Though you're joking, I'm reminded of the book "Aquariums of Pyongyang" by Kang Chol-Hwan. Written by an escapee from a North Korean prison camp (Yodok, or "Border Patrol of the Korean People, Unit 2915" as it's officially known), it gives 'violation of privacy' and 'freedom' a completely new meaning.
Recommended reading for anyone old enough to handle it.
Like cancer research, better transportation systems, better comms, etc?
A lot of money is already being poured into those, but it ain't going any faster. If you want to throw 100 billion at cancer research, where exactly are you going to throw them? Who's pocket?
See, I don't think the amount of research accomplished is linearly proportional to the amount of money you throw.
Yes, but the expansion happens in two dimensions, from the point of view of those stars you drew on the balloon surface. Anyone living on a planet circling one of those stars won't have any idea about anything other than the surface of the balloon, since the 2d surface is a projection of the actual 3d universe. You can get the same effect by drawing points on a paper and then stretching the paper (supposing it was possible).
If you mean that the balloon is not a 2d representation, but represents a subset of stars in a portion of the universe (those that intersect the balloon surface), well, then you're omitting the stars inside and outside the balloon surface.
That won't give you a Z-axis, since the balloon is a 2D surface. The only difference is that the balloon is potentially not infinite in size, but wraps around. Those analogies are fine as they are, because trying to extend them by somehow magically including an extra axis is only going to confuse things.
It's the same problem as trying to make an uninitiated understand the concept of a hypercube, or 4 dimensions. The extra axis will only cause heads to explode, thus I like to call it the "axis of evil".
I don't think so. A 1 Hz sine signal is just wind blowing back and forth slowly, and you'd need some serious hurricane winds with flying kitchen utensils included to rupture my internals. 10 Hz sounds more like it could work, as in, it can actually be called 'sound' as opposed to 'wind'.
Well, Mark Hamill's acting in Episode IV was certainly not stellar, and these days I outright laugh at some of his blurbs. Yes, they are cringe-worthy. But hey, it works anyway, and he got better later on.
But just imagine.. one day someone will release a virus in the wild, that we never will get rid of. It will replicate itself and modify itself continuously, changing its attack vectors, so that any efforts to stop it will eventually fail. Almost eradicating it will not be enough. I wonder, just how far off is it?
We would have to develop immune systems for computers.
Right, so you do, but if you do that to all your opponents, I don't think it's a very constructive way of debating at all. I did jump right into the middle of the fray, though, so I apologize if that's what ticked you off.
I don't mind your harsh debating style myself, but usually such is left out of debates. If not, the debate can easily turn into a flamefest. Now, I can take some argumentative beating and harsh language, but if you want to educate creationists who are in religious lock-in, it's hardly going to work. I'm guessing it would have the opposite effect, actually.
this is one of the most absolutely ridiculous arguments i've ever heard.
I can agree with that. The concept of omnipotence seems ridiculous all by itself, because it allows an omnipotent being to be outside of logic. Your argument is based on this not being the case, however.
it's not like god can be so powerful that the probability god is intelligent goes up, or is no longer calculable.
Why not? God is omnipotent, after all. And yes, this is a ridiculous statement as well, but you can't attack it with logic, that's the problem.
god can't change concepts that we have defined ourselves.
Ok, let's say he can't. But those are only concepts that we have defined; my point is that shoehorning an omnipotent god into these won't work. As you say, you can calculate the probability of god's existence, but only from your point of view, not from god's point of view. In my view, omnipotence is like a wildcard that can be pulled out any time, whenever the argument starts to go the wrong way. A soon as you present evidence that god cannot exist, a creationist zealot can pop up and say that those rules do not apply to god, because god is omnipotent. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not that zealot, I'm just arguing for the sake of the argument.
Now, a god that isn't omnipotent is certainly something that fits within logic, and whose probability can be calculated, or at least estimated. Similarly, if we define omnipotence to exclude being outside of logical reasoning, your argument works as well.
it's all about the shapes your brain is familiar with.
Yes, of course. I would assume that most brains that use latin letters are now trained to read, and expect, both majuscule and minuscule shapes.
a good font has all capital letters, where the ones specified with the shift or caps lock key are just larger.
Aha, now that's more sensible. All-caps style can certainly look good, and even better than mixed case, though I'm not used to reading longer texts written like that. But, the standard that we have now goes back a long way, since it's based on handwriting. Writing in all capitals by hand is more difficult than writing small letters, because pen strokes do not connect (and these difficulties were removed by the birth of more rounded letters, as you know). I have a friend who's dyslectic and he writes in all caps by hand. How about you?
In any case, this boils down to a matter of taste, it seems.
if you want to say "debating", i would accept that.
Slashdot Mirror
North Korea, powered by fear and propaganda. Do not go down that road.
Recommended reading for anyone old enough to handle it.
Actually, it's the ew spellig stadard.
Meanwhile the rest of curious mankind takes an interested look...
How is that a bad thing?
Won't somebody please think of the propagation time!
Bah, big capitals are always fscked up, no surprises there.
Of course. And don't forget those soon-to-be murderers, rapists, corporate leeches, lawyers etc. etc. ... Isn't humanity wonderful in it's diversity?
Or perhaps a six-cornered cathode-ray-tube. It'll be great for Hexxagon at least...
A lot of money is already being poured into those, but it ain't going any faster. If you want to throw 100 billion at cancer research, where exactly are you going to throw them? Who's pocket?
See, I don't think the amount of research accomplished is linearly proportional to the amount of money you throw.
If you mean that the balloon is not a 2d representation, but represents a subset of stars in a portion of the universe (those that intersect the balloon surface), well, then you're omitting the stars inside and outside the balloon surface.
30 months? That's the average seek time for some of my most obscure drawers.
Yikes!
It's the same problem as trying to make an uninitiated understand the concept of a hypercube, or 4 dimensions. The extra axis will only cause heads to explode, thus I like to call it the "axis of evil".
Best to just explain things as they are instead.
(7) Discard unused 100% size copy.
Maddox? Is that you?
I don't think so. A 1 Hz sine signal is just wind blowing back and forth slowly, and you'd need some serious hurricane winds with flying kitchen utensils included to rupture my internals. 10 Hz sounds more like it could work, as in, it can actually be called 'sound' as opposed to 'wind'.
Where do I send my resumé?
Well, Mark Hamill's acting in Episode IV was certainly not stellar, and these days I outright laugh at some of his blurbs. Yes, they are cringe-worthy. But hey, it works anyway, and he got better later on.
Except that the "secure" part, while functional, hasn't really caught on at all.
Revolution it is, then.
"What's more, the documents could bolster Sit straight! Rambus' defense in the separate antitrust case brought by the FTC."
We would have to develop immune systems for computers.
I don't mind your harsh debating style myself, but usually such is left out of debates. If not, the debate can easily turn into a flamefest. Now, I can take some argumentative beating and harsh language, but if you want to educate creationists who are in religious lock-in, it's hardly going to work. I'm guessing it would have the opposite effect, actually.
I can agree with that. The concept of omnipotence seems ridiculous all by itself, because it allows an omnipotent being to be outside of logic. Your argument is based on this not being the case, however. Why not? God is omnipotent, after all. And yes, this is a ridiculous statement as well, but you can't attack it with logic, that's the problem. Ok, let's say he can't. But those are only concepts that we have defined; my point is that shoehorning an omnipotent god into these won't work. As you say, you can calculate the probability of god's existence, but only from your point of view, not from god's point of view. In my view, omnipotence is like a wildcard that can be pulled out any time, whenever the argument starts to go the wrong way. A soon as you present evidence that god cannot exist, a creationist zealot can pop up and say that those rules do not apply to god, because god is omnipotent. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not that zealot, I'm just arguing for the sake of the argument.Now, a god that isn't omnipotent is certainly something that fits within logic, and whose probability can be calculated, or at least estimated. Similarly, if we define omnipotence to exclude being outside of logical reasoning, your argument works as well.
Yes, of course. I would assume that most brains that use latin letters are now trained to read, and expect, both majuscule and minuscule shapes. Aha, now that's more sensible. All-caps style can certainly look good, and even better than mixed case, though I'm not used to reading longer texts written like that. But, the standard that we have now goes back a long way, since it's based on handwriting. Writing in all capitals by hand is more difficult than writing small letters, because pen strokes do not connect (and these difficulties were removed by the birth of more rounded letters, as you know). I have a friend who's dyslectic and he writes in all caps by hand. How about you?In any case, this boils down to a matter of taste, it seems.
Ok, I'll concede on that point, debating it is.