And thats why I listen to listener supported radio: http://www.klove.com/ sure they have pledge drives and stuff, but good music and is available not only anywhere on the net, but in many areas of the U.S.A., there are "real" fm stations to listen to with the same "commercial-free, listener supported content.
Developers will tend to use what they are familiar with. For example you unfortunately will get unix buzzheads writing perl scripts and crap for use in WinXP but the same effect could have easily been handled in a few lines of a batch file. been there and seen it...over and over again and that is just for the "little" stuff.
The answer is not so much having a rigorous standard that all apps must be written in, but a flexible, yet defined, architecture that allows for the right things to be done in the right language. Unfortunately most companies don't have the IT managment support to create an "architectures and standards/strategies" team to help define and guide the devlopment process, it gets deferred to whatever the assigned programmers know how to code.
Why should the hypocrisy surprise you? the Bible clearly speaks that this will happen and they will suffer for it.
Matthew 7 (NIV)
13"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
15"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
Obviously it is clear to see the lack of fruit in the lives of the hypocrites. Please be careful not to reject God because of foolish people who fail to live the lives they claim to live for they will see the same fate as those who have not given their lives to God. By this, I mean living as God would have you, rather than how you would naturally do, not some ritualistic sunday moring "sacrificial" act. This means 24x7 faith. not perfection mind you, but the prusuit of what God has for you and the rejection of the natural sinful ways.
FWIW, I think you read into that a bit too much. I think the poster was indicating that anything he/she might do in favor of redemption is astonishingly insufficient to meet what has already been done by Christ on his behalf. And no, Christ gave no such teaching of killing others for the purpose of getting into heaven as a redemptive/loyalty act.
That sort of human against human fight is a human borne inductive thought that twists the relationship from man and God into what we generally think of as religion.
But to take the point further we need to look at this a bit from God's view of humankind versus our own view of human kind. Christs sacrifice on the cross was for all my sisn, not just the ones from before I was saved, but after as well. Many Christians including myself wrestle continually with this, but despite the desire to redeem oneself from any particualr sin, this has already been completed and need not be re-justified. any effort on my part to punish myself for that sin is simply wasted effort.
Christ's death was sufficient for all my sin: past, present and future. Keep in mind that this not at all give license to sin (aka killing a bunch people, etc...).
So if you don't think it is a better world if they do these things, do you believe the world is worse if......the teacher says a prayer before class?...if the science teacher talks about "Intelligent Design."?...my child pledges alegiance to "one nation, under God"?...the judge in the local courtroom has a plaque ourside [sic] his chambers which insists that "...thou shalt have no other God before me..."?
It would seem that just like some of the Christians, many non-Christians (of whatever flavors) believe that restricting others behaviors for the betterment of society is a good thing. (Is it? or isn't it?) So, at what point can we agree that "someones behavior" is or is not in the best interest of society and should be restricted? At what point should laws restrict individual actions other than for the general betterment of society?
Many issues have their pros and cons depending upon your point of view, so where can we agree on what is legal/endorsed or illegal/restricted?
Smoking, prostitution, public prayer, cocaine, meth, alchohol, flag burning, school vouchers, 10 commandment displays, abortion, etc... A varied list, no doubt, but hot buttons for different people for different reasons, each with a different spin on who's rights are being restricted and by presumably whom.
Do they already have monitoring of the in flight phones? Seems to me the last cal anyone woudl need to make and it woudl be too late then when the coordinator yells "God is Great!" on a conference call with all involved planes.
I don't know about you, but all the terrorists I know use low-tech elements to minimize failure and to maximize effect while minimizing cost and effort.
fertilizer and fuel.
explosives and a match
grenade
the American media.
explosives and a washing machine timer and a battery.
crude example certainly. you believe the cause of the waves is a thing you have named a "fish" based on the type of motion which caused the waves as you have observed before.
Even though you have never seen this thing named "fish", and you have no other logical explanation, so until further notice, if anyone asks what causes the waves, they would be told is is "the fish".
The scientific approach to this is just plain cool?
No kidding.... he intentionally left it unsecured because "his neighbors are older"?
Sooo... he was intentionally sharing his broadband connection with his neighbors? Seems like he possibly intentionally violated his TOS with his ISP. Interesting if the defense uses that "openness" as being an offer of intended public consumption or not.
How would he know what the "old man" next door was doing over said wireless internet connection? hmmm...
"The industry is keen to make sure that is not abused by making copies for other people that would otherwise go buy a CD."
I wouldn't otherwise go buy the CD, so....hand me another blank please......[click][burn]Thanks!
Glad they finally realize that not everyone who wants a copy is a prospective paying customer.
Wow. I really shouldn't respond to your spewing "wisdom", but here goes...I have 35k miles on my car and have had litterally 0 problems thus far (unless you count the small missing drivers side door rubber stop that came off). I liked the car, it had a balanced ride, was not too slow, not too fast, don't need to "pick up chicks" (married). The headlights are hardly "n34t". Nobody I know has one (though I did drive an 83' Corolla). Not many cars "gain" in value. Oh, and yes I can read. The only thing I can't respond to is the ol' '76 Vega comment.
So how is your ol' Vega anyways? You just kinds feel bad that you got suckered in 30 years or so ago and need to vent? A professional counselor or junkyard might be able to help you more than I can.
P.S. Please do seek counseling before someone gets hurt.
Indeed. The IS300 is a great, fun car. Had mine for over a year now and enjoy driving it every time I get in it. My wife is driving the IS now while her Ford Windstar is in the shop....again.... and I have the loaner Taurus. Uggghh.
To include something appropriate for the original topic... If Congress wants to fix the problem, will they be any more successful than they were at stopping/controlling/increasing spam? What is the root problem and CAN it be fixed?, or we just seeing the ugly side of capitalism?
If I ran up to you on the beach and told you a tsunami was coming, you would you ignore me? What would it take for you to believe? Would the evidence you require to believe only be believable when it was too late to do anything about it?
For Christians, there seems to be ample evidence of the truth of their belief, so why wouldn't they want others to know about what Christ did and why?
Unfortunately, IMHO, the biggest barrier for people believing the message is the life many of the so-called Christian messengers live.
Further analysis reveals 14% of those surveyed are complete idiots. 4% of those surveyed are utter morons and should be removed from the gene pool immediately. The news article supports these findings.
More analysis... (stolen from a coworkers reponse to the same news) Thanks TG!:
"According the Bureau of Labor Statistics http://www.bls.gov/cew/state2002.txt the 2002 avg US wage (based on salary only) is $17.68 per hour (based on a 40 hour work week). That breaks down to 29.46 cents per minute. 2.8 minutes a day X.2946 = 82.5 cents per day spent deleting spam. For the price of a cup of coffee, I can delete spam or support one of Sally Struthers' kids in a third world country. Being the cheap ******** I am, I'd rather pocket the 82.5 cents a day." -TG
Most of human behaviour is governed by "lust". Actually, I think most human behavior is driven by "lust". The governing factors would be more or less: ethics, conscience, morality, and similar "governing" agents.
P.S. Great. a logical machine with desires to survive and so on. What happens when it is time for the machine to be taken to the recycling center and the machine lusts for life?
I shudder to think of where mankind is taking itself.
you forgot to include the last part of that sentence. It should read:...into a physical form that all can enjoy if he/she:
a) pays a small sum of money for a revokable license to to enjoy the work. b) accepts any advertising that comes with it. c) accepts the binding license agreement. d) all of the above.
Please note the above amendment was sponsored by the organizations who's acronyms end in "AA" and Microsoft.
Welcome to the godless society. Without God, orginal sin, accountability to the creator, we have no basis for morality except what is the deire of the human kind and what we are willing to tolerate.
If we were to even allow the possibility for God to exist, then we put ourselves intoa realm where we are unconfortable with the idea that our actions have implications beyond the mechanical.
One time where I work, the data center took a complete power outage because when the annual fire suppression system test was made. As it turns out, the bypass switches that would have prevented the power from automatically being cut by the fire system weren't flipped.......
Turns out, due to cost cutting, we laid off the guys who know how this stuff worked. Nothing like bringing a very large Teradata, hundreds of servers, mainframes all back online. Glad I wasn't at the data center that day!
I have pondered this, though am not committed to taking the time to do it, but I sure wish someone would come up with a different kind of "EULA".
The real "End User" license agreement. A license agreement submitted to the manufacturers which state "my" terms of use of their product, their terms of use of me and my information as well as what rights I reserve they may not violate.
The EULA's today are so one sided. Agree or not is the choice for the average person. Many large corporations (being recognized as individuals as well) have legal departments which negotiate terms of use for purchased hardware and software. Why can't we (besides the cost of a legal team) also have some feedback to them on the EULA we will accept.
The software evndors (HW too) almost always include the obligatory "we are not responsible for anything arising from the use of this product and we do not suggest this product is suitable for any purpose" type clauses. This is ridiculous.
Any takers on drafting such a creature? Would it do any good? Would it atleast be a stake in the ground?
Kinda like signing a contract that when employed, you will agree to a certain code of conduct? There is nothing wrong with requiring someone who joins your organization to support the organizations primary goals and operating guidelines.
Ensuring your organization maintains integrity of it's key principles is hardly a "bad thing". Don't agree? don't join. real simple.
Slashdot Mirror
..and a greater likelihood of an STD free life as well.
And thats why I listen to listener supported radio: http://www.klove.com/ sure they have pledge drives and stuff, but good music and is available not only anywhere on the net, but in many areas of the U.S.A., there are "real" fm stations to listen to with the same "commercial-free, listener supported content.
Yes.. and no.
Developers will tend to use what they are familiar with. For example you unfortunately will get unix buzzheads writing perl scripts and crap for use in WinXP but the same effect could have easily been handled in a few lines of a batch file. been there and seen it...over and over again and that is just for the "little" stuff.
The answer is not so much having a rigorous standard that all apps must be written in, but a flexible, yet defined, architecture that allows for the right things to be done in the right language. Unfortunately most companies don't have the IT managment support to create an "architectures and standards/strategies" team to help define and guide the devlopment process, it gets deferred to whatever the assigned programmers know how to code.
Why should the hypocrisy surprise you? the Bible clearly speaks that this will happen and they will suffer for it.
Matthew 7 (NIV)
13"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
15"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
Obviously it is clear to see the lack of fruit in the lives of the hypocrites. Please be careful not to reject God because of foolish people who fail to live the lives they claim to live for they will see the same fate as those who have not given their lives to God. By this, I mean living as God would have you, rather than how you would naturally do, not some ritualistic sunday moring "sacrificial" act. This means 24x7 faith. not perfection mind you, but the prusuit of what God has for you and the rejection of the natural sinful ways.
a witch? lemme guess.... she turned you into a newt...but you got better?!
;-)
Lemme give you a tip:
If she weighs the same as a duck, then she's made of wood and therefore she is a witch because both wood and witchs burn!!!!!!!
A very wise man once taught me these things.
FWIW, I think you read into that a bit too much. I think the poster was indicating that anything he/she might do in favor of redemption is astonishingly insufficient to meet what has already been done by Christ on his behalf. And no, Christ gave no such teaching of killing others for the purpose of getting into heaven as a redemptive/loyalty act.
s in.htm
That sort of human against human fight is a human borne inductive thought that twists the relationship from man and God into what we generally think of as religion.
But to take the point further we need to look at this a bit from God's view of humankind versus our own view of human kind. Christs sacrifice on the cross was for all my sisn, not just the ones from before I was saved, but after as well. Many Christians including myself wrestle continually with this, but despite the desire to redeem oneself from any particualr sin, this has already been completed and need not be re-justified. any effort on my part to punish myself for that sin is simply wasted effort.
Christ's death was sufficient for all my sin: past, present and future. Keep in mind that this not at all give license to sin (aka killing a bunch people, etc...).
Gotta run now, but take this fwiw... (not proseletization just further detail on the thought)(just found this on a quick keyword search)
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/license_to_
Have a GREAT day!
So if you don't think it is a better world if they do these things, do you believe the world is worse if ... ...the teacher says a prayer before class? ...if the science teacher talks about "Intelligent Design."? ...my child pledges alegiance to "one nation, under God"? ...the judge in the local courtroom has a plaque ourside [sic] his chambers which insists that "...thou shalt have no other God before me..."?
It would seem that just like some of the Christians, many non-Christians (of whatever flavors) believe that restricting others behaviors for the betterment of society is a good thing. (Is it? or isn't it?) So, at what point can we agree that "someones behavior" is or is not in the best interest of society and should be restricted? At what point should laws restrict individual actions other than for the general betterment of society?
Many issues have their pros and cons depending upon your point of view, so where can we agree on what is legal/endorsed or illegal/restricted?
Smoking, prostitution, public prayer, cocaine, meth, alchohol, flag burning, school vouchers, 10 commandment displays, abortion, etc... A varied list, no doubt, but hot buttons for different people for different reasons, each with a different spin on who's rights are being restricted and by presumably whom.
Do they already have monitoring of the in flight phones? Seems to me the last cal anyone woudl need to make and it woudl be too late then when the coordinator yells "God is Great!" on a conference call with all involved planes.
I don't know about you, but all the terrorists I know use low-tech elements to minimize failure and to maximize effect while minimizing cost and effort.
fertilizer and fuel.
explosives and a match
grenade
the American media.
explosives and a washing machine timer and a battery.
etc....
just a a late afternoon thot.
crude example certainly. you believe the cause of the waves is a thing you have named a "fish" based on the type of motion which caused the waves as you have observed before.
Even though you have never seen this thing named "fish", and you have no other logical explanation, so until further notice, if anyone asks what causes the waves, they would be told is is "the fish".
The scientific approach to this is just plain cool?
No kidding.... he intentionally left it unsecured because "his neighbors are older"?
Sooo... he was intentionally sharing his broadband connection with his neighbors? Seems like he possibly intentionally violated his TOS with his ISP. Interesting if the defense uses that "openness" as being an offer of intended public consumption or not.
How would he know what the "old man" next door was doing over said wireless internet connection? hmmm...
From "The Article":
"The industry is keen to make sure that is not abused by making copies for other people that would otherwise go buy a CD."
I wouldn't otherwise go buy the CD, so....hand me another blank please......[click][burn]Thanks!
Glad they finally realize that not everyone who wants a copy is a prospective paying customer.
Wow. I really shouldn't respond to your spewing "wisdom", but here goes...I have 35k miles on my car and have had litterally 0 problems thus far (unless you count the small missing drivers side door rubber stop that came off). I liked the car, it had a balanced ride, was not too slow, not too fast, don't need to "pick up chicks" (married). The headlights are hardly "n34t". Nobody I know has one (though I did drive an 83' Corolla). Not many cars "gain" in value. Oh, and yes I can read. The only thing I can't respond to is the ol' '76 Vega comment.
So how is your ol' Vega anyways? You just kinds feel bad that you got suckered in 30 years or so ago and need to vent? A professional counselor or junkyard might be able to help you more than I can.
P.S. Please do seek counseling before someone gets hurt.
Indeed. The IS300 is a great, fun car. Had mine for over a year now and enjoy driving it every time I get in it. My wife is driving the IS now while her Ford Windstar is in the shop....again.... and I have the loaner Taurus. Uggghh.
http://www.is300.net/
To include something appropriate for the original topic... If Congress wants to fix the problem, will they be any more successful than they were at stopping/controlling/increasing spam? What is the root problem and CAN it be fixed?, or we just seeing the ugly side of capitalism?
"Researchers say that the greatest difficulty will be with the reading of information"
I get it! This is the Soviet equivalent to a zip drive?!?!?
If I ran up to you on the beach and told you a tsunami was coming, you would you ignore me? What would it take for you to believe? Would the evidence you require to believe only be believable when it was too late to do anything about it?
For Christians, there seems to be ample evidence of the truth of their belief, so why wouldn't they want others to know about what Christ did and why?
Unfortunately, IMHO, the biggest barrier for people believing the message is the life many of the so-called Christian messengers live.
Further analysis reveals 14% of those surveyed are complete idiots. 4% of those surveyed are utter morons and should be removed from the gene pool immediately. The news article supports these findings.
More analysis... (stolen from a coworkers reponse to the same news) Thanks TG!:
.2946 = 82.5 cents per day spent deleting spam. For the price of a cup of coffee, I can delete spam or support one of Sally Struthers' kids in a third world country. Being the cheap ******** I am, I'd rather pocket the 82.5 cents a day." -TG
"According the Bureau of Labor Statistics http://www.bls.gov/cew/state2002.txt the 2002 avg US wage (based on salary only) is $17.68 per hour (based on a 40 hour work week). That breaks down to 29.46 cents per minute. 2.8 minutes a day X
Most of human behaviour is governed by "lust".
Actually, I think most human behavior is driven by "lust". The governing factors would be more or less: ethics, conscience, morality, and similar "governing" agents.
P.S. Great. a logical machine with desires to survive and so on. What happens when it is time for the machine to be taken to the recycling center and the machine lusts for life?
I shudder to think of where mankind is taking itself.
you forgot to include the last part of that sentence. It should read:
a) pays a small sum of money for a revokable license to to enjoy the work.
b) accepts any advertising that comes with it.
c) accepts the binding license agreement.
d) all of the above.
Please note the above amendment was sponsored by the organizations who's acronyms end in "AA" and Microsoft.
Welcome to the godless society. Without God, orginal sin, accountability to the creator, we have no basis for morality except what is the deire of the human kind and what we are willing to tolerate.
If we were to even allow the possibility for God to exist, then we put ourselves intoa realm where we are unconfortable with the idea that our actions have implications beyond the mechanical.
One time where I work, the data center took a complete power outage because when the annual fire suppression system test was made. As it turns out, the bypass switches that would have prevented the power from automatically being cut by the fire system weren't flipped. ......
Turns out, due to cost cutting, we laid off the guys who know how this stuff worked. Nothing like bringing a very large Teradata, hundreds of servers, mainframes all back online. Glad I wasn't at the data center that day!
I have pondered this, though am not committed to taking the time to do it, but I sure wish someone would come up with a different kind of "EULA".
The real "End User" license agreement. A license agreement submitted to the manufacturers which state "my" terms of use of their product, their terms of use of me and my information as well as what rights I reserve they may not violate.
The EULA's today are so one sided. Agree or not is the choice for the average person. Many large corporations (being recognized as individuals as well) have legal departments which negotiate terms of use for purchased hardware and software. Why can't we (besides the cost of a legal team) also have some feedback to them on the EULA we will accept.
The software evndors (HW too) almost always include the obligatory "we are not responsible for anything arising from the use of this product and we do not suggest this product is suitable for any purpose" type clauses. This is ridiculous.
Any takers on drafting such a creature? Would it do any good? Would it atleast be a stake in the ground?
Great. Experts who think similarly about a topic. If they disagree then either the information is not yet proven or someone is wrong.
Peer review is overrated and certainly not as trustworthy as it woudl seem to be.
Kinda like signing a contract that when employed, you will agree to a certain code of conduct? There is nothing wrong with requiring someone who joins your organization to support the organizations primary goals and operating guidelines.
Ensuring your organization maintains integrity of it's key principles is hardly a "bad thing". Don't agree? don't join. real simple.
How come folks such as yourself never use Buddha, Mohammed, etc.. in a vain way?
Why use Christ?, or why do people "Goddamn" something when He does not even exist? What is the point of that? Can anyone clarify?
Seems odd that you might reference a name so specifically, yet so generically.
OT-1