The only problem is, that there are more browsers than "x" and "y", if in this example you use browser "z" you will probably not be able to use the site.
I think it is impossible for whoever should enforce this restriction to check on everybodies age or whatever restrictions one can think of. Besides, if they could do that, they would need far more information about you than they can ever get over the net. This alternative is far more intrusive than the original idea.
I don't think you are the person to judge on someone's openmindedness. I do respect your faith ( and the faith of any Muslim/Budist/Hindu etc.), allthough I do not share it, but you are just as closed minded as you say your oponents are. As long as there is no hard evidence on any of these theories (evolution or creationism) they should be able to coexist. BTW. The bible, which you seem to see as hard evidence, has been tempered with by the Vatican since the Middle ages, and especially the OT has been passed over orally for many generations before it was ever written down. I don't think any scientist could take it as evidence on it's own.
Come on, where would society be today if everything we did should have a immidiate purpose. The purpose of science is, in my view, to enlarge our knowledge, and thus creating a kind of `library' for the clever people of the future to use. They can figure out if the information we gather today is usefull or not.
Oh please, As if there are not enough holy wars in this world. Please talk about CONTENT not NAME. Maybe someone should come up with a term both ESR and RMS are happy with.
The modern 747 are still just a body with a wing on each side, so the basic idea is the same, just like the basic idea of UNIX is still the same as in the 70ies. BTW: This doen't mean I believe the basic idea of either planes or UNIX is bad.
As far as I can see, onbody claims anything to be ``Open Source Compliant''. The author just says `... the rumor is that it will be Open Source compliant...' without making his own statements. I can see no problem with that.
The so called ``French paradox'' (French people drinking lots of wine, eating lots of fat) seems to have something to do with the kind of fat they consume. The French eat olive oil and fish, instead of `greasy pork products' and burgers. (Allthough they might overreact a bit on McDonalds restaurants, burning them down is a bit rude.) By the way, scientists discovered that two glasses of wine a day is indead healthy.
Why bother about keyboards. Deaf people's sign language, and in particular the `hand alphabeth' seem to me tailormade for this application. If the patern-recognition software is so good it can make out which key you think you are pressing, making out what sign your hand is making by the relative position of the fingertips should be just as easy.
But the person who did run the program (usually he/she own the hardware, or at least is in some way connected to the owner) has provided the program with some input data, which the computer changed into some brilliant output. So it seems to me that both the author of the software as well as its user should get part of the credid. That could create some interesting legal problems in the future.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are about to steal data, what do you care about the laws of physics ;)
The only problem is, that there are more browsers than "x" and "y", if in this example you use browser "z" you will probably not be able to use the site.
I think it is impossible for whoever should enforce this restriction to check on everybodies age or whatever restrictions one can think of. Besides, if they could do that, they would need far more information about you than they can ever get over the net.
This alternative is far more intrusive than the original idea.
Follow the link and you'll see.
Sadly sometimes the pessimists are right.
I don't think you are the person to judge on someone's openmindedness. I do respect your faith ( and the faith of any Muslim/Budist/Hindu etc.), allthough I do not share it, but you are just as closed minded as you say your oponents are.
As long as there is no hard evidence on any of these theories (evolution or creationism) they should be able to coexist.
BTW. The bible, which you seem to see as hard evidence, has been tempered with by the Vatican since the Middle ages, and especially the OT has been passed over orally for many generations before it was ever written down. I don't think any scientist could take it as evidence on it's own.
Come on, where would society be today if everything we did should have a immidiate purpose.
The purpose of science is, in my view, to enlarge our knowledge, and thus creating a kind of `library' for the clever people of the future to use. They can figure out if the information we gather today is usefull or not.
Oh please, As if there are not enough holy wars in this world. Please talk about CONTENT not NAME.
Maybe someone should come up with a term both ESR and RMS are happy with.
The modern 747 are still just a body with a wing on each side, so the basic idea is the same, just like the basic idea of UNIX is still the same as in the 70ies.
BTW: This doen't mean I believe the basic idea of either planes or UNIX is bad.
As far as I can see, onbody claims anything to be ``Open Source Compliant''. The author just says `... the rumor is that it will be Open Source compliant ...' without making his own statements. I can see no problem with that.
The so called ``French paradox'' (French people drinking lots of wine, eating lots of fat) seems to have something to do with the kind of fat they consume.
The French eat olive oil and fish, instead of `greasy pork products' and burgers. (Allthough they might overreact a bit on McDonalds restaurants, burning them down is a bit rude.)
By the way, scientists discovered that two glasses of wine a day is indead healthy.
If you read the link, it is called Roentgen because it can be used to view X-ray pictures on screen.
And for just $10.000 it can be yours! Now that's a bargain.
Why bother about keyboards. Deaf people's sign language, and in particular the `hand alphabeth' seem to me tailormade for this application.
If the patern-recognition software is so good it can make out which key you think you are pressing, making out what sign your hand is making by the relative position of the fingertips should be just as easy.
But the person who did run the program (usually he/she own the hardware, or at least is in some way connected to the owner) has provided the program with some input data, which the computer changed into some brilliant output.
So it seems to me that both the author of the software as well as its user should get part of the credid. That could create some interesting legal problems in the future.