a few years but put us through this torture because it would supposedly be better for us. I wonder if she had a cow when computers became ubiquitous.
Start with the fact that computers get obsolete pretty quickly when compared to many other things we buy. So maybe every three or four years, we're stuck with a lot of computer hardware that is hard to dispose of or get rid of. It's hard to sell a four year old computer since the technology moves so quickly: their resale value plummets with every faster model.
Next think about how on earth do you recycle a computer? It's not a soda can or paper. What often happens is the parts are sold off and shipped to China, where people in villages are paid to take the computer components apart to get at the trace metals ... in the process leaking all kinds of toxins into the water supply. Great.
Last, I recall a study showing that the paperless office has been exposed to be a myth. While on the surface it would seem having computers everywhere would save paper, the truth of the matter is more paper is consumed. I'm sure you know of people (mostly execs and grandparents) that print out every email since they like reading on paper, not a screen. And how about people printing out their digital photos? If the paperless office were taking hold, we'd be seeing a lot less printer sales, where the opposite is the case: it's expected every computer you buy, comes with a printer.
I actually think as computer technology takes greater hold and becomes more ubiquitous, we will see more waste and more environmental destruction as a result. This has more to do with the fact it's just getting cheaper and cheaper at a faster rate. People toss cell phones in the trash now. I think the only thing that will stop this process is for technology to be made with easy recycling in mind from the start. But I think it will get a lot worse before it gets better.
It's the main component of a computer. Besides, for software, it's much easier to update (bug fix). If your processor is messed up, it's a lot worse.
It's all their fault! They're voting down taxes and handing a bankrupt economy to the younger generation. Ain't that the truth. I sure hope we get something to loot and pillage for our kids to deal with.
Here's one reason why a lot of these people have to shop at these places: they don't have cars and can't afford to get around. They don't have time to go across town and shop at the mall. Next, why is it that poor neighboorhoods stay poor? Because no developer wants to build a "good" store in a crappy neighboorhood. They use the excuse that nobody with any money is going to want to drive to these crappy areas and shop. So the cycle perpetuates itself.
Let's say, where "rich people" go to eat? Probably about 40-50 bucks a plate. I don't see many "rich yuppies" eating at Burger King, that's for sure. They're all standing in line at Slanted Door, or Zuni Cafe waiting for their lemon grass organic bluberry crepes.
You haven't seen the 10 dollar jars of spaghetti sauce at Whole Foods, have you.
Read Fast Food Nation, then take a drive in the crappiest neighboor hood in YOUR town, and report back on how many KFCs, Taco Bells, McDonald's there are vs. grocery stores.
I thought Oregonians were "liberal", oh well. Most people who eat fast food are low income; that's all they can afford. Also, have you noticed where a lot of fast food eateries are? In low income or rural areas. All the rich people can afford to shop at Trader Joes and Whole Foods ... the poor folk are stuck eating Big Macs. A fast food tax is a dumb idea, and shouldn't fly if Democratic voters have a clue and can put a and b together. Now an internet tax, that's taxing the well to do, so it's "okay". Not many ghetto kids are buying DVDs online at Amazon, get it?
... would do anything of the above you mention. Forget it!
I remember a couple of years ago seeing this documentary with a computer wine taster. It would sniff the vapors coming off of a glass of wine and identify the vintage. There are professional winetasters (humans) that do the same thing for a living ... needless to say they had one of these winetasters on the show and the computer was more accurate than him. I'm glad they found a practical application of this idea, since, although the technology was cool in this wine example it seemed rather pointless ... except to piss off the human winetaster.
That's the trend I see taking off. It's already here with mp3s. Having already digitized my entire cd library, I can hardly wait until storage space catches up with the size of DVDs ... when I can have an entire video library on the computer. Take a loot at MAME ... you can have everything that used to be in an arcade on your computer. An entire freaking arcade! I can hardly wait for the day when I can have several thousand DVD quality movies on a hard drive streaming to a TV .... yeah...
At least for me. Whenever I want a good laugh I pop up some old game I used to play via an Apple IIe emulator and be amazed at how primitive the graphics are. The first Ultima, Bolo, or ... SuperQuest. I'd actually love to get an old IIe now that I have a huge amount of software (due to the internet) that I never had back then ... but the pain of transferring all this stuff onto floppies somehow keeps this task at bay. Don't have time for that nightmare.
Uh, because movie screens in the theater are widescreen, and if movie people took you literaly, they'd be making movies at 640 X 480 that would look like garbaggio on the big screen. Film makers make films, otherwise, they'd be called ... television directors.
Where were you shopping, and whereabouts do you live?
That's the bottom line here ... hardly anybody I know who owns a Mac is gonna want a case that looks like a PC. A fair amount of the fun of having a Mac is the wow factor when people come over and look at it. Superficial, yeah, but if you're gonna plunk down bucks to get a Mac you want it to LOOK like a Mac. My suggestion to whomever makes these cases: make it look cool and Mac like. Don't make it look like PC. Even them AlienWare designs ... not good enough. Make it a big globe or a cylinder ... anything but a copy of a PC case.