I stand by our proud tradition of thumbing our noses at our government, poking fun at our ratlike leaders and ignoring laws and any other rules that I don't agree with. This is what makes me an American.
Amen!
Though I always thought he looked more like a mokey...
I know a merchant mariner who has gotten the language down to precisely *one* word, expressed in astonishing gradiations of emphasis, inflection and tonality!
So you only value your gifts when nobody else has them?
Isn't that the instinctive response? Scarcity = value. Anything you have that others don't is automatically something you take care of and cherish. Otherwise...no.
No, you have to do it in your head. If you do it fast enough, the branch prediction logic hitting rollback points seem only as thoughtful pauses.
One the things I like best about studying development and computers, is that you get the vocabulary to talk about things like rollback points, branch prediction logic, parallelism, task optimization, etc. I mean, everyone does branch prediction and roll-back and the other things, but they can't talk about it. They can't talk about how, e.g., thinking works because they don't have the vocabulary.
Well, yeah, but it is their country, and their rules, and they are a sovereign nation. We can talk all we want and pass judgement, that's fine, but it is not for us to interfere. We don't have the right, and how they run their country is none of our business.
Actually, I've done a little research on Satanism, and they are a fairly nihilist bunch of people. Not really my cup of tea, even if I weren't an atheist.
I sure as hell don't. There are several mottos I live by. One of them is "Perfect is the enemy of Good." What this means is, don't go for perfection, you won't achieve it and you'll screw up something else--a deadline or something--by trying. Make it good. Don't try to make it perfect.
I don't understand why you bothered to repost the text. Either way, it'll take only one click to get to the entire article: the article link or the "read more" link.
If you want true nightmare wake-up-sweating horror, go see that movie. It is that bad.
The acting was bad, the plot was full of holes, the characters were pretty archetypical and dumb, and the music reeked. The creatures were cool, but in this movie, they were like a candle in a windstorm.
So, take everything I said in the parent post. Everything about how exquisitely engineered we machines are, from DNA on up, rising in complexity from virus, to amoeba, to ant, to dolphin and tiger, to human, and all the refinements introduced every step of the way, and all that we are capable of. Take all that, and encapsulate it, because now I am going to lay out for you the best part, the part that is so huge, I was not able to say it in the parent post.
Think about all that exquisite design, the little bits that work perfectly with a degree of innovation that humans can't match. Now think about this: There was no designer.
Let's discuss faith, and the concept of God. Simply put, God (or any Deity) does not have the chops to play in the same arena as Atheism. God is way out of his league. The Atheistic natural forces and laws have brought about this Universe, that by definition cannot be distinguished from the Universe of God's Creation. The Atheistic Universe happened without the benefit of a Divine Plan, without the benefit of omnipotence. And it is the same.
Without design, the universe has quantum law. Without design, it has electrons, protons, gravity, energy, matter. Without design, it has planets, solar systems, stars, black holes. Without design, it has life, it has ecosystems, it has all the tricks of nature. Without design, without effort, the Universe yielded Earth, its plants and animals, it yielded us. It yielded our history, philosophy. Without design, we have ethics.
God would have needed Omniscience to do the same, the knowledge of every possibility, every future, every effect throughout time. He would have needed Omnipotence, the ability to do anything, unconstrained by logical paradox, natural law, or mechanism.
So, which is more worthy of admiration? The Atheistic natural forces did what God is supposed to have done, without omniscience, omnipotence, or intelligence, and under constraints of law and logic. I think the answer is clear: the Atheistic Creation deserves more respect.
But I said I would discuss faith as well. You have to have faith in order to believe in God, obviously. There is no proof of God, nor can there ever be proof, unless God were to come down and make his Presence known.
On the other hand, to believe in the natural forces, and evolution, faith is not necessary. There is plenty of evidence from experiments. Or is that really the case? The Atheistic natural universe stretches from the quantum level, where reality is not even a concept that makes sense, all the way through the unbelievable complexity of life, to forces than span the entire Universe. And there are gaps. We do not understand the transition from quantum mechanics to classical. We do not understand time. We do not understand many things.
I believe it actually requires more faith to believe in the Atheistic Creation (cool phrase, huh?) that to believe in God's Creation. You have to have faith that A leads to B, and B leads to C, and this means that A leads to C, always and unto infinity. How often does that happen in real life? You have to have faith that things are the way they are, and that if there is a problem, it is in your understanding only. You have to have faith that "A and not-A" is an impossibility. And you have to believe in absolutes. And you have to have faith that eventually, all questions and concerns will be answered.
A faith in God, on the other hand, is not much of a faith at all. Anything you don't understand about his ways or the world around you is merely written off as either a) omniscience, b) omnipotence, or c) the divine plan. If you have a question or concern, God does not need to answer you, but Science does.
Some people cannot accept a belief in God, for one reason or another, and they do not have enough faith to believe in Him regardless. What they do not understand, is that it is much, much harder to believe in nothing. So, without any answers they trust, from Science or from God, they hav
The horror of the modern position is that we cannot accept that we are just machines.
"Just machines?" There is nothing "just" about us. We are machines of unparalleled intelligence, inventiveness, and engineering.
Haven't you admired the beauty of a tiger in action, its energy, speed and power? Aren't you amazed at the effectiveness of ant society, how they work together without knowing they work together, powered by, like, 50 neurons? Do you not realize how impressive Nature's little tricks are? The chemical processes that eke out every last iota of energy where it should be impossible; the way the microstructure of dolphin skin lets them cut through water like a knife; vision; the blinding elegance of natural selection?
We are heir to all that. Think watches are intricate? Software? Even the simplest amoeba is more worthy of admiration. And humans? We can reason. We can by-God reason! We can communicate, we can invent! How much more admiration are we worth, than an amoeba?
So, yes. We are machines. But we are fuckin' amazing machines. So amazing that I have to ignore how amazing we are just to function. This is a Total Perspective Vortex. It would blow your mind if you really thought about how amazingly...everything...we truly are.
We can forgive and help people who hurt us, while still endorsing a judicial system that punishes wrong.
I considered mentioning this point, in fact, but passed in favor of the one-liner.:)
And I think it is the Church, rather than Jesus, who has deprecated at least some of the Old Testament. The problem is, some of the OT clearly needs to be deprecated, and is at odds with the Church's current position, but AFAIK, they haven't published a list of "verses you can ignore."
I kinda wish they would. Or maybe a "Bible rev. 2" would be better. One of the advantages Christians have in theological debates is that they acknowledge that the Bible is an imperfect transcription of God's will. This is in contrast with the Islamic position that the Koran (or Quran, whatever) is written by Allah himself, IIUC. So it follows that there could be a legitimate corrected version of the Bible.
Slashdot Mirror
Although you appear to be correct, you are using way too many exclamation points. Switch to decaf, sparky.
less of a boondogle than some of the things communities do fund (e.g. sports stadiums)
Seattle, right?
I stand by our proud tradition of thumbing our noses at our government, poking fun at our ratlike leaders and ignoring laws and any other rules that I don't agree with. This is what makes me an American.
Amen!
Though I always thought he looked more like a mokey...
Survival of the Fittest, baby! Your lock has just been selected against.
I know a merchant mariner who has gotten the language down to precisely *one* word, expressed in astonishing gradiations of emphasis, inflection and tonality!
Dude! "Dude," dude.
Or maybe you're thinking of another word. Dude.
So you only value your gifts when nobody else has them?
Isn't that the instinctive response? Scarcity = value. Anything you have that others don't is automatically something you take care of and cherish. Otherwise...no.
Lesbian soccer moms are so hot.
True dat.
No, you have to do it in your head. If you do it fast enough, the branch prediction logic hitting rollback points seem only as thoughtful pauses.
One the things I like best about studying development and computers, is that you get the vocabulary to talk about things like rollback points, branch prediction logic, parallelism, task optimization, etc. I mean, everyone does branch prediction and roll-back and the other things, but they can't talk about it. They can't talk about how, e.g., thinking works because they don't have the vocabulary.
And you can get stung by a scorpion for a power-up.
That episode was unsettling.
Doctor: I have some good news and some bad news.
...ah...and the good news?
Patient: OK, start with the bad news.
Doctor: You have cancer.
Patient:
Doctor: I just saved a ton of money on my car insurance!
Well, yeah, but it is their country, and their rules, and they are a sovereign nation. We can talk all we want and pass judgement, that's fine, but it is not for us to interfere. We don't have the right, and how they run their country is none of our business.
Satan is better.
Yay Satan! Booze, babes and bankroll.
Actually, I've done a little research on Satanism, and they are a fairly nihilist bunch of people. Not really my cup of tea, even if I weren't an atheist.
Many people wish they were perfectionists.
I sure as hell don't. There are several mottos I live by. One of them is "Perfect is the enemy of Good." What this means is, don't go for perfection, you won't achieve it and you'll screw up something else--a deadline or something--by trying. Make it good. Don't try to make it perfect.
Yep, you were drunk. But on topic, and even insightful.
Well done!
I don't understand why you bothered to repost the text. Either way, it'll take only one click to get to the entire article: the article link or the "read more" link.
You do know that the IQ-scale is normalized, right?
Damn. I guess his life and death were a total waste, then.
(Sorry, that was an evil comment. I'm sure the g-grandparent had many sterling qualities. *snicker*)
(Okay, that's evil again. My bad.)
I won't, but shouldn't you be honest with him?
"I know all there is to know, about the crying game
I've had my share of the crying game"
Heh.
Alone in the Dark is a movie now.
If you want true nightmare wake-up-sweating horror, go see that movie. It is that bad.
The acting was bad, the plot was full of holes, the characters were pretty archetypical and dumb, and the music reeked. The creatures were cool, but in this movie, they were like a candle in a windstorm.
She's Hawt, but Evil. I'm confused...
...
Sorry, I hit "Reply to This" on instinct. I didn't actually have any reply in mind.
So, take everything I said in the parent post. Everything about how exquisitely engineered we machines are, from DNA on up, rising in complexity from virus, to amoeba, to ant, to dolphin and tiger, to human, and all the refinements introduced every step of the way, and all that we are capable of. Take all that, and encapsulate it, because now I am going to lay out for you the best part, the part that is so huge, I was not able to say it in the parent post.
Think about all that exquisite design, the little bits that work perfectly with a degree of innovation that humans can't match. Now think about this: There was no designer.
Let's discuss faith, and the concept of God. Simply put, God (or any Deity) does not have the chops to play in the same arena as Atheism. God is way out of his league. The Atheistic natural forces and laws have brought about this Universe, that by definition cannot be distinguished from the Universe of God's Creation. The Atheistic Universe happened without the benefit of a Divine Plan, without the benefit of omnipotence. And it is the same.
Without design, the universe has quantum law. Without design, it has electrons, protons, gravity, energy, matter. Without design, it has planets, solar systems, stars, black holes. Without design, it has life, it has ecosystems, it has all the tricks of nature. Without design, without effort, the Universe yielded Earth, its plants and animals, it yielded us. It yielded our history, philosophy. Without design, we have ethics.
God would have needed Omniscience to do the same, the knowledge of every possibility, every future, every effect throughout time. He would have needed Omnipotence, the ability to do anything, unconstrained by logical paradox, natural law, or mechanism.
So, which is more worthy of admiration? The Atheistic natural forces did what God is supposed to have done, without omniscience, omnipotence, or intelligence, and under constraints of law and logic. I think the answer is clear: the Atheistic Creation deserves more respect.
But I said I would discuss faith as well. You have to have faith in order to believe in God, obviously. There is no proof of God, nor can there ever be proof, unless God were to come down and make his Presence known.
On the other hand, to believe in the natural forces, and evolution, faith is not necessary. There is plenty of evidence from experiments. Or is that really the case? The Atheistic natural universe stretches from the quantum level, where reality is not even a concept that makes sense, all the way through the unbelievable complexity of life, to forces than span the entire Universe. And there are gaps. We do not understand the transition from quantum mechanics to classical. We do not understand time. We do not understand many things.
I believe it actually requires more faith to believe in the Atheistic Creation (cool phrase, huh?) that to believe in God's Creation. You have to have faith that A leads to B, and B leads to C, and this means that A leads to C, always and unto infinity. How often does that happen in real life? You have to have faith that things are the way they are, and that if there is a problem, it is in your understanding only. You have to have faith that "A and not-A" is an impossibility. And you have to believe in absolutes. And you have to have faith that eventually, all questions and concerns will be answered.
A faith in God, on the other hand, is not much of a faith at all. Anything you don't understand about his ways or the world around you is merely written off as either a) omniscience, b) omnipotence, or c) the divine plan. If you have a question or concern, God does not need to answer you, but Science does.
Some people cannot accept a belief in God, for one reason or another, and they do not have enough faith to believe in Him regardless. What they do not understand, is that it is much, much harder to believe in nothing. So, without any answers they trust, from Science or from God, they hav
The horror of the modern position is that we cannot accept that we are just machines.
"Just machines?" There is nothing "just" about us. We are machines of unparalleled intelligence, inventiveness, and engineering.
Haven't you admired the beauty of a tiger in action, its energy, speed and power? Aren't you amazed at the effectiveness of ant society, how they work together without knowing they work together, powered by, like, 50 neurons? Do you not realize how impressive Nature's little tricks are? The chemical processes that eke out every last iota of energy where it should be impossible; the way the microstructure of dolphin skin lets them cut through water like a knife; vision; the blinding elegance of natural selection?
We are heir to all that. Think watches are intricate? Software? Even the simplest amoeba is more worthy of admiration. And humans? We can reason. We can by-God reason! We can communicate, we can invent! How much more admiration are we worth, than an amoeba?
So, yes. We are machines. But we are fuckin' amazing machines. So amazing that I have to ignore how amazing we are just to function. This is a Total Perspective Vortex. It would blow your mind if you really thought about how amazingly...everything...we truly are.
Truly horrifying? So not!
In Soviet Russia, you beat Moore's Law!
But in S. Korea, only old people are beaten by Moore's Law. (Moore's Law is reported to use a Pentium heat sink to inflict the damage.)
We can forgive and help people who hurt us, while still endorsing a judicial system that punishes wrong.
:)
I considered mentioning this point, in fact, but passed in favor of the one-liner.
And I think it is the Church, rather than Jesus, who has deprecated at least some of the Old Testament. The problem is, some of the OT clearly needs to be deprecated, and is at odds with the Church's current position, but AFAIK, they haven't published a list of "verses you can ignore."
I kinda wish they would. Or maybe a "Bible rev. 2" would be better. One of the advantages Christians have in theological debates is that they acknowledge that the Bible is an imperfect transcription of God's will. This is in contrast with the Islamic position that the Koran (or Quran, whatever) is written by Allah himself, IIUC. So it follows that there could be a legitimate corrected version of the Bible.