It's interesting that this attitude is most prevalent in a country with a written supposedly infallible constitution. It's written down! It must be true!!
The Constitution is explicitly fallible. It has a built in mechanism to allow itself to be fixed with amendments.
Not really. You see, the way the entire Bible is written, the "literal" meaning isn't as simple as taking the meaning of the individual words and putting them together, and the Bible (from the very beginning of Christianity) has always been looked at that way. For example, if I say someone has the "heart of a lion", I don't mean their ventricular structure is that of a feline animal. Similarly, in Genesis when they list the "days" and the creation of the world, it's an attempt at describing what happened in basic human terms. There couldn't even have been a proper "day" before the creation of the sun. The creation of "light" before the sun/stars is usually taken to be, on the literal level, not referring to electromagnetic waves, but to angelic beings (and the separation of angels and demons).
What you are describing is a metaphorical interpretation. Consider your example, "heart of a lion" -- this is a metaphor. The use of "light" to mean "angelic beings" would also be metaphor. This is the exact opposite of a literal interpretation.
In other words, it isn't a scientific text, and shouldn't be read as one. It isn't even trying to describe science, and it's a serious misreading of it to think it is. It's like reading the Iliad as a history book, and complaining about the inaccuracies.
No one is complaining about inaccuracies in the Bible. We are complaining about people who believe inaccurate things about the world because of how they treat the Bible, the present example being Representative Broun.
Rep. Broun needs to learn than belief in god and even Christianity does not mean the big bang or evolution are wrong. One cannot snap their fingers and make a cake; the ingredients must be mixed together and have heat applied. Why should god be able to circumvent the rules just because his cake is the universe?
I think the obvious answer to that would be because he makes the rules.
But more importantly, while you are right that Christianity in the general sense is not incompatible with these two scientific theories, certainly a literal interpretation of the Bible is incompatible. You'd have to do some pretty liberal stretching of Genesis to make it fit what we know about evolution. It's a pretty serious problem for Christians that their infallible sacred text contains bad theories about the natural world.
Note to future religious text writers: stick to unfalsifiable metaphysics and moral advice.
Actually EA lost their exclusivity with the NCAA as part of settlement of a lawsuit. Starting in 2014 they give up their exclusive licensing, at least for a period of five years.
He's saying that genetic selection is the moral thing to do. In your argument against this, you cannot assume from the start that selection is immoral. "Parents with good moral sense would not engineer their babies" is exactly wrong if this guy is right.
I think the point is that he's not linked to a larger group with a political agenda, which would make this potentially one part of a larger set of attacks.
A jury of 12 people disagrees with your assessment. This wasn't some judge with an attitude problem: This was a law passed by elected representatives, in an open and accessible public forum, with ample opportunity for public discourse. It has been affirmed countless times by a majority -- and now has been affirmed unanimously by 12 randomly-selected people from that community. You are welcome to your opinion but as a matter of law, there is little doubt as to his guilt. That said, my opinion is that you are short-sighted and bigoted, and have probably done (or thought of doing) things like this because of your own homophobia. For someone like you, a verdict like this must be pretty scary.
The post you were responding to ("What Ravi did was punch in the nose wrong - not 10 years in prison and deportation") was about the appropriateness of the punishment, not about Ravi's guilt. The jury's role is not to affirm the fairness of the law or to determine sentencing. All the jury is doing in this case is deciding if the details of this crime fit the criteria described by the law.
The fact that he was found guilty does nothing to establish the fairness of this law or the punishments it prescribes.
When I google "torx 5 point" sans quotes i get a ton of results for suitable bits.
Does Apple have some special version that are incompatible with these?
Yes. This is not a Torx 5-point. The points of the star have been rounded into "lobes".
The "iPhone Liberation Kit" being sold by ifixit will open the screws but does not actually fit them precisely so it will ruin them on the way out. They are selling it so you can get the pentalobular screws out and replace them. I suspect the other $2.35 tool people are linking to is the same thing.
This is a terrible idea because it unnecessarily links control of the car together with attention. Even covert attention (moving your attention around without moving your eyes) is coupled to the eye movement system in the brain (covertly shifting attention to a different part of the visual field really involves planning eye movements towards that spot). You need to have control of your vehicle uncoupled from this process, since driving requires you to pay attention to many things at once. There's no reason to hijack this system for control when we have a very effective one already.
We should be trying to free up our effectors, not shift around responsibilities among them. What we really want to do is to hook into ventral premotor cortex directly with a wireless connection so we can control the car with thought and still have our hands free.
After watching Phil Ivey burn out at the WSOP last year... I'd say it's both. It's about making the right decision based on what you know, and what ou have. You can't last long in tournament play if you're a sloppy player, and on the reverse, no matter how good you are, if you're drawing crap hands, even if you muscle in with crap cards, it's going to destroy you.
First, tournament poker is only one form of the game and involves higher variance compared to a cash game. But while the outcome of any individual hand or of a single tournament is a combination of luck and skill, long-run outcomes can only differ among individuals on the basis of skill, since the random factors do not favor any particular individual in the long run.
But one of the categories is "task completion" which is pretty generic sounding.
A sixth feature, task completion, will enable an app to start a job and continue working on it after the user leaves the app. And example given cited an app posting photos to Flicker, which continued working after the user left that app.
So, it is possible you could continue to sequence your genome while twittering your friends, although how many friends do you really have if you are sequencing genomes on your phone?
Because getting an abortion doesn't endanger anyone else.
The reason vaccinations are mandated is because each person serves as a potential vessel to spread the disease to many other people. Your choice of whether or not to take it is something that affects us all.
I agree we should have a choice about what goes into our bodies, but this is the reasoning, and its not without merit.
It just seems to me that this is already known in the imaging community, and correcting for it is the de facto standard. The problem with your study is that it lends itself quite well towards sensationalist stories in the media with the gist that fMRI results are meaningless (this slashdot story is a good example of that.) This is counter-productive. What comes through is "fMRI is crap since even a dead fish shows activations" rather than "researchers demonstrate the importance of known statistical techniques for brain imaging in a humorous way".
Slashdot Mirror
The Constitution is explicitly fallible. It has a built in mechanism to allow itself to be fixed with amendments.
What you are describing is a metaphorical interpretation. Consider your example, "heart of a lion" -- this is a metaphor. The use of "light" to mean "angelic beings" would also be metaphor. This is the exact opposite of a literal interpretation.
No one is complaining about inaccuracies in the Bible. We are complaining about people who believe inaccurate things about the world because of how they treat the Bible, the present example being Representative Broun.
Thirty percent of Americans.
I think the obvious answer to that would be because he makes the rules.
But more importantly, while you are right that Christianity in the general sense is not incompatible with these two scientific theories, certainly a literal interpretation of the Bible is incompatible. You'd have to do some pretty liberal stretching of Genesis to make it fit what we know about evolution. It's a pretty serious problem for Christians that their infallible sacred text contains bad theories about the natural world.
Note to future religious text writers: stick to unfalsifiable metaphysics and moral advice.
Actually EA lost their exclusivity with the NCAA as part of settlement of a lawsuit. Starting in 2014 they give up their exclusive licensing, at least for a period of five years.
You're begging the question.
He's saying that genetic selection is the moral thing to do. In your argument against this, you cannot assume from the start that selection is immoral. "Parents with good moral sense would not engineer their babies" is exactly wrong if this guy is right.
And in America, one in three children are overweight or obese.
Should we call back Curiosity?
I think the point is that he's not linked to a larger group with a political agenda, which would make this potentially one part of a larger set of attacks.
The post you were responding to ("What Ravi did was punch in the nose wrong - not 10 years in prison and deportation") was about the appropriateness of the punishment, not about Ravi's guilt. The jury's role is not to affirm the fairness of the law or to determine sentencing. All the jury is doing in this case is deciding if the details of this crime fit the criteria described by the law.
The fact that he was found guilty does nothing to establish the fairness of this law or the punishments it prescribes.
I wear actual shoes.
Yes. This is not a Torx 5-point. The points of the star have been rounded into "lobes". The "iPhone Liberation Kit" being sold by ifixit will open the screws but does not actually fit them precisely so it will ruin them on the way out. They are selling it so you can get the pentalobular screws out and replace them. I suspect the other $2.35 tool people are linking to is the same thing.
We should not propagate this misattribution.
The piano chat roulette improv guy was not Ben Folds, although Ben Folds did a tribute to him after people noticed the similarity.
"Merton" deserves the credit for this one.
I'm curious, specifically which draconian policy would impair your use and enjoyment of the phone?
This is a terrible idea because it unnecessarily links control of the car together with attention. Even covert attention (moving your attention around without moving your eyes) is coupled to the eye movement system in the brain (covertly shifting attention to a different part of the visual field really involves planning eye movements towards that spot). You need to have control of your vehicle uncoupled from this process, since driving requires you to pay attention to many things at once. There's no reason to hijack this system for control when we have a very effective one already.
We should be trying to free up our effectors, not shift around responsibilities among them. What we really want to do is to hook into ventral premotor cortex directly with a wireless connection so we can control the car with thought and still have our hands free.
First, tournament poker is only one form of the game and involves higher variance compared to a cash game. But while the outcome of any individual hand or of a single tournament is a combination of luck and skill, long-run outcomes can only differ among individuals on the basis of skill, since the random factors do not favor any particular individual in the long run.
While an individual life form has goals, I don't see how it makes sense to say that life itself is goal-oriented.
But one of the categories is "task completion" which is pretty generic sounding.
A sixth feature, task completion, will enable an app to start a job and continue working on it after the user leaves the app. And example given cited an app posting photos to Flicker, which continued working after the user left that app.
So, it is possible you could continue to sequence your genome while twittering your friends, although how many friends do you really have if you are sequencing genomes on your phone?
This does not qualify as a reason why tablets suck. It is evidence that they do indeed suck, but it is not a reason why.
When did everyone become such a wimp about looking at LCD screens?
I mean, how much time each day does any self-respecting Slashdot reader spend not looking a backlit screen?
Nonsense.
My distaste for French people is based entirely on how they post on Slashdot.
I propose we rename the Streisand effect after them.
Because getting an abortion doesn't endanger anyone else.
The reason vaccinations are mandated is because each person serves as a potential vessel to spread the disease to many other people. Your choice of whether or not to take it is something that affects us all.
I agree we should have a choice about what goes into our bodies, but this is the reasoning, and its not without merit.
Clearly not common enough to assume that it was present in this particular location without direct evidence.
It just seems to me that this is already known in the imaging community, and correcting for it is the de facto standard. The problem with your study is that it lends itself quite well towards sensationalist stories in the media with the gist that fMRI results are meaningless (this slashdot story is a good example of that.) This is counter-productive. What comes through is "fMRI is crap since even a dead fish shows activations" rather than "researchers demonstrate the importance of known statistical techniques for brain imaging in a humorous way".