Yes, and you and all other anonymous cowards are fountains of knowledge and wisdom. Your knowledge poverty is greater even than you financial wealth. You are Sooooo much smarter and better than the millions of people of faith. You have such knowledge, that you can explain everything except the source of your arrogance.
......especially if they discover the trojan and have their 12 year old kid hack it to feed the government bogus info........
Why bother hacking it? Just use it to do all sorts of stuff to give the listeners at the other end fits. Get another computer for the real stuff. Computers are cheap these days. What's a few hundred to an oil funded terrorist?
.....If you're a proficient hacker, what can you do to a machine when you can change each and every packet that leaves or enters it?.......
What if the machine isn't even connected to the Internet? Will they mail them a floppy?
A Terrorist could always use some cheap laptop on one of the thousands of wireless open access points and encrypt all the emails to their buddies in Afghanistan. He would never use that computer for opening any emails from anyone else. He could have another computer that would run the trojan and send the investigators on all sorts of rabbit trails and wild goose chases or simply show that he was totally "innocent".
....Your own private definition of "multinational"....
Goodness, have none of you ever hear of a dictionary to look up the meaning of words??
Merriam-Webster: 2 a : of, relating to, or involving more than two nations *a multinational alliance* b : having divisions in more than two countries *a multinational corporation*
ñmultinational noun
....You are entering into a contract when you purchase it......
BS. ANY contract is between persons of LEGAL age for one thing. If merely buying something were a LEGAL contract, then kids could not legally buy so much as a stick of gum. Any contract has to not only spell out the terms thereof, but also has to identify of exactly WHO the parties to a contract are. When I send my kid or go by myself to buy stuff at Fry's or Walmart, NONE of these conditions are met, regardless of what I buy. Neither I nor my kid is identified nor identifiable in any way as to having even been in that store where supposedly some item was bought. How can there be a contract, if it cannot be determined who the alleged participants of such an agreement are? Clicking on some screen doesn't change that in the slightest. I don't have to abide by any terms. I don't have to abide by any agreement I have NEVER agreed to.
(.....Well, "A contract is a legally binding exchange of promises or agreement between parties that the law will enforce......)
The only promise I or anyone makes at most stores, such as Walmart is that they will pay for the stuff before they walk out of the place. LAWS come into play if I don't. It has nothing to do with agreements or contracts. When I buy coffee I make no agreement other than agreeing to pay for it and use it within the law. Since they don't even know who I am, how can they agree to enter into an agreement. There are laws as to what I may or may not do in their shop. It has nothing to do with any agreement or contract. One of those laws says that they can throw me out if they don't like me for whatever reason. Even so I STILL have not entered into any sort of contract with anybody. Determining digital identities is particularly vexing these days. When I buy a t-shirt, all I do is promise to give them money. They don't even have the right to ask me for my name, at least not if I offer the correct amount of cash.
It has been that way for centuries. When did this change? The crux of this whole discussion is: When is a so called agreement truly an enforceable contract? What are the minimum things that have to be in place for all parties? One thing for sure. Nobody can hold someone accountable for anything if they don't even know who that someone is. That's why the **AA is having an increasingly difficult time making their frivolous lawsuits stick.
......So, basically, you're sick and so are *billions* of other people on Earth........
Of course you are healthy because you BELIEFS are true. You belong to the "enlightened" minority who has the truth based on YOUR beliefs.
(.....Simon Greenlead died in 1853!.....)
I wonder how many people will still be even looking at, let alone avidly studying anything you leave behind 154 years after your death. If you go to law school, you will be required to study that man's writings.
(.....*Everybody* knows the Burden of Proof is on the person making the *claim*.......)
Jesus did provide plenty of evidence that His claims were valid. The writers were merely eye witnesses to what happened. When you are called into court as a WITNESS, you don't have to and are never asked to prove anything. You are merely asked to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth. It is assumed then, that you, like every witness, is truthful. It is up to the opposition to convince the judge or jury that the witness is a liar or deceived.
(......Evolution is not an opinion, it's a rigorously tested scientific theory.......)
Evolution theory, like every other theory is ultimately based on certain assumptions. (faith, axioms) Evolution depends on time, lots of time and our accurate measurement thereof, into the distant past. Anytime you want to measure anything, you have to be sure the measuring device is correct while measuring. There is NO way anyone can KNOW if the clocks used to measure the immense periods of time have run at the same rate throughout all that time. It is assumed (believed) they did. So, ultimately, evolution is based on a belief which cannot be checked scientifically. In that, it is in the same category as any religion, which cannot be checked either.
.....then you already In The Know... you already know enough to research BEFORE to find out if it is legal.......
You missed the whole point. I know that software, DVD, CD etc are protected by copyright laws. AFAIK, copyright law doesn't give them that right. What OTHER laws are there that give MS the right to enforce a sticker, label, dire warning etc. that I am not allowed to do this or that with their stuff? I agree that copying and distributing such material is illegal. I am taking about an honest user who PAID for a copy being kept from using it according to law. When I install VISTA on a virtual machine on my Mac, what law am I breaking? I KNOW I am breaking their stupid little sticker, but what law gives them the right to enforce such a sticker in the first place? If push come to shove, do they actually have a law based upon which they can "punish" anyone for violating their rules?
(.....You cannot, however, resell the candy bars in your office, as they are all marked "Not for Individual Sale".......)
Does that have to do with the fact that the individual candies are not labeled, as required by law, with their ingredient list?
I can and will do whatever the law allows me to do. I do not violate copyright law. I may or may not abide by whatever restrictions a piece of paper or mouse click tries to place upon me. When I rent a piece of equipment, such as a Rug Doctor, I agree in WRITING that it is a rental, and promise to return the thing undamaged after the agreed upon rental period is over.
(.....All of the rules regarding the software are spelled out in manuals, EULAs and other documentation.....)
Where is there a law, duly passed by a legislative body, such as copyright law, which mandates that a manual, EULA or any other piece of paper or electronic image thereof has a binding effect on anybody?
(......every time you want to purchase a piece of software you should be required to produce Identification, a valid credit card, and sign a contract like you are renting a car at the Airport.......)
I suspect that the only way that could be done is for MS and similar big companies to purchase a LAW to that effect from the Government, just like they did with the DMCA. Otherwise the majority of customers would buy from vendors that don't require such BS.
.....Let's think for a moment. Let's say that you are the super-mega brilliant race, billions of years more advanced than humans. You can reorganize matter with a thought.......
What about a mega-intelligent being that transcends the balloon we call the universe and who can travel at the speed of thought and not be confined to locality. The limitations of the speed of light, time and space would not apply to Him. Are you talking about God by chance?
If you have an aquarium in your family room, what do the fish swimming therein know about your kitchen?
(....Make a sign! Well, what kind of sign......)
To me a better sign would be to go and visit these fish in said aquarium.
Isaiah 7:14 So, the Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold, the virgin will conceive and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Immanuel.
Immanuel means God with us. Maybe He did give us a sign?
.....because we are still inside that expanding point (the universe), no real center exists........
If the expanding universe is analogous to an expanding balloon, as it is often described, one could find the center of the balloon only if the dimensions of the balloon's diameter were measured. The balloon could still have a center, but it would not be locatable if the diameter of the balloon or even it's size cannot be determined.
With present technology we seem to be able to observe a fall off in the amount of matter beyond a certain distance from us, but that doesn't mean this is where the edge of the universe (balloon) is located.
......So, anyone want to put odds on dark matter going the way of the cublical atom in, say, ten years?.......
The need for theorized dark matter and dark energy is based on two assumptions (beliefs). 1). The red shift is caused by the doppler effect. 2) That light has always traveled at the speed we measure today.
It seems incredible that 70% of all matter and energy should be hidden so well as to not give the slightest real measurable hint of its existence.
There is observed evidence that calls these two assumptions into question. The red shift is a measured fact, but its may have nothing or very little to do with motion.
Is science not generally better at exploring "how", rather than why? We can measure how much more mass a proton has than an electron, but can anyone tell WHY it is 1836 times heavier? We know that if it were not for that particular ratio, neither we nor any other life would be here to ask "why" questions.
There are lots of relationships in physics we can measure pretty consistently, but nobody really knows why these are the way they are. This apparent alignment of galaxies is another discovery that has yet to yield an answer to the many "why" questions we ask from the time we can talk.
It seems that for every answer that scientists find, ten or more new questions arise. That's what makes science interesting and keeps scientists employed.
....If someone has your car's title then it's not legally your car even if you bought the car.......
If someone other than you holds the title, that means YOU did not pay for it, they did. You only own merchandise you pay for. If the bank gives you the money to buy a car, they own the car until you pay it off. What has this to do with mouse click "agreements"?
Yes, but when I go to the dealer to lease a car, they don't pretend it's a sale. When you go into Best By or Fry's, pick a box with Windows VISTA off the shelf along with a shopping cart full of other gadgets, there is NO differentiation made between any of those item and that software. They ring it up, you pay and walk out of the store. The only "agreement" I have with a store is that I pay them a specified amount for the right to walk out the door with specific merchandise. The difference comes in when you try to take some of the stuff back because it was wrong or did not meet your need. The will take any of it back for a refund, EXCEPT the software. Software is merchandised under false pretenses if they don't tell the customer right up front in plain English that you can never own the software, but only get permission to use it under often severely proscribed circumstances. On all software shelves there should be a prominent sign:
You cannot BUY this material. It is only for rent or lease.
Of course when I rent or lease, I SIGN a REAL agreement, not just click a mouse, or rip some plastic, which any kid can do. Send your 10 year old to lease a rug doctor carpet cleaner or rent a movie sometime. When I rent a cement mixer, floor sander or whatever, they'll repair or replace it if it doesn't work for mixing cement or sanding my floor. Software makers specifically exempt themselves from any warranty that their program will work properly. Society lets them get away with it. Has anyone even ATTEMPTED to take MS to task for their insecure, bug infested software?
(...You cannot legally distribute it in any way you see fit.....)
That is correct, and falls under copyright LAW. Does copyright law also give them the right to "license" software? If not, what law is there that permits MS to tell me, (via a so called "license") for example, if I buy MS VISA home, I cannot run that in a particular way, such as under a virtual machine on my Mac. What right do they have to attach any conditions to their merchandise that others may not? What right do they have to pretend that when I open their package and install their crap, I am giving up any rights under the LAW that I normally have?
.....In short - a culture in which people who have done nothing wrong really don't have anything to hide......
OK, I assume you have done nothing wrong, so please post your SS number, and credit card info. Privacy is needed to protect the truly innocent from those who are guilty of wanting to take advantage of them by the use of private information.
.......The hardware existed in phone-exchanges to eavesdrop on phone calls.....
I wonder if REAL terrorists know that and don't use the phone to communicate? There are many ways to communicate that makes it hard or impossible for a third party to figure out what is going on. Unless the government already has some suspicion about someone, they are not likely to expend the resources to monitor the average Joe's phone or email. It costs too much money. Even if the average Joe has an uncle in Pakistan, if neither is communicating stuff that strikes the FBI or whatever eavesdropper's interest, they'll soon look for others to listen in on. After all, the FBI, CIA or whoever's aim is to catch terrorists.
........The fact is, a police state requires a military willing to kill their fellow citizens.......
It also requires a disarmed, helpless citizenry. If only 10% of the Jews under the Nazis had weapons and willing to die in using these on the Gestapo thugs that came to arrest them in the middle of the might, there would have never been a holocaust. Even if only 10% of those willing to use their weapons had managed to kill one gestapo agent, 6000 such agents would have bit the dust. That means that the Gestapo actions could not have been carried out in secret, under the noses of the German population.
If only 5% of the population is armed and willing to die, rather than submit to a tyrant government, then such rule will never happen. Such a potential tyrant government would have to fight and kill over 15 million such armed US citizens. That is why it is vital to ensure that the populace is never disarmed. The framers of the constitution knew that tyranny can never prosper if the people can defend themselves. Before a tyrant can take over the US, the population first has to be disarmed.
.......I hear they have sattelite-based laser microphones......
You forgot to add that this capability will be added to the next version of Google Earth. They will make it work for everybody, including the FBI. They and I and everyone, will be able to listen in to the conversation vibrations emitted from the windows of your house.
....it's more like going to the video store to rent a video......
Last time I looked, when I rent the movie, I was obligated to return it to the store. I specifically agreed to the low rental price, which is much cheaper than buying said movie. This is not the case with MS or other software or movies I BUY in the store. There is no rental, express or implied. The store SELLS me a box with a CD or DVD inside. Under copyright law, I am allowed to play that ONE copy back, wherever I want, whenever I want. It is even legal to make fair use copies, such as rip the content onto an iPod. If I no longer want the thing, I can sell, give away, destroy or otherwise get rid of that ONE same original copy, as well as any other copies I may have of it. If the software and movie makers REALLY were like a rental, then they should market it as rentals and not pretend to sell their stuff. In a rental, if the rented item sucks or is broken, I have the right to return the item and get my rental money back. Try THAT with software or movies you have BOUGHT.
Also, in the case of many rentals, they are prorated. If I return a rented tool sooner or later the rental fee is adjusted accordingly.
That is my understanding of the law. Am I wrong in this?
...... Legal? Of course. Welcome to the world of software licensing.......
So then unlike cars, pants and every other commodity I can buy in a store, software has a legal exception in that it ALONE can be LICENSED? Does that mean a manufacturer of pants or toilets could also LEGALLY demand a license to use them in a specific manner? Do software and content makers get any special legal privileges, (other than copyright law) so they can make people enter into a dubious, legally enforceable "agreement" they must abide by in order to use their commodity unlike any other? If there isn't a specific LAW that gives these guys special privileges above that of the makers and sellers of all other goods, why does all this baloney about "licensing" these things hold up in court? Does copyright law really address any issues other than copying and distributing (including public performance) that these businesses use to foist these "licenses" on consumers?
.......You do know that if you read the MS EULA you do not OWN the Microsoft Windows product you purchased with HUNDREDS of hard earned Dollars.........
If I buy a product in a store, it doesn't matter what, I OWN it. Ford doesn't make me enter into a so called agreement, nor have they the right, to tell me I can only drive the vehicle they SOLD me on certain roads or only use it to transport certain items or people. I can resell that vehicle or whatever else I bought to anybody at anytime.
What body of law gives MS or other software companies the right to put out EULA crap like this, that supposedly applies to their products, unlike every other product under the sun? Are there special laws that have been created that only apply to their products and no others? Did our paid for legislators create special laws that allows software companies only, unlike every other business, to restrict how their customers may use their stuff?
......The possiblity that a non-Christian scientist would be condemned for really no other reason other than difference in faith.....
The fact is that scientists are human. A such, like every human, have a certain world view. There is no way that their world view (belief system) cannot help but formulate the underlying assumptions made in their discipline.
The currently popular evolutionary world view doesn't allow for the possibility of any reality beyond the matter-energy-time-space (physical) domain which science can explore. Because of this world view constraint, everything must be explained only by physical interactions. Evolution is a system based on descent through time. More complex life descended from simpler forms. Mechanisms of survival and mutation, coupled with huge amounts of time are the drivers of evolution. This logical and irrefutable, given the acceptance (belief in) of this underlying world view.
Christians and others have the world view that there is an intelligent, God, who is the originator and controller of everything. This includes the time-space-matter-energy dimensions studied by science. In this view, the evidence points to a common set of laws, principles, systems and re-useable designs that operate consistently in all living things, as well as the rest of creation. These were all put in place and are sustained by a designer who exists outside of this fishbowl we call the universe. This too is logical and irrefutable, given the acceptance (belief in) of this underlying world view.
.......Besides the fact that you don't have a shread of evidence. Evidence and proof are the foundation of this site.........
I suppose that depends on whether you consider historical evidence written down by eyewitnesses worthless. The writings of the New Testament are every bit as historical and trustworthy as other historians of that time. Oral and written testimony of witnesses is accepted in our courts of law. It is generally assumed in a court that a witness is telling the TRUTH. It is incumbent on the opposing party, defense or prosecution, to cast doubt and discredit the evidence of testimony or credibility of the witnesses.
Simon Greenleaf, a founder of the Harvard Law School, wrote at length on rules of evidence and how an attorney may undermine or bolster the truthfulness of witnesses and their testimony. These rules and procedures are still followed in all law courts from the Supreme Court down. He, as an atheist lawyer, determined to show by those rules, that the testimony of the four writers of the Gospels was untrue and that they were not credible eye witnesses of what they claim. He did come to the opposite conclusion after careful study of the written depositions these four witnesses left behind. He became a Christian as a result.
There are many OPINIONS expressed here on/. on almost any subject. Whenever the subject of origins comes up, most here express the opinions of materialistic evolution. Since science can only deal with the material world of matter-energy, the assumption (belief) is made that there isn't anything else that goes beyond that. For most of human history, and in fact, still today, most humans STILL believe that the dimensions of time-space and matter-energy are not all that exists. Those here on/. who DO believe that there is nothing beyond the physical are more numerous only here, but are a tiny minority of the human race, now and all through history.
If I speak out on behalf of the overwhelming majority of humanity, that doesn't mean I have to leave reason behind and forego science and technology as discussed here.
....only someone adhering to the subjectively defined "truly Christian" worldview would be allowed to speak freely, all others would hit a wall....
Jesus claimed not only to teach truth, like the others also claim, but to be the embodiment of THE truth. Even so He said that He didn't condemn anyone, but lets everybody choose whether to believe Him. A truly Christian person could do no less, but let others consider the claims of Jesus for themselves without coercion. I personally had dialogue with other faiths, but only when asked why I am a Christian. My faith is not blind faith, but based on reason and the fact that God personally, in Jesus, communicated to me at various times throughout my life.
Unfortunately that, just as with most other religions, has not been the case for those so called Christians that obtained political power and with that, the power to coerce others to "accept" Christianity. Our founding fathers recognized this and forbade any particular religion from obtaining the ability to use the power of government to their advantage. All faiths, regardless of majority or minority are placed on the same level. In all Moslem countries, where that religion also has full political power, other faiths, especially the Christian one are put down at minimum and severely persecuted at worst.
Not necessarily. If anything, Apple will sell more iPhones because of this hack. Any non-ATT providers would also have to modify their network in order to allow the voicemail to work correctly. The user selected voicemail ordering is one of the key features of the iPhone. It is not likely that any provider will go to the trouble of modifying their network in order to accommodate a few hacked phones. I think Apple can use their expensive lawyers for better purposes. Apple can also come out with a software "update" that totally bricks hacked iPhones. No more updates from Apple for any hacked phone. This is a nice geek headline, just as the ostensible OSX vulnerabilities, but in the real world it amounts to nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
...... A lot of people are stupid.......
Yes, and you and all other anonymous cowards are fountains of knowledge and wisdom. Your knowledge poverty is greater even than you financial wealth. You are Sooooo much smarter and better than the millions of people of faith. You have such knowledge, that you can explain everything except the source of your arrogance.
......especially if they discover the trojan and have their 12 year old kid hack it to feed the government bogus info........
Why bother hacking it? Just use it to do all sorts of stuff to give the listeners at the other end fits. Get another computer for the real stuff. Computers are cheap these days. What's a few hundred to an oil funded terrorist?
.....If you're a proficient hacker, what can you do to a machine when you can change each and every packet that leaves or enters it?.......
What if the machine isn't even connected to the Internet? Will they mail them a floppy?
A Terrorist could always use some cheap laptop on one of the thousands of wireless open access points and encrypt all the emails to their buddies in Afghanistan. He would never use that computer for opening any emails from anyone else. He could have another computer that would run the trojan and send the investigators on all sorts of rabbit trails and wild goose chases or simply show that he was totally "innocent".
....Your own private definition of "multinational" ....
:)
Goodness, have none of you ever hear of a dictionary to look up the meaning of words??
Merriam-Webster:
2 a : of, relating to, or involving more than two nations *a multinational alliance* b : having divisions in more than two countries *a multinational corporation*
ñmultinational noun
There now go and argue some more!
....You are entering into a contract when you purchase it......
BS. ANY contract is between persons of LEGAL age for one thing. If merely buying something were a LEGAL contract, then kids could not legally buy so much as a stick of gum. Any contract has to not only spell out the terms thereof, but also has to identify of exactly WHO the parties to a contract are. When I send my kid or go by myself to buy stuff at Fry's or Walmart, NONE of these conditions are met, regardless of what I buy. Neither I nor my kid is identified nor identifiable in any way as to having even been in that store where supposedly some item was bought. How can there be a contract, if it cannot be determined who the alleged participants of such an agreement are? Clicking on some screen doesn't change that in the slightest. I don't have to abide by any terms. I don't have to abide by any agreement I have NEVER agreed to.
(.....Well, "A contract is a legally binding exchange of promises or agreement between parties that the law will enforce......)
The only promise I or anyone makes at most stores, such as Walmart is that they will pay for the stuff before they walk out of the place. LAWS come into play if I don't. It has nothing to do with agreements or contracts. When I buy coffee I make no agreement other than agreeing to pay for it and use it within the law. Since they don't even know who I am, how can they agree to enter into an agreement. There are laws as to what I may or may not do in their shop. It has nothing to do with any agreement or contract. One of those laws says that they can throw me out if they don't like me for whatever reason. Even so I STILL have not entered into any sort of contract with anybody. Determining digital identities is particularly vexing these days. When I buy a t-shirt, all I do is promise to give them money. They don't even have the right to ask me for my name, at least not if I offer the correct amount of cash.
It has been that way for centuries. When did this change? The crux of this whole discussion is: When is a so called agreement truly an enforceable contract? What are the minimum things that have to be in place for all parties? One thing for sure. Nobody can hold someone accountable for anything if they don't even know who that someone is. That's why the **AA is having an increasingly difficult time making their frivolous lawsuits stick.
......So, basically, you're sick and so are *billions* of other people on Earth........
Of course you are healthy because you BELIEFS are true. You belong to the "enlightened" minority who has the truth based on YOUR beliefs.
(.....Simon Greenlead died in 1853!.....)
I wonder how many people will still be even looking at, let alone avidly studying anything you leave behind 154 years after your death. If you go to law school, you will be required to study that man's writings.
(.....*Everybody* knows the Burden of Proof is on the person making the *claim*.......)
Jesus did provide plenty of evidence that His claims were valid. The writers were merely eye witnesses to what happened. When you are called into court as a WITNESS, you don't have to and are never asked to prove anything. You are merely asked to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth. It is assumed then, that you, like every witness, is truthful. It is up to the opposition to convince the judge or jury that the witness is a liar or deceived.
(......Evolution is not an opinion, it's a rigorously tested scientific theory.......)
Evolution theory, like every other theory is ultimately based on certain assumptions. (faith, axioms) Evolution depends on time, lots of time and our accurate measurement thereof, into the distant past. Anytime you want to measure anything, you have to be sure the measuring device is correct while measuring. There is NO way anyone can KNOW if the clocks used to measure the immense periods of time have run at the same rate throughout all that time. It is assumed (believed) they did. So, ultimately, evolution is based on a belief which cannot be checked scientifically. In that, it is in the same category as any religion, which cannot be checked either.
.....then you already In The Know... you already know enough to research BEFORE to find out if it is legal .......
You missed the whole point. I know that software, DVD, CD etc are protected by copyright laws. AFAIK, copyright law doesn't give them that right. What OTHER laws are there that give MS the right to enforce a sticker, label, dire warning etc. that I am not allowed to do this or that with their stuff? I agree that copying and distributing such material is illegal. I am taking about an honest user who PAID for a copy being kept from using it according to law. When I install VISTA on a virtual machine on my Mac, what law am I breaking? I KNOW I am breaking their stupid little sticker, but what law gives them the right to enforce such a sticker in the first place? If push come to shove, do they actually have a law based upon which they can "punish" anyone for violating their rules?
(.....You cannot, however, resell the candy bars in your office, as they are all marked "Not for Individual Sale".......)
Does that have to do with the fact that the individual candies are not labeled, as required by law, with their ingredient list?
I can and will do whatever the law allows me to do. I do not violate copyright law. I may or may not abide by whatever restrictions a piece of paper or mouse click tries to place upon me. When I rent a piece of equipment, such as a Rug Doctor, I agree in WRITING that it is a rental, and promise to return the thing undamaged after the agreed upon rental period is over.
(.....All of the rules regarding the software are spelled out in manuals, EULAs and other documentation.....)
Where is there a law, duly passed by a legislative body, such as copyright law, which mandates that a manual, EULA or any other piece of paper or electronic image thereof has a binding effect on anybody?
(......every time you want to purchase a piece of software you should be required to produce Identification, a valid credit card, and sign a contract like you are renting a car at the Airport.......)
I suspect that the only way that could be done is for MS and similar big companies to purchase a LAW to that effect from the Government, just like they did with the DMCA. Otherwise the majority of customers would buy from vendors that don't require such BS.
.....Let's think for a moment. Let's say that you are the super-mega brilliant race, billions of years more advanced than humans. You can reorganize matter with a thought .......
......)
What about a mega-intelligent being that transcends the balloon we call the universe and who can travel at the speed of thought and not be confined to locality. The limitations of the speed of light, time and space would not apply to Him. Are you talking about God by chance?
If you have an aquarium in your family room, what do the fish swimming therein know about your kitchen?
(....Make a sign! Well, what kind of sign
To me a better sign would be to go and visit these fish in said aquarium.
Isaiah 7:14 So, the Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold, the virgin will conceive and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Immanuel.
Immanuel means God with us. Maybe He did give us a sign?
....So, if the universe is a balloon, when does it pop?.....
When the guy who blew it up decides to stick a pin into it.
.....because we are still inside that expanding point (the universe), no real center exists........
If the expanding universe is analogous to an expanding balloon, as it is often described, one could find the center of the balloon only if the dimensions of the balloon's diameter were measured. The balloon could still have a center, but it would not be locatable if the diameter of the balloon or even it's size cannot be determined.
With present technology we seem to be able to observe a fall off in the amount of matter beyond a certain distance from us, but that doesn't mean this is where the edge of the universe (balloon) is located.
......So, anyone want to put odds on dark matter going the way of the cublical atom in, say, ten years?.......
The need for theorized dark matter and dark energy is based on two assumptions (beliefs). 1). The red shift is caused by the doppler effect. 2) That light has always traveled at the speed we measure today.
It seems incredible that 70% of all matter and energy should be hidden so well as to not give the slightest real measurable hint of its existence.
There is observed evidence that calls these two assumptions into question. The red shift is a measured fact, but its may have nothing or very little to do with motion.
......saying they do not know why......
Is science not generally better at exploring "how", rather than why? We can measure how much more mass a proton has than an electron, but can anyone tell WHY it is 1836 times heavier? We know that if it were not for that particular ratio, neither we nor any other life would be here to ask "why" questions.
There are lots of relationships in physics we can measure pretty consistently, but nobody really knows why these are the way they are. This apparent alignment of galaxies is another discovery that has yet to yield an answer to the many "why" questions we ask from the time we can talk.
It seems that for every answer that scientists find, ten or more new questions arise. That's what makes science interesting and keeps scientists employed.
....If someone has your car's title then it's not legally your car even if you bought the car.......
If someone other than you holds the title, that means YOU did not pay for it, they did. You only own merchandise you pay for. If the bank gives you the money to buy a car, they own the car until you pay it off. What has this to do with mouse click "agreements"?
..... What about leasing a car?......
Yes, but when I go to the dealer to lease a car, they don't pretend it's a sale. When you go into Best By or Fry's, pick a box with Windows VISTA off the shelf along with a shopping cart full of other gadgets, there is NO differentiation made between any of those item and that software. They ring it up, you pay and walk out of the store. The only "agreement" I have with a store is that I pay them a specified amount for the right to walk out the door with specific merchandise. The difference comes in when you try to take some of the stuff back because it was wrong or did not meet your need. The will take any of it back for a refund, EXCEPT the software. Software is merchandised under false pretenses if they don't tell the customer right up front in plain English that you can never own the software, but only get permission to use it under often severely proscribed circumstances. On all software shelves there should be a prominent sign:
You cannot BUY this material. It is only for rent or lease.
Of course when I rent or lease, I SIGN a REAL agreement, not just click a mouse, or rip some plastic, which any kid can do. Send your 10 year old to lease a rug doctor carpet cleaner or rent a movie sometime. When I rent a cement mixer, floor sander or whatever, they'll repair or replace it if it doesn't work for mixing cement or sanding my floor. Software makers specifically exempt themselves from any warranty that their program will work properly. Society lets them get away with it. Has anyone even ATTEMPTED to take MS to task for their insecure, bug infested software?
(...You cannot legally distribute it in any way you see fit.....)
That is correct, and falls under copyright LAW. Does copyright law also give them the right to "license" software? If not, what law is there that permits MS to tell me, (via a so called "license") for example, if I buy MS VISA home, I cannot run that in a particular way, such as under a virtual machine on my Mac. What right do they have to attach any conditions to their merchandise that others may not? What right do they have to pretend that when I open their package and install their crap, I am giving up any rights under the LAW that I normally have?
.....In short - a culture in which people who have done nothing wrong really don't have anything to hide......
OK, I assume you have done nothing wrong, so please post your SS number, and credit card info. Privacy is needed to protect the truly innocent from those who are guilty of wanting to take advantage of them by the use of private information.
.......The hardware existed in phone-exchanges to eavesdrop on phone calls.....
I wonder if REAL terrorists know that and don't use the phone to communicate? There are many ways to communicate that makes it hard or impossible for a third party to figure out what is going on. Unless the government already has some suspicion about someone, they are not likely to expend the resources to monitor the average Joe's phone or email. It costs too much money. Even if the average Joe has an uncle in Pakistan, if neither is communicating stuff that strikes the FBI or whatever eavesdropper's interest, they'll soon look for others to listen in on. After all, the FBI, CIA or whoever's aim is to catch terrorists.
........The fact is, a police state requires a military willing to kill their fellow citizens.......
It also requires a disarmed, helpless citizenry. If only 10% of the Jews under the Nazis had weapons and willing to die in using these on the Gestapo thugs that came to arrest them in the middle of the might, there would have never been a holocaust. Even if only 10% of those willing to use their weapons had managed to kill one gestapo agent, 6000 such agents would have bit the dust. That means that the Gestapo actions could not have been carried out in secret, under the noses of the German population.
If only 5% of the population is armed and willing to die, rather than submit to a tyrant government, then such rule will never happen. Such a potential tyrant government would have to fight and kill over 15 million such armed US citizens. That is why it is vital to ensure that the populace is never disarmed. The framers of the constitution knew that tyranny can never prosper if the people can defend themselves. Before a tyrant can take over the US, the population first has to be disarmed.
.......I hear they have sattelite-based laser microphones ......
You forgot to add that this capability will be added to the next version of Google Earth. They will make it work for everybody, including the FBI. They and I and everyone, will be able to listen in to the conversation vibrations emitted from the windows of your house.
....it's more like going to the video store to rent a video......
Last time I looked, when I rent the movie, I was obligated to return it to the store. I specifically agreed to the low rental price, which is much cheaper than buying said movie. This is not the case with MS or other software or movies I BUY in the store. There is no rental, express or implied. The store SELLS me a box with a CD or DVD inside. Under copyright law, I am allowed to play that ONE copy back, wherever I want, whenever I want. It is even legal to make fair use copies, such as rip the content onto an iPod. If I no longer want the thing, I can sell, give away, destroy or otherwise get rid of that ONE same original copy, as well as any other copies I may have of it. If the software and movie makers REALLY were like a rental, then they should market it as rentals and not pretend to sell their stuff. In a rental, if the rented item sucks or is broken, I have the right to return the item and get my rental money back. Try THAT with software or movies you have BOUGHT.
Also, in the case of many rentals, they are prorated. If I return a rented tool sooner or later the rental fee is adjusted accordingly.
That is my understanding of the law. Am I wrong in this?
...... Legal? Of course. Welcome to the world of software licensing.......
So then unlike cars, pants and every other commodity I can buy in a store, software has a legal exception in that it ALONE can be LICENSED? Does that mean a manufacturer of pants or toilets could also LEGALLY demand a license to use them in a specific manner? Do software and content makers get any special legal privileges, (other than copyright law) so they can make people enter into a dubious, legally enforceable "agreement" they must abide by in order to use their commodity unlike any other? If there isn't a specific LAW that gives these guys special privileges above that of the makers and sellers of all other goods, why does all this baloney about "licensing" these things hold up in court? Does copyright law really address any issues other than copying and distributing (including public performance) that these businesses use to foist these "licenses" on consumers?
.......You do know that if you read the MS EULA you do not OWN the Microsoft Windows product you purchased with HUNDREDS of hard earned Dollars.........
If I buy a product in a store, it doesn't matter what, I OWN it. Ford doesn't make me enter into a so called agreement, nor have they the right, to tell me I can only drive the vehicle they SOLD me on certain roads or only use it to transport certain items or people. I can resell that vehicle or whatever else I bought to anybody at anytime.
What body of law gives MS or other software companies the right to put out EULA crap like this, that supposedly applies to their products, unlike every other product under the sun? Are there special laws that have been created that only apply to their products and no others? Did our paid for legislators create special laws that allows software companies only, unlike every other business, to restrict how their customers may use their stuff?
......The possiblity that a non-Christian scientist would be condemned for really no other reason other than difference in faith.....
The fact is that scientists are human. A such, like every human, have a certain world view. There is no way that their world view (belief system) cannot help but formulate the underlying assumptions made in their discipline.
The currently popular evolutionary world view doesn't allow for the possibility of any reality beyond the matter-energy-time-space (physical) domain which science can explore. Because of this world view constraint, everything must be explained only by physical interactions. Evolution is a system based on descent through time. More complex life descended from simpler forms. Mechanisms of survival and mutation, coupled with huge amounts of time are the drivers of evolution. This logical and irrefutable, given the acceptance (belief in) of this underlying world view.
Christians and others have the world view that there is an intelligent, God, who is the originator and controller of everything. This includes the time-space-matter-energy dimensions studied by science. In this view, the evidence points to a common set of laws, principles, systems and re-useable designs that operate consistently in all living things, as well as the rest of creation. These were all put in place and are sustained by a designer who exists outside of this fishbowl we call the universe. This too is logical and irrefutable, given the acceptance (belief in) of this underlying world view.
.......Besides the fact that you don't have a shread of evidence. Evidence and proof are the foundation of this site.........
/. on almost any subject. Whenever the subject of origins comes up, most here express the opinions of materialistic evolution. Since science can only deal with the material world of matter-energy, the assumption (belief) is made that there isn't anything else that goes beyond that. For most of human history, and in fact, still today, most humans STILL believe that the dimensions of time-space and matter-energy are not all that exists. Those here on /. who DO believe that there is nothing beyond the physical are more numerous only here, but are a tiny minority of the human race, now and all through history.
I suppose that depends on whether you consider historical evidence written down by eyewitnesses worthless. The writings of the New Testament are every bit as historical and trustworthy as other historians of that time. Oral and written testimony of witnesses is accepted in our courts of law. It is generally assumed in a court that a witness is telling the TRUTH. It is incumbent on the opposing party, defense or prosecution, to cast doubt and discredit the evidence of testimony or credibility of the witnesses.
Simon Greenleaf, a founder of the Harvard Law School, wrote at length on rules of evidence and how an attorney may undermine or bolster the truthfulness of witnesses and their testimony. These rules and procedures are still followed in all law courts from the Supreme Court down. He, as an atheist lawyer, determined to show by those rules, that the testimony of the four writers of the Gospels was untrue and that they were not credible eye witnesses of what they claim. He did come to the opposite conclusion after careful study of the written depositions these four witnesses left behind. He became a Christian as a result.
There are many OPINIONS expressed here on
If I speak out on behalf of the overwhelming majority of humanity, that doesn't mean I have to leave reason behind and forego science and technology as discussed here.
....only someone adhering to the subjectively defined "truly Christian" worldview would be allowed to speak freely, all others would hit a wall....
Jesus claimed not only to teach truth, like the others also claim, but to be the embodiment of THE truth. Even so He said that He didn't condemn anyone, but lets everybody choose whether to believe Him. A truly Christian person could do no less, but let others consider the claims of Jesus for themselves without coercion. I personally had dialogue with other faiths, but only when asked why I am a Christian. My faith is not blind faith, but based on reason and the fact that God personally, in Jesus, communicated to me at various times throughout my life.
Unfortunately that, just as with most other religions, has not been the case for those so called Christians that obtained political power and with that, the power to coerce others to "accept" Christianity. Our founding fathers recognized this and forbade any particular religion from obtaining the ability to use the power of government to their advantage. All faiths, regardless of majority or minority are placed on the same level. In all Moslem countries, where that religion also has full political power, other faiths, especially the Christian one are put down at minimum and severely persecuted at worst.
Not necessarily. If anything, Apple will sell more iPhones because of this hack. Any non-ATT providers would also have to modify their network in order to allow the voicemail to work correctly. The user selected voicemail ordering is one of the key features of the iPhone. It is not likely that any provider will go to the trouble of modifying their network in order to accommodate a few hacked phones. I think Apple can use their expensive lawyers for better purposes. Apple can also come out with a software "update" that totally bricks hacked iPhones. No more updates from Apple for any hacked phone. This is a nice geek headline, just as the ostensible OSX vulnerabilities, but in the real world it amounts to nothing.