.......we see them used as a quick effortless way to subdue someone for whatever reason,.......
So? In earlier times they used the more "humane" method of a billy club to subdue violent suspects. If a cop tells you that you're under arrest, go quietly and no physical means are needed. Then keep your mouth shut and ask for a lawyer.
.....we see them used as a quick effortless way to subdue someone for whatever reason,.....
So if a cop wants to arrest you and you resist, would you prefer to be bonked in the head with a Billy Club? That's what they used to do, before Tasers existed.
.....when I'm perfectly free to drive a motorcycle.....
In many states, not without a helmet! If you would be OK with just scraping an injured motorcyclist not wearing a helmet off the pavement and denying them medical care unless they pay for it, cash on the barrel-head, then fine. Don't force taxpayers or insurance payers to subsidize your "freedom" to cause yourself more injury and driving up the already high hospital bills even more.
....Congress Shall Have The Power to make cars better.......
The constitution does give Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. Most cars travel interstate. So Congress does have the right to make a law that says the cops can push a button to remotely stop your car. The feds mandate all sorts of design "features" of cars already. What's one more?
.....All Windows antivirus software works like this.......
Why do all files need to be scanned for viruses? I am not an expert on the innards of OS, including Macs. If I remember correctly, Macs have a process launcher I believe is called launchd. In Windows, it seems there should be something equivalent. Files containing viruses don't do anything until they attempt to execute any code therein. At that point the launcher can call the antivirus program telling it, hey here is a program that I've never seen before, please tell me if I should let it run. In Macs the launcher asks the user if it is OK to start up code it has never seen before. If a KNOWLEDGEABLE user sees such a message, they can click NO, and the unknown code cannot execute. Users who routinely click OK would likely get a bug if that's what the unknown code was. Scanning files manually for viruses could still be done. It would help identify malware and quarantine it.
(....Also, you can run it from a USB key......)
Not only run an application, but boot the whole computer. I have a small portable 80G firewire drive. I can boot most any G5 or G4 PPC Mac with it. If the firmware of any Mac isn't password protected, holding down the option key brings up a screen where boot-able drives can be selected from which the computer will boot. For Intel based Mac this also works if the portable drive has the Intel version of OSX. If the Intel disk also has Windows and Linux installed, those system will also boot on any Intel processor Mac. For me, that makes a powerful troubleshooting tool for sick Macs. I have booted and resurrected a number of un-bootable Macs this way, backed up the frantic users data and made the Mac boot normally again.
A HD based iPod will do this also, but the tiny little drive doesn't stand up too well for prolonged use in this way.
....it's ok for me to get them from wherever and still count as a life form, isn't it?.....
Of course there is no doubt that you are a natural life form. However for someone to create life, means to make such artificial life entirely from non-living parts. Humans make computers from scratch. Some mine and refine elements, others make chips and so forth. Finally Dell comes along and makes computers. They don't really create computers, but only assemble them. In the same way, Venter has assembled some viruses out of parts that were previously made by some living thing, but he did not create life.
(.....Regarding all your other steps I don't see why a robot reproducing couldn't use whatever materials are available for him/her/it,.....)
Such a robot would have to have all the correct materials, but more importantly, it would need to be programmed. Where would the first robot get its program, telling it how to reproduce itself?
By photosynthesis, plants produce hydrocarbons from bare elements. This is a complex process science still doesn't understand and has not yet copied. By this process living systems get all the bits and pieces they need for operation and reproduction. Anyone wanting to create artificial "robotic" life would have to build up a similar supply chain and write all the software to run everything.
......School textbooks are not written by or for scientists......
So then they indoctrinate students about the beliefs of the textbook writers and masquerade as science.
(....It took 50 years for others to test and confirm his observations....)
No it did not take long for someone else to look out at Jupiter and its moons to be able to observe what Roemer reported.
(...to model observed natural phenomena.....)
So we're only having a semantic problem here about the meaning of the word law, as applied to natural phenomena we observe. The point is that we have built our technological society upon the observed fact that these things, you call natural phenomena and I call the laws of nature, are predictable and consistent.
(....We can freely change the laws.....)
Given your interpretation of the word law, how about if I substitute "observed natural phenomena"? Can we change these observations about how gravity works everyday on earth. Shall we relabel what is commonly known as "Ohms Law" of electricity as "Ohm's phenomena or observation of electricity"?
(....These are localised phenomena, not universal ones...)
Gravity is still largely a mystery in terms of where it comes from. We observe that matter gives rise to gravity and this, as well as the other forces can be observed to be uniformly at work in the entire observable universe.....not fundamental aspects of reality that it "obeys"....)
These fundamental aspects of reality show there is a consistency and order which we have no power to change. These aspects of reality were first called theories. After much more observation and experimentation, which is at the core of real science, no exceptions to these phenomena were observed and the name was changed from theory to law, a law of nature.
(.....Where is your evidence for claiming that the entire universe obeys moral laws?......)
I have never stated that the entire universe obeys moral laws. Only man was given that choice, because man was given the ability to love, which is a choice of the will of man. The rest of creation MUST obey the laws, or in your wording, it doesn't violate the nature of reality.
(.....know or care about the horrific suffering......)
The existence of pain and suffering in our world seems to cry out against the idea that there is a God who could by any measure be described as "good". There are some satisfying answers, to me at least, but this forum on technology and science is not the place to discuss that. Even so, God and science are not incompatible.
.....Maybe you should go read about what Venter is doing.....
What does it matter what he's doing? He is applying his presumed intelligence to the problem of coming up with artificial life. He is using components from living factories, not from the bare bones elements. That means he is not creating life at all. All he is doing is taking existing life products and re-arraging them. It's like taking a stock car and turning it into a racing machine. He's still using nuts, bolts, pipes and metals etc made by other humans. To create life is not the same as making a copy. If God had copyrighted or patented DNA and all life, Venter could be charged with making a derivative work or patent infringement and be forced to pay royalties.
That depends on whether the antivirus utility merely adds itself to the existing ones or replaces an existing, vital one. Merely trashing that is fine in the former case, but can leave a dead system in the latter. By looking at the date it easily determined if a kext is part of the original set or was added later.
On Macs or other *NIX based systems any process running as root can scan files. A kext is not needed. The registry in Windows is a serious design flaw that causes a large amount of the grief that Windows users experience. It is the main reason why most Windows programs need an uninstaller. Also, because of the registry, malware can hide anywhere in a HD. In *NIX systems stuff needs to be in certain limited locations and thus more easily found and eradicated.
.....Belief is something for religios: scientists _accept_ whatever provides the best explanation.......
You show me ONE school text book that doesn't state somewhere therein where faith words such as "accept" or "assume" are not used in connection with conjectures about origins. Speaking of light, for centuries, scientists accepted the idea that light took no time at all, that it was instantaneous. Olaf Roemer observed that this was not true. However, it took another 50 years for mainstream scientists to believe (accept) his observations.
(....The laws are made by man to model observed natural phenomena,.....)
So the consistent laws of gravity, inertia, electricity etc. are all man made? So then, why don't we change them? Reverse gravity whenever a car goes uphill and re-instate it when going downhill. We observe that nature seems to work in a consistent way. It's not capricious. Water doesn't run uphill one day and the sun doesn't rise in the north one day and in the west the next. It's this very predictability of a universe we did not make, but are mostly spectators in, that makes science and technology possible. We quantify the consistent behavior we observe, but did not create. On the basis of these units and laws we are able to make certain predictions and build useful devices.
(.....How does man disobey these "laws of physics" that you claim all of nature must obey?......)
First I did not state laws of "physics" that man fails to obey. I merely wrote His, that it is all God's laws. You MUST obey His laws of physics, but God honors us by giving us a choice about HIS moral laws based on love. You may choose to tell the truth or to be a liar. If you lie to someone, you demonstrate you have no love for them. Thou shalt not steal. If you do steal from somebody, which you CAN do, you prove that you have no love for them. Anyone who violates anyone of God's moral laws commits cosmic rebellion and treason against the rightful government of God over His creation. He wants us to deal with each other out of love, not coercion.
.....I hear some scientists believe that stars, planets, and even galaxies form through naturally-occurring processes......
Scientists believe this, but they don't KNOW it. All of nature obeys the LAWS of physics. All laws, natural or man given, originate in a mind. Nobody has ever shown that any of the laws of nature arise from within our time-space-matter-energy universe. God gave his laws and the entire universe except for man obeys them. So yes, you're right, God did it. Is that so hard to believe?
......It is perhaps worth pointing out that no antivirus could every be uninstalled without an uninstaller......
For Mac users, uninstallers do exist for the very few programs that do install stuff in the OS. An antivirus program would likely be in that category. These are merely a convenience, because unlike Windows, unless you're talking root-kit, malware doesn't have as many places to hide. Malware doesn't do much good if it can't be made to start running automatically either at boot time or when a user logs in. There is a general system startup folder for boot time and each user has one in their user space. The Apple Installer program also keeps a log of where stuff was put in the system. Dragging those itms to the trash gets rid of them.
The system stuff in Macs is much better protected. We don't give the name of the admin account nor the password to any user around here. Even at home, only one person (Dad) knows the admin password. All users run as standard users and are not able to install any software other than in user space. If anyone wants to install downloaded software that wants to write to the system, the administrator must do it. No Mac program requires admin rights in order to RUN, even games. Sadly that is STILL not the case for many Windows programs out there.
It's so much easier to produce and install malware in Windows, and there are so many more Windows systems out there. The bottom line is: In practice, Macs are very safe without the burden and expense of AV type software. The OS and any other programs that use CPU cycles without adding to the productivity of the user is like the overhead of a business.
......even if humans are able to create life, that doesn't mean that whatever method we use is the one originally used for life on Earth........
True, but it would be powerful evidence that a mind, ie. intelligence was needed to create this artificial life. If intelligent humans did manage to create life from the elements, it would be highly unreasonable to assume, as many do today, that natural life came about by any means that did not also require intelligent input.
....Many users would just give up and not replace the product......
I know users who gave their Windows computer, which they used to use for doing real work to their kids for games. Then they got themselves a Mac, which doesn't put its users through all that trauma.
.......Our pc tech here is constantly moaning about a machine that's got malware that has planted itself in the registry of every user on the system.....
That's why its better in the long run to get a computer that doesn't need a registry and is more secure by design. For computer smart folks that are also poor, Linux is the way to go. For those who don't know beans about computers, they can pay time for some education or money for a Mac. Macs even run Windows nicely. The windows part may not need a network connection. Since HD space is cheap a clean copy of the virtual Windows machine can replace and infected one in seconds.
.....The Uninstalls shipped with the software should work,.....
On Mac OSX, most programs don't come with an uninstaller, since that is unnecessary. Just drag the program to the trash... empty trash... there, it's uninstalled. Why can't Windows have it that easy? Also, other than a few experimental proofs of concept there STILL isn't a virus in the wild, that infects Macs. Now let the market share replies begin.
..... IBM and Dell don't mine copper or silicon.....
No, of course they don't. There is however a long complex "food chain" of other manufacturers (organisms) that do in fact supply these companies with the subassemblies that are then made into computers. Mankind as a whole has learned to take the elements of the earth and used them to build computers and a lot of other things. Life as a whole does this also, only on a much higher, complex level. Life is able to make computers that make computers, without an external factory. Everybody will readily admit that the computers that Dell turns out are designed. However, there are many who are unwilling to admit that the living computers are likely also designed.
.....whereas in fact the assembly of this virus was from synthesized components........
So were these components they used the bare bones elements, (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen etc.) or did the bits and pieces come from something that had once been alive? From the article, it appears that these input components were pre-assembled from substances that had once been part of something that was alive once. All petro-chemicals are in that category. That's why we call them fossil fuels. Fossils are the remains of living creatures. Complex molecules made by living things are routinely broken down into simpler ones. My original assertion still holds, life can only come from life. To truly create life, not merely reassemble it, all parts have to be made without utilizing anything that was part of or produced by a living creature.
.....is good at shaping that titanium to build more robots,......
That's fine, but you'd first have to build one or more robots that could take the basic elements and make parts that other robots could use. You'd have to build what could be called a robotic food chain. The toughest one to make would be the very first robot that could make useful parts for other robots out of the bare elements.
You did not read what I wrote. What these guys did was like building a computer from pre-made parts, like a disk drive, motherboard, memory chips, CPU etc. That isn't building a computer from scratch. It's only an assembly job.
To make a computer from scratch you mine the silicon, aluminum and copper ores etc. and then you build the computer. You also have to write ALL its software. You may not enlist the help of Bill, Steve or Linus.
.....by modifying the software (genes) as opposed to the hardware.......
Except that in living systems, the hardware is built by and depends on the software. It requires enzymes to construct DNA, which carries instruction code how to make enzymes. So which came first, the enzymes that make the code carrier DNA possible, or the DNA which carries the instructions for making enzymes?
It's like building a computer that makes computers with disk drives. The computer itself has a disk drive that contains the instructions needed to make computers and disk drives. Someone external to the loop, has to first build a disk drive and a computer, load the drive with the instructions on how to build computers with a disk drive and then boot the computer. Once the first computer is running, it can make more computers with disk drives, which can repeat this forever.
.....Creationists and other voodoo merchants will surely seize on this as an example of scientists claiming far too much,.......
More likely as an example of far too little. If scientists would succeed in making life from non-life, it would show that it takes a lot of thought, not some random processes over time. It would show that it took even more thought to invent life from scratch, rather than just figuring out how to copy that which already exists. It would greatly strengthen the theory of intelligent design. Making a copy of a car or other machine is much easier if a working model is at hand. Even though we have a working model of life, nobody has managed to make even a rudimentary copy, in spite of the application of a considerable amount of human intelligence. Yet these same so called intelligent people insist that no intelligence was needed to make the original working model.
.....but it's like saying people who pared down Windows installations by removing non-essential files are "creating" new operating systems......
No, it's like taking some Linux and Max OSX files and installing those in Windows. If done right, it might produce a Windows with some of the best characteristics of those OS. Immunity to worms and spyware might be one of these. However there may also be some other effects, such as certain applications crashing or doing strange things.
....... it would be a good time to implement some fundamental changes in how we approach and create technology.......
It has to go much deeper than mere technology. God had put in writing, centuries ago, where the problem lies:
Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things , and desperately wicked: who can know it?
He wrote this in the context of man's desire to be independent of his Creator. Only a change of a person's core attitude toward God and then toward the other creations of God, especially other people, will ever change this. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge and respect the Creator, cannot possibly be too concerned about Hid creation, including other humans. It's not the tools, but the one who wields the tools that needs to change at the most fundamental level.
There is no fundamental difference, except quantity, between someone who kills a fellow human being with a club and someone pushing a button, releasing some WMD that kills millions. The person using the club or button may have been "ordered" to do this by someone else, who is just as guilty.
The sad, terrifying prediction of Jesus is that this attitude of rebellion in humanity will not change until mankind has brought itself and other life forms to the brink of extinction. God will be forced to intervene at the last possible moment, to prevent His world from being made into a desolate, uninhabitable waste by us.
......Looks like they're at the beginning stages though.......
Actually, nobody is anywhere near making even a moderately complex protein, let alone a living cell, from totally non-living material. We can take complex molecules, produced by something that was at one point alive and assemble these into other compounds. So far, life only comes from life. Nobody has ever even come remotely close to demonstrating otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
.......we see them used as a quick effortless way to subdue someone for whatever reason,.......
So? In earlier times they used the more "humane" method of a billy club to subdue violent suspects. If a cop tells you that you're under arrest, go quietly and no physical means are needed. Then keep your mouth shut and ask for a lawyer.
.....we see them used as a quick effortless way to subdue someone for whatever reason,.....
So if a cop wants to arrest you and you resist, would you prefer to be bonked in the head with a Billy Club? That's what they used to do, before Tasers existed.
.....when I'm perfectly free to drive a motorcycle.....
In many states, not without a helmet! If you would be OK with just scraping an injured motorcyclist not wearing a helmet off the pavement and denying them medical care unless they pay for it, cash on the barrel-head, then fine. Don't force taxpayers or insurance payers to subsidize your "freedom" to cause yourself more injury and driving up the already high hospital bills even more.
....Congress Shall Have The Power to make cars better.......
The constitution does give Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. Most cars travel interstate. So Congress does have the right to make a law that says the cops can push a button to remotely stop your car. The feds mandate all sorts of design "features" of cars already. What's one more?
.....All Windows antivirus software works like this.......
Why do all files need to be scanned for viruses? I am not an expert on the innards of OS, including Macs. If I remember correctly, Macs have a process launcher I believe is called launchd. In Windows, it seems there should be something equivalent. Files containing viruses don't do anything until they attempt to execute any code therein. At that point the launcher can call the antivirus program telling it, hey here is a program that I've never seen before, please tell me if I should let it run. In Macs the launcher asks the user if it is OK to start up code it has never seen before. If a KNOWLEDGEABLE user sees such a message, they can click NO, and the unknown code cannot execute. Users who routinely click OK would likely get a bug if that's what the unknown code was. Scanning files manually for viruses could still be done. It would help identify malware and quarantine it.
(....Also, you can run it from a USB key......)
Not only run an application, but boot the whole computer. I have a small portable 80G firewire drive. I can boot most any G5 or G4 PPC Mac with it. If the firmware of any Mac isn't password protected, holding down the option key brings up a screen where boot-able drives can be selected from which the computer will boot. For Intel based Mac this also works if the portable drive has the Intel version of OSX. If the Intel disk also has Windows and Linux installed, those system will also boot on any Intel processor Mac. For me, that makes a powerful troubleshooting tool for sick Macs. I have booted and resurrected a number of un-bootable Macs this way, backed up the frantic users data and made the Mac boot normally again.
A HD based iPod will do this also, but the tiny little drive doesn't stand up too well for prolonged use in this way.
....it's ok for me to get them from wherever and still count as a life form, isn't it?.....
Of course there is no doubt that you are a natural life form. However for someone to create life, means to make such artificial life entirely from non-living parts. Humans make computers from scratch. Some mine and refine elements, others make chips and so forth. Finally Dell comes along and makes computers. They don't really create computers, but only assemble them. In the same way, Venter has assembled some viruses out of parts that were previously made by some living thing, but he did not create life.
(.....Regarding all your other steps I don't see why a robot reproducing couldn't use whatever materials are available for him/her/it,.....)
Such a robot would have to have all the correct materials, but more importantly, it would need to be programmed. Where would the first robot get its program, telling it how to reproduce itself?
By photosynthesis, plants produce hydrocarbons from bare elements. This is a complex process science still doesn't understand and has not yet copied. By this process living systems get all the bits and pieces they need for operation and reproduction. Anyone wanting to create artificial "robotic" life would have to build up a similar supply chain and write all the software to run everything.
......School textbooks are not written by or for scientists......
....not fundamental aspects of reality that it "obeys"....)
So then they indoctrinate students about the beliefs of the textbook writers and masquerade as science.
(....It took 50 years for others to test and confirm his observations....)
No it did not take long for someone else to look out at Jupiter and its moons to be able to observe what Roemer reported.
(...to model observed natural phenomena.....)
So we're only having a semantic problem here about the meaning of the word law, as applied to natural phenomena we observe. The point is that we have built our technological society upon the observed fact that these things, you call natural phenomena and I call the laws of nature, are predictable and consistent.
(....We can freely change the laws.....)
Given your interpretation of the word law, how about if I substitute "observed natural phenomena"? Can we change these observations about how gravity works everyday on earth. Shall we relabel what is commonly known as "Ohms Law" of electricity as "Ohm's phenomena or observation of electricity"?
(....These are localised phenomena, not universal ones...)
Gravity is still largely a mystery in terms of where it comes from. We observe that matter gives rise to gravity and this, as well as the other forces can be observed to be uniformly at work in the entire observable universe.
These fundamental aspects of reality show there is a consistency and order which we have no power to change. These aspects of reality were first called theories. After much more observation and experimentation, which is at the core of real science, no exceptions to these phenomena were observed and the name was changed from theory to law, a law of nature.
(.....Where is your evidence for claiming that the entire universe obeys moral laws?......)
I have never stated that the entire universe obeys moral laws. Only man was given that choice, because man was given the ability to love, which is a choice of the will of man. The rest of creation MUST obey the laws, or in your wording, it doesn't violate the nature of reality.
(.....know or care about the horrific suffering......)
The existence of pain and suffering in our world seems to cry out against the idea that there is a God who could by any measure be described as "good". There are some satisfying answers, to me at least, but this forum on technology and science is not the place to discuss that. Even so, God and science are not incompatible.
.....Maybe you should go read about what Venter is doing.....
What does it matter what he's doing? He is applying his presumed intelligence to the problem of coming up with artificial life. He is using components from living factories, not from the bare bones elements. That means he is not creating life at all. All he is doing is taking existing life products and re-arraging them. It's like taking a stock car and turning it into a racing machine. He's still using nuts, bolts, pipes and metals etc made by other humans. To create life is not the same as making a copy. If God had copyrighted or patented DNA and all life, Venter could be charged with making a derivative work or patent infringement and be forced to pay royalties.
......What about kexts?....
That depends on whether the antivirus utility merely adds itself to the existing ones or replaces an existing, vital one. Merely trashing that is fine in the former case, but can leave a dead system in the latter. By looking at the date it easily determined if a kext is part of the original set or was added later.
On Macs or other *NIX based systems any process running as root can scan files. A kext is not needed. The registry in Windows is a serious design flaw that causes a large amount of the grief that Windows users experience. It is the main reason why most Windows programs need an uninstaller. Also, because of the registry, malware can hide anywhere in a HD. In *NIX systems stuff needs to be in certain limited locations and thus more easily found and eradicated.
.....Belief is something for religios: scientists _accept_ whatever provides the best explanation.......
You show me ONE school text book that doesn't state somewhere therein where faith words such as "accept" or "assume" are not used in connection with conjectures about origins. Speaking of light, for centuries, scientists accepted the idea that light took no time at all, that it was instantaneous. Olaf Roemer observed that this was not true. However, it took another 50 years for mainstream scientists to believe (accept) his observations.
(....The laws are made by man to model observed natural phenomena,.....)
So the consistent laws of gravity, inertia, electricity etc. are all man made? So then, why don't we change them? Reverse gravity whenever a car goes uphill and re-instate it when going downhill. We observe that nature seems to work in a consistent way. It's not capricious. Water doesn't run uphill one day and the sun doesn't rise in the north one day and in the west the next. It's this very predictability of a universe we did not make, but are mostly spectators in, that makes science and technology possible. We quantify the consistent behavior we observe, but did not create. On the basis of these units and laws we are able to make certain predictions and build useful devices.
(.....How does man disobey these "laws of physics" that you claim all of nature must obey?......)
First I did not state laws of "physics" that man fails to obey. I merely wrote His, that it is all God's laws. You MUST obey His laws of physics, but God honors us by giving us a choice about HIS moral laws based on love. You may choose to tell the truth or to be a liar. If you lie to someone, you demonstrate you have no love for them. Thou shalt not steal. If you do steal from somebody, which you CAN do, you prove that you have no love for them. Anyone who violates anyone of God's moral laws commits cosmic rebellion and treason against the rightful government of God over His creation. He wants us to deal with each other out of love, not coercion.
.....I hear some scientists believe that stars, planets, and even galaxies form through naturally-occurring processes......
Scientists believe this, but they don't KNOW it. All of nature obeys the LAWS of physics. All laws, natural or man given, originate in a mind. Nobody has ever shown that any of the laws of nature arise from within our time-space-matter-energy universe. God gave his laws and the entire universe except for man obeys them. So yes, you're right, God did it. Is that so hard to believe?
......It is perhaps worth pointing out that no antivirus could every be uninstalled without an uninstaller......
For Mac users, uninstallers do exist for the very few programs that do install stuff in the OS. An antivirus program would likely be in that category. These are merely a convenience, because unlike Windows, unless you're talking root-kit, malware doesn't have as many places to hide. Malware doesn't do much good if it can't be made to start running automatically either at boot time or when a user logs in. There is a general system startup folder for boot time and each user has one in their user space. The Apple Installer program also keeps a log of where stuff was put in the system. Dragging those itms to the trash gets rid of them.
The system stuff in Macs is much better protected. We don't give the name of the admin account nor the password to any user around here. Even at home, only one person (Dad) knows the admin password. All users run as standard users and are not able to install any software other than in user space. If anyone wants to install downloaded software that wants to write to the system, the administrator must do it. No Mac program requires admin rights in order to RUN, even games. Sadly that is STILL not the case for many Windows programs out there.
It's so much easier to produce and install malware in Windows, and there are so many more Windows systems out there. The bottom line is: In practice, Macs are very safe without the burden and expense of AV type software. The OS and any other programs that use CPU cycles without adding to the productivity of the user is like the overhead of a business.
......even if humans are able to create life, that doesn't mean that whatever method we use is the one originally used for life on Earth........
True, but it would be powerful evidence that a mind, ie. intelligence was needed to create this artificial life. If intelligent humans did manage to create life from the elements, it would be highly unreasonable to assume, as many do today, that natural life came about by any means that did not also require intelligent input.
....Many users would just give up and not replace the product......
I know users who gave their Windows computer, which they used to use for doing real work to their kids for games. Then they got themselves a Mac, which doesn't put its users through all that trauma.
.......Our pc tech here is constantly moaning about a machine that's got malware that has planted itself in the registry of every user on the system.....
That's why its better in the long run to get a computer that doesn't need a registry and is more secure by design. For computer smart folks that are also poor, Linux is the way to go. For those who don't know beans about computers, they can pay time for some education or money for a Mac. Macs even run Windows nicely. The windows part may not need a network connection. Since HD space is cheap a clean copy of the virtual Windows machine can replace and infected one in seconds.
.....The Uninstalls shipped with the software should work,.....
... empty trash ... there, it's uninstalled. Why can't Windows have it that easy? Also, other than a few experimental proofs of concept there STILL isn't a virus in the wild, that infects Macs. Now let the market share replies begin.
On Mac OSX, most programs don't come with an uninstaller, since that is unnecessary. Just drag the program to the trash
..... IBM and Dell don't mine copper or silicon.....
No, of course they don't. There is however a long complex "food chain" of other manufacturers (organisms) that do in fact supply these companies with the subassemblies that are then made into computers. Mankind as a whole has learned to take the elements of the earth and used them to build computers and a lot of other things. Life as a whole does this also, only on a much higher, complex level. Life is able to make computers that make computers, without an external factory. Everybody will readily admit that the computers that Dell turns out are designed. However, there are many who are unwilling to admit that the living computers are likely also designed.
.....whereas in fact the assembly of this virus was from synthesized components........
So were these components they used the bare bones elements, (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen etc.) or did the bits and pieces come from something that had once been alive? From the article, it appears that these input components were pre-assembled from substances that had once been part of something that was alive once. All petro-chemicals are in that category. That's why we call them fossil fuels. Fossils are the remains of living creatures. Complex molecules made by living things are routinely broken down into simpler ones. My original assertion still holds, life can only come from life. To truly create life, not merely reassemble it, all parts have to be made without utilizing anything that was part of or produced by a living creature.
.....is good at shaping that titanium to build more robots,......
That's fine, but you'd first have to build one or more robots that could take the basic elements and make parts that other robots could use. You'd have to build what could be called a robotic food chain. The toughest one to make would be the very first robot that could make useful parts for other robots out of the bare elements.
....Sorry to break your bubble.....
You did not read what I wrote. What these guys did was like building a computer from pre-made parts, like a disk drive, motherboard, memory chips, CPU etc. That isn't building a computer from scratch. It's only an assembly job.
To make a computer from scratch you mine the silicon, aluminum and copper ores etc. and then you build the computer. You also have to write ALL its software. You may not enlist the help of Bill, Steve or Linus.
.....by modifying the software (genes) as opposed to the hardware.......
Except that in living systems, the hardware is built by and depends on the software. It requires enzymes to construct DNA, which carries instruction code how to make enzymes. So which came first, the enzymes that make the code carrier DNA possible, or the DNA which carries the instructions for making enzymes?
It's like building a computer that makes computers with disk drives. The computer itself has a disk drive that contains the instructions needed to make computers and disk drives. Someone external to the loop, has to first build a disk drive and a computer, load the drive with the instructions on how to build computers with a disk drive and then boot the computer. Once the first computer is running, it can make more computers with disk drives, which can repeat this forever.
.....Creationists and other voodoo merchants will surely seize on this as an example of scientists claiming far too much,.......
More likely as an example of far too little. If scientists would succeed in making life from non-life, it would show that it takes a lot of thought, not some random processes over time. It would show that it took even more thought to invent life from scratch, rather than just figuring out how to copy that which already exists. It would greatly strengthen the theory of intelligent design. Making a copy of a car or other machine is much easier if a working model is at hand. Even though we have a working model of life, nobody has managed to make even a rudimentary copy, in spite of the application of a considerable amount of human intelligence. Yet these same so called intelligent people insist that no intelligence was needed to make the original working model.
.....but it's like saying people who pared down Windows installations by removing non-essential files are "creating" new operating systems......
No, it's like taking some Linux and Max OSX files and installing those in Windows. If done right, it might produce a Windows with some of the best characteristics of those OS. Immunity to worms and spyware might be one of these. However there may also be some other effects, such as certain applications crashing or doing strange things.
....... it would be a good time to implement some fundamental changes in how we approach and create technology.......
It has to go much deeper than mere technology. God had put in writing, centuries ago, where the problem lies:
Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things , and desperately wicked: who can know it?
He wrote this in the context of man's desire to be independent of his Creator. Only a change of a person's core attitude toward God and then toward the other creations of God, especially other people, will ever change this. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge and respect the Creator, cannot possibly be too concerned about Hid creation, including other humans. It's not the tools, but the one who wields the tools that needs to change at the most fundamental level.
There is no fundamental difference, except quantity, between someone who kills a fellow human being with a club and someone pushing a button, releasing some WMD that kills millions. The person using the club or button may have been "ordered" to do this by someone else, who is just as guilty.
The sad, terrifying prediction of Jesus is that this attitude of rebellion in humanity will not change until mankind has brought itself and other life forms to the brink of extinction. God will be forced to intervene at the last possible moment, to prevent His world from being made into a desolate, uninhabitable waste by us.
......Looks like they're at the beginning stages though.......
Actually, nobody is anywhere near making even a moderately complex protein, let alone a living cell, from totally non-living material. We can take complex molecules, produced by something that was at one point alive and assemble these into other compounds. So far, life only comes from life. Nobody has ever even come remotely close to demonstrating otherwise.