Except when implemented like here. I work at a large IT company, and there are two chief complains against our official wiki.
1) access. Access to everything is denied by default. You get access to beginner employee documents, corporate standards and to whatever your team is doing at the moment. If you want access to docs on any tool, subsystem, API, service, function - whatever internally developed technology you need to use - you need to apply, through your boss, to the person responsible for giving access. You get the access the next day, unless the person is away on a leave/holidays (there's only one). Search returns only titles, so you need to guess which of the entries the search returned you need access to. Usually it's faster to rewrite it from scratch yourself or reverse-engineer the sources (you have access to these), or to find the author (by word on mouth) and ask directly.
2) keywords. A common habit has it that most internal systems get 3-letter acronym names. Amongst all, it's an official requirement to obfuscate the name so that competition couldn't figure out the function of a system from its name. And of course the search function of wiki requires searchable words to be longer than 3 characters. Ooops.
Does Totem with Win32 codecs still crash X so badly that it crashes nVidia kernel module and the rest of the kernel, leading to crash/reboot of the PC?
"In the US, every major operator has an email gateway, since they're assured of getting paid by the receiver;"
How is it assured that nobody will maliciously spam the receiver? We do get WWW gateways here, but they tend to be bound to your own number (and password protected), and you may be charged for using them, or they are protected by captcha and other blockades, but even if circumvented they don't put the receiver at risk of paying for unwanted messages.
There are plans that don't differ between landline vs mobile, and ones that do - you have a wide range of choices. Unlimited calls to chosen numbers, discounts to given numeration zones or operators, SMS for $0.01 plans, unlimited data transfers, etc. They all come with various monthly fees but you have a lot of flexiblity to pick what you need - and are often modular so you pick a 'basic service' of, say, 20 mins flat rate, then add 4-5 "modules" like unused free call time passing over the next month or indefinitely, free SMS packages, free/cheap calls to chosen numbers and so on.
Imagine I get a phone with unlimited/very cheap SMS plan. Maybe even a throw-away prepaid. And I start sending my SMS in bulk to a person I don't like. Ouch.
In Europe, all 'incoming' are free, with exception of roaming which only suckers (and people with money to burn) use. Others just buy a local throw-away pre-paid in their destination country - international rates are far lower than roaming.
Here we get a pre-paid plan like: buy starter for $10, use up the $10 within a month, receive calls/sms for another 11 months. Anytime, for another $10 you get another $10 worth of outgoing calls/SMS and prolonging the incoming calls/sms for another year since the recharge. It's great if you want to drive embedded devices by GSM, if you want to stay in contact with your kid without risk of paying arm and leg for the bills, and you can always call the emergency number 112 for free.
Not really - if the values are orders of magnitude apart. You pick a bunch of zeros and try to separate them in two distinct groups, "deeper zeros" and "shallow zeros". These that have been ones in previous life, and the ones that have been zeros. The groups will be quite distinct with very little/no "specimens" on the border, because the residual value from "two lives ago" has very little influence. Then you can take each of these groups and split it in half again. The difference will be much smaller but still you should come up with two distinct groups.
I don't know how big the equipment to read data that deep is, but my bet is it wouldn't fit between the platters, or even within a 5.25" enclosure, plus costs a good deal more than your typical hard drive head. And reading one bit 4 levels deep may take far longer than picking up the 'outer-most' layer of information. The residual information remains and is readable strictly because the hard-drive head takes so short to write it.
And even assuming you could read the data at current speeds of reading 1-bit data, think of the process of writing the data in orderly manner: changing the data in layer 1 pushes the old data into layer 2, l2 down into l3, l3 into l4, and l4 into oblivion. So if you want to modify l1 data, you first cache the other 3 layers, then write them all back in order, before writing the top-most one.
This would be good for "shadow directory"/"snapshot"/"undo file" type storage, or "write rarely, read often" like applications or long-term storage (though I'm very unsure about how long-lasting is the deeper-level field value change). But most likely cost, reliablity, speed and size are prohibitive factors. It's cheaper to squeeze bits twice as densely.
The recovery services can recover data up to 4 passes deep. Thing is the magnetic orientation is not really boolean but float. So the transitions of the values of the plate surface are like (new) = (0.9*trans)+(0.1*old), so:
so you can guess the sequence of transitions from the value.
I know battery-backed RAM can't be recovered that way - it's like it was constantly writing to itself, you'll have a thousand write cycles in matter of miliseconds. I don't know how data is stored in flash though.
Makes you wonder if you could quadruple the capacity of the harddrives that way too.
The patent system is intended to promote innovation by granting protection to the inventor to allow them to get paid for their work/research. The purpose of the period is to protect from copycats and give time to manufacture and sell the invented product.
It never meant gathering a few thousands of ideas everyone in the industry would get within next year anyway, then keeping them never intending to manufacture them, only gaining money from others.
Patents were intended to protect you from others who copy your idea, not to prevent others from getting the same idea as you did.
The flaw is that you can get something quite obvious patented and then block progress by charging everyone for doing the same thing independently. Patent trolls do exactly that - use the law directly against its spirit, stifling innovation instead of promoting it.
Zeitgeist, like Wikipedia, took the 'no original research' approach - they use others' scientific works or journalism instead of trying to interprete 2000yo sources. Meaning all their direct sources are modern. You won't find direct references to historical documents, only indirect.
And now, if any source provides a view that is in direct opposition of christian beliefs, how can it not be labelled anti-christian? They are about as anti-christian as Galileo's works. How can you present a list of similarities between current and past mainstream religions, not to be viewed as their enemy?
Companies that operate solemnly on exploiting the flaws of the system are called 'patent trolls'. As opposed to 'bridge trolls' or 'Internet trolls' like you.
In Poland, there's such an organization, ZAIKS. They request the IP-physical address mappings from the ISPs before sending the police to raid the people. ISPs are in no way obligated to give them the info, or withhold it - but since ZAIKS coperates with the Police, ISPs usually yield, just not to anger the Police - they can't really hurt them, but they can make their life more difficult, so the ISPs usually hand over the info.
Now with this decision in effect, ZAIKS would still sue you for copyright violation, just the same. But now you can sue your ISP for illegally distributing your personal data (it IS protected here!) and ISPs confronted with alternative between "inconveniences from the Police" and a serious threat of a valid legal action from the customer, are much more likely to make the right decision: "Sorry, this is personal data, we're not authorised to share it."
(the sail does not propel you as such towards the Sun. Solar gravity does, and the sail only propels you against orbital speed, so you drop to a lower orbit in effect.)
I know what crucifiction is. I also know what clay sculpting is. I don't understand why you insist the act of sculpting Adam out of clay was just a metaphor while nailing Jesus to a cross was not.
The video shows clearly that history of Jesus is a clear, outright and very well-matched plagiarism of history of Horus. Oh well, there just -might- have happened a guy whose life by a very odd series of incidents and miracles followed an egyptian myth predating him by some 1000 years, to the letter. Things like one or two events in our lives matching given these of historical or mythological character's happen all the time. Maybe really there was a guy with a list of some 140 matches against myth of Horus, many including key points of his life. Amazing coincidence, isn't it?
I don't know if you can have a relationship with a person who does not exist (I suppose you could do a case study with someone who is crazy and thinks they have an imaginary friend). But I take unbelievable comfort in knowing that even if I had no one left, I would still have God.
Schizophrenia. I had it. It was very nice while it lasted, and a truly comforting feeling. I miss it nowadays.;)
You can safely believe in God as a being 'beyond', possibly a creator of the initial spark, possibly 'meddling' (no pejorative meaning intended) in our affairs by very subtle and pretty rare touches, as an existence 'above us'. You may even believe there is some kind of heaven and hell, not angel choruses and brimstone and sulfur, but states of awareness, forms of existence. With God like this, the religion doesn't matter and there's no way it could be disproven, challenged, faith damaged. At worst it can be discounted as 'not worthy of attention'.
But as soon as you start pulling any 'solid data' out of the Bible, as soon as you go physical, you meet opposition, amongst all because you're usually entirely wrong. If Bible is not to be taken literally, why take any part of it literally, any single one? Why take that his name was Jesus, why take that he was nailed to a cross, a model of cross that was not in popular use at that time, why think that him bleeding and hurting there has any impact on us. Why not believe it's ALL a literary metaphor, man named Jesus just a symbol, not ever a live person, just a metaphor? His crucification a physical, violent act a symbol for something spiritual - a story that never happened but gives you an idea how could feel what have happened, or will happen?
Religious people are adamant that Adam was not made of clay, that it's absolutely not to be taken literally, but they are also adamant Jesus had his hands pierced by nails, and for some reason get very angry if you treat it as the same kind of metaphor without real historical background. Despite the fact there's not a single information that tells you which one can be taken literally.
There is nothing that can't be figuratively speaking there.
But there's almost nothing that can be literately speaking there. And speaking figuratively, pi=3 for certain values of pi. (the meaning can be changed entirely, or even reversed given enough 'interpretation'.)
The bible is supposed to be understood but it doesn't mean that people understand it.
And great most of people believe they do, while they don't. Likely including you.
If there ever was a greater truth to the Bible (which I doubt), it's been long lost to the ages, in translations, in political plots changing its content, in including apocrypha or banning parts of Bible into them, and today the Bible simply can't be understood, because it's a mess. It's a corrupted media, damaged data and there's no checksum to see what is right and what is broken.
Some use the Bible as a tool, to do good or evil by guiding or controlling people, while distancing themselves from their interpretations. Some believe their own interpretations, and accept them without criticism, with possibly catastrophic consequences. Some fish out pieces of wisdom that are still left there. But the Bible is NOT anything more than a book and believing anything else is dangerous. It leads people to believe they found some truths while they didn't. It can be useful when used with a lot of criticism, but it must be taken with a grain of salt, always.
picked up a pice of paper from the table and a glass fell to the floor.
The science won't assume anything except these events coincided in time: there's an unsupported hypothesis they were related. Then you can apply known knowledge or research, why. Resistance of paper, yes. And force - and what's the origin of the force? You. So you knocked it to the floor. No Ockham Razor because all data is known, confirmed.
But "God causing something" is you pulling the paper and then blaming breaking the glass on me. The glass broke because of me, because I printed the paper. It was about a push-pull data transfer system project. But you read 'receiver pulls the message' and interpreted you're the receiver, and the paper is the message. And I broke the glass by printing the instruction and leaving it under the glass, right?
That's what interpreting the Bible and following the interpretations directly does. Ockham Razor says: Literal interpretation is true. And if for a fact you know literal interpretation is false, and there's no key to decipher it into literal interpretation unambiguously, the info can't be trusted.
Science says you broke the glass. My printout is not to be blamed.
See the first chapter of ZeitGeist. It's on youtube. The rest is very political, partially false and very controversial, but the first part, about religion, is very insightful and very interesting.
Then we can discuss matter of Jesus again, and whether using this name makes sense.
Personally, I argue with some of the list of sins, and I long discarded all the literal info from Bible, like proper names (Moses, Jesus, Iehova), but still some of its key concepts are okay.
Check the maps again, and remember near the poles the distances appear longer than they are in reality (Greenland really is not the size of South America!)
The hop from nearest islands Maldives, Seychylles) is really really long. Indian Ocean is very empty when it comes to island density. It would take much longer from land to land, and note that boats of the Indonesian were far less advanced than Viking boats.
Nowhere in particular, but it never said anything has changed and treats 'things of the old' just the same as anything 'new' as if there was no difference. Meaning it gives clueless people lots of very wrong ideas they are ready to defend with their lives.
That's the whole problem with the Bible. If I sought, I'd give you a couple of verses that very well could mean nothing has changed, then you'd give me a couple of others that very well could mean just the opposite, but if we agree they contradict each other, someone else will come and twist their meaning just a little and make them not contradictory at all (while simultaneously ruining out original 'proofs' with the new meanings).
The Bible is not meant to be treated literally AND there's no official interpretation key to it. Meaning the results of interpretation are very random, and if you start believing your interpretation, it gets very dangerous.
I've seen religious bigots picking one line and spewing their wrath using it, then when asked about the previous line, used in exactly the same context, just another bullet point of a longish list of 'things not to be done', they say it's been invalidated by an entry in the New Testament. I check the entry and it's all-or-nothing, not specific about this very issue - if you believe it means what they mean it means, then both lines are gone. If they still want to use the first line, then the second is valid as well.
IMHO Bible contains no more truth than/dev/random, but being human-readable, it works well as a brain teaser, it can tickle you to discover something. You see a pattern in the noise, then imagine more, and you may come up with an interesting idea, despite the fact nobody ever intentionally put it in the original noise. But if you start believing that because that pattern is neat and useful, that any sequence of data taken from the same chunk of noise is correct answer to a question at hand, you're getting dangerous.
oops. I meant Balkans, not Scandinavia (thinking 'peninsula' and automatically typing the first match in my brain). They are predominantly orthodox catholic and more religious than average.
Slashdot Mirror
And I want death sentence for speeding.
Sure, yeah, Wiki. Wiki is good.
Except when implemented like here. I work at a large IT company, and there are two chief complains against our official wiki.
1) access. Access to everything is denied by default. You get access to beginner employee documents, corporate standards and to whatever your team is doing at the moment. If you want access to docs on any tool, subsystem, API, service, function - whatever internally developed technology you need to use - you need to apply, through your boss, to the person responsible for giving access. You get the access the next day, unless the person is away on a leave/holidays (there's only one). Search returns only titles, so you need to guess which of the entries the search returned you need access to. Usually it's faster to rewrite it from scratch yourself or reverse-engineer the sources (you have access to these), or to find the author (by word on mouth) and ask directly.
2) keywords. A common habit has it that most internal systems get 3-letter acronym names. Amongst all, it's an official requirement to obfuscate the name so that competition couldn't figure out the function of a system from its name. And of course the search function of wiki requires searchable words to be longer than 3 characters. Ooops.
Does Totem with Win32 codecs still crash X so badly that it crashes nVidia kernel module and the rest of the kernel, leading to crash/reboot of the PC?
"In the US, every major operator has an email gateway, since they're assured of getting paid by the receiver;"
How is it assured that nobody will maliciously spam the receiver? We do get WWW gateways here, but they tend to be bound to your own number (and password protected), and you may be charged for using them, or they are protected by captcha and other blockades, but even if circumvented they don't put the receiver at risk of paying for unwanted messages.
There are plans that don't differ between landline vs mobile, and ones that do - you have a wide range of choices. Unlimited calls to chosen numbers, discounts to given numeration zones or operators, SMS for $0.01 plans, unlimited data transfers, etc. They all come with various monthly fees but you have a lot of flexiblity to pick what you need - and are often modular so you pick a 'basic service' of, say, 20 mins flat rate, then add 4-5 "modules" like unused free call time passing over the next month or indefinitely, free SMS packages, free/cheap calls to chosen numbers and so on.
Pay for incoming anything? WTF?
Imagine I get a phone with unlimited/very cheap SMS plan. Maybe even a throw-away prepaid. And I start sending my SMS in bulk to a person I don't like. Ouch.
In Europe, all 'incoming' are free, with exception of roaming which only suckers (and people with money to burn) use. Others just buy a local throw-away pre-paid in their destination country - international rates are far lower than roaming.
Here we get a pre-paid plan like: buy starter for $10, use up the $10 within a month, receive calls/sms for another 11 months. Anytime, for another $10 you get another $10 worth of outgoing calls/SMS and prolonging the incoming calls/sms for another year since the recharge. It's great if you want to drive embedded devices by GSM, if you want to stay in contact with your kid without risk of paying arm and leg for the bills, and you can always call the emergency number 112 for free.
Not really - if the values are orders of magnitude apart. You pick a bunch of zeros and try to separate them in two distinct groups, "deeper zeros" and "shallow zeros". These that have been ones in previous life, and the ones that have been zeros. The groups will be quite distinct with very little/no "specimens" on the border, because the residual value from "two lives ago" has very little influence. Then you can take each of these groups and split it in half again. The difference will be much smaller but still you should come up with two distinct groups.
Differential readout is a wonderful thing.
I don't know how big the equipment to read data that deep is, but my bet is it wouldn't fit between the platters, or even within a 5.25" enclosure, plus costs a good deal more than your typical hard drive head. And reading one bit 4 levels deep may take far longer than picking up the 'outer-most' layer of information. The residual information remains and is readable strictly because the hard-drive head takes so short to write it.
And even assuming you could read the data at current speeds of reading 1-bit data, think of the process of writing the data in orderly manner: changing the data in layer 1 pushes the old data into layer 2, l2 down into l3, l3 into l4, and l4 into oblivion. So if you want to modify l1 data, you first cache the other 3 layers, then write them all back in order, before writing the top-most one.
This would be good for "shadow directory"/"snapshot"/"undo file" type storage, or "write rarely, read often" like applications or long-term storage (though I'm very unsure about how long-lasting is the deeper-level field value change). But most likely cost, reliablity, speed and size are prohibitive factors. It's cheaper to squeeze bits twice as densely.
The recovery services can recover data up to 4 passes deep. Thing is the magnetic orientation is not really boolean but float. So the transitions of the values of the plate surface are like (new) = (0.9*trans)+(0.1*old), so:
0->0 = 0
1->1 = 1
1->0 = 0.1
0->1 = 0.9
0.9->1 = 0.99
0.9->0 = 0.09
0.09->1 = 0.909
so you can guess the sequence of transitions from the value.
I know battery-backed RAM can't be recovered that way - it's like it was constantly writing to itself, you'll have a thousand write cycles in matter of miliseconds. I don't know how data is stored in flash though.
Makes you wonder if you could quadruple the capacity of the harddrives that way too.
Lego is a really great toy but it lacks one serious feature: SAVE.
research that undermines concepts any idea is based on, is certainly anti-(that idea). Doesn't change validity of the research.
The patent system is intended to promote innovation by granting protection to the inventor to allow them to get paid for their work/research. The purpose of the period is to protect from copycats and give time to manufacture and sell the invented product.
It never meant gathering a few thousands of ideas everyone in the industry would get within next year anyway, then keeping them never intending to manufacture them, only gaining money from others.
Patents were intended to protect you from others who copy your idea, not to prevent others from getting the same idea as you did.
The flaw is that you can get something quite obvious patented and then block progress by charging everyone for doing the same thing independently. Patent trolls do exactly that - use the law directly against its spirit, stifling innovation instead of promoting it.
Zeitgeist, like Wikipedia, took the 'no original research' approach - they use others' scientific works or journalism instead of trying to interprete 2000yo sources. Meaning all their direct sources are modern. You won't find direct references to historical documents, only indirect.
And now, if any source provides a view that is in direct opposition of christian beliefs, how can it not be labelled anti-christian? They are about as anti-christian as Galileo's works. How can you present a list of similarities between current and past mainstream religions, not to be viewed as their enemy?
http://zeitgeistmovie.com/sources.htm
Companies that operate solemnly on exploiting the flaws of the system are called 'patent trolls'. As opposed to 'bridge trolls' or 'Internet trolls' like you.
In Poland, there's such an organization, ZAIKS. They request the IP-physical address mappings from the ISPs before sending the police to raid the people. ISPs are in no way obligated to give them the info, or withhold it - but since ZAIKS coperates with the Police, ISPs usually yield, just not to anger the Police - they can't really hurt them, but they can make their life more difficult, so the ISPs usually hand over the info.
Now with this decision in effect, ZAIKS would still sue you for copyright violation, just the same. But now you can sue your ISP for illegally distributing your personal data (it IS protected here!) and ISPs confronted with alternative between "inconveniences from the Police" and a serious threat of a valid legal action from the customer, are much more likely to make the right decision: "Sorry, this is personal data, we're not authorised to share it."
And good riddance, the company doesn't need disloyal employes ready to sue their own employer.
(no, the above is not -my- opinion. It's just how the corporation will see it.)
That's what I meant from the beginning!
(the sail does not propel you as such towards the Sun. Solar gravity does, and the sail only propels you against orbital speed, so you drop to a lower orbit in effect.)
I know what crucifiction is. I also know what clay sculpting is. I don't understand why you insist the act of sculpting Adam out of clay was just a metaphor while nailing Jesus to a cross was not.
Concerning Murphy's Law... if you look at the current state of affairs... it really DID go wrong back, back then.
The video shows clearly that history of Jesus is a clear, outright and very well-matched plagiarism of history of Horus. Oh well, there just -might- have happened a guy whose life by a very odd series of incidents and miracles followed an egyptian myth predating him by some 1000 years, to the letter. Things like one or two events in our lives matching given these of historical or mythological character's happen all the time. Maybe really there was a guy with a list of some 140 matches against myth of Horus, many including key points of his life. Amazing coincidence, isn't it?
;)
I don't know if you can have a relationship with a person who does not exist (I suppose you could do a case study with someone who is crazy and thinks they have an imaginary friend). But I take unbelievable comfort in knowing that even if I had no one left, I would still have God.
Schizophrenia. I had it. It was very nice while it lasted, and a truly comforting feeling. I miss it nowadays.
You can safely believe in God as a being 'beyond', possibly a creator of the initial spark, possibly 'meddling' (no pejorative meaning intended) in our affairs by very subtle and pretty rare touches, as an existence 'above us'. You may even believe there is some kind of heaven and hell, not angel choruses and brimstone and sulfur, but states of awareness, forms of existence. With God like this, the religion doesn't matter and there's no way it could be disproven, challenged, faith damaged. At worst it can be discounted as 'not worthy of attention'.
But as soon as you start pulling any 'solid data' out of the Bible, as soon as you go physical, you meet opposition, amongst all because you're usually entirely wrong. If Bible is not to be taken literally, why take any part of it literally, any single one? Why take that his name was Jesus, why take that he was nailed to a cross, a model of cross that was not in popular use at that time, why think that him bleeding and hurting there has any impact on us. Why not believe it's ALL a literary metaphor, man named Jesus just a symbol, not ever a live person, just a metaphor? His crucification a physical, violent act a symbol for something spiritual - a story that never happened but gives you an idea how could feel what have happened, or will happen?
Religious people are adamant that Adam was not made of clay, that it's absolutely not to be taken literally, but they are also adamant Jesus had his hands pierced by nails, and for some reason get very angry if you treat it as the same kind of metaphor without real historical background. Despite the fact there's not a single information that tells you which one can be taken literally.
There is nothing that can't be figuratively speaking there.
But there's almost nothing that can be literately speaking there. And speaking figuratively, pi=3 for certain values of pi.
(the meaning can be changed entirely, or even reversed given enough 'interpretation'.)
The bible is supposed to be understood but it doesn't mean that people understand it.
And great most of people believe they do, while they don't. Likely including you.
If there ever was a greater truth to the Bible (which I doubt), it's been long lost to the ages, in translations, in political plots changing its content, in including apocrypha or banning parts of Bible into them, and today the Bible simply can't be understood, because it's a mess. It's a corrupted media, damaged data and there's no checksum to see what is right and what is broken.
Some use the Bible as a tool, to do good or evil by guiding or controlling people, while distancing themselves from their interpretations. Some believe their own interpretations, and accept them without criticism, with possibly catastrophic consequences. Some fish out pieces of wisdom that are still left there. But the Bible is NOT anything more than a book and believing anything else is dangerous. It leads people to believe they found some truths while they didn't. It can be useful when used with a lot of criticism, but it must be taken with a grain of salt, always.
picked up a pice of paper from the table and a glass fell to the floor.
The science won't assume anything except these events coincided in time: there's an unsupported hypothesis they were related. Then you can apply known knowledge or research, why. Resistance of paper, yes. And force - and what's the origin of the force? You. So you knocked it to the floor. No Ockham Razor because all data is known, confirmed.
But "God causing something" is you pulling the paper and then blaming breaking the glass on me. The glass broke because of me, because I printed the paper. It was about a push-pull data transfer system project. But you read 'receiver pulls the message' and interpreted you're the receiver, and the paper is the message. And I broke the glass by printing the instruction and leaving it under the glass, right?
That's what interpreting the Bible and following the interpretations directly does. Ockham Razor says: Literal interpretation is true. And if for a fact you know literal interpretation is false, and there's no key to decipher it into literal interpretation unambiguously, the info can't be trusted.
Science says you broke the glass. My printout is not to be blamed.
See the first chapter of ZeitGeist. It's on youtube. The rest is very political, partially false and very controversial, but the first part, about religion, is very insightful and very interesting.
Then we can discuss matter of Jesus again, and whether using this name makes sense.
Personally, I argue with some of the list of sins, and I long discarded all the literal info from Bible, like proper names (Moses, Jesus, Iehova), but still some of its key concepts are okay.
Jump distance.
Check the maps again, and remember near the poles the distances appear longer than they are in reality (Greenland really is not the size of South America!)
The hop from nearest islands Maldives, Seychylles) is really really long. Indian Ocean is very empty when it comes to island density. It would take much longer from land to land, and note that boats of the Indonesian were far less advanced than Viking boats.
Nowhere in particular, but it never said anything has changed and treats 'things of the old' just the same as anything 'new' as if there was no difference. Meaning it gives clueless people lots of very wrong ideas they are ready to defend with their lives.
/dev/random, but being human-readable, it works well as a brain teaser, it can tickle you to discover something. You see a pattern in the noise, then imagine more, and you may come up with an interesting idea, despite the fact nobody ever intentionally put it in the original noise. But if you start believing that because that pattern is neat and useful, that any sequence of data taken from the same chunk of noise is correct answer to a question at hand, you're getting dangerous.
That's the whole problem with the Bible. If I sought, I'd give you a couple of verses that very well could mean nothing has changed, then you'd give me a couple of others that very well could mean just the opposite, but if we agree they contradict each other, someone else will come and twist their meaning just a little and make them not contradictory at all (while simultaneously ruining out original 'proofs' with the new meanings).
The Bible is not meant to be treated literally AND there's no official interpretation key to it. Meaning the results of interpretation are very random, and if you start believing your interpretation, it gets very dangerous.
I've seen religious bigots picking one line and spewing their wrath using it, then when asked about the previous line, used in exactly the same context, just another bullet point of a longish list of 'things not to be done', they say it's been invalidated by an entry in the New Testament. I check the entry and it's all-or-nothing, not specific about this very issue - if you believe it means what they mean it means, then both lines are gone. If they still want to use the first line, then the second is valid as well.
IMHO Bible contains no more truth than
oops. I meant Balkans, not Scandinavia (thinking 'peninsula' and automatically typing the first match in my brain). They are predominantly orthodox catholic and more religious than average.