Yes it is unreasonable. This is a limitation of our language natural laws is bad language for the way the things are.
Regular laws are often bent or broker, have to be enforced and can be changed. Natural laws have no enforcer because it does not even make sense to "enforce" them, gravity has no intentionality to even think about going up, electrons have no decision in their electrical charge, etc.
Its a language flaw we don't have a separate words for those concepts and I'm not interested waging semantic wars.
The problem is twofold:
Firstly is that a mind, like a clock, is complex, and, like a clock, serves a purpose. The idea that a God Mind "just is" is unacceptable, or if you accept it you could far more easily accept simpler stuff to "just be" including the laws of physics or, yes even just a clock, just there lying in the space.
The other problem is that of the disembodied mind, there is no such thing, the same way there is no sound in space because there is no air, even tough sound is much more than air that carries it sound can not be without a carrier.
Yes, of course, you can summon dualism and invent a category of invisible stuff to forge the mind of your god with it, god still need to create that stuff first and, again, he can't create it if he doesn't exists.
Again, its nonsense. a mind *is* a machine, how can you conceive of a mind that is not made of *parts* whether of ether or fermions, a mind is a *process* carried out by a machine, encoding knowledge as patters in some material and processing them into ideas using an already present set of laws.
An intelligence can not create stuff because intelligence is a behavior of stuff.
I read once that talking about a mind without a body is like talking about a wave without water. Surely the concept of wavefullness can be abstracted away, the same way that squareness, or sphereness can be abstracted from any specific square or sphere, so does the concept of mindfullness.
But the fact that these exists as abstract concepts does not mean that these concepts exist in the concrete world.
Saying that somewhere out there there is a mind without a body that created the universe is like saying somewhere out there there is a cube that is not made of anything teaching algebra on weekdays and singing with Elvis on Sundays.
A good rule of thumb is that when the possibility of something being true is infinitesimally less that the possibility of you hallucinating it to be true, that something essentially falls outside the "reasonable" universe.
Even so trying to explain the origin of the world due its complexity by summoning an even more complex "creator" is nonsense and we only do so because we anthropomorphize "fate" or "orderness" the same way we anthropomorphize everything.
Spoilsport! You are missing the point in investigation harassment! Also I don't get how a jury can assert the difference between a personal diary and a personal online profile.
Explain me, as you would explain an 8 year old kid, why two documents that are not supposed the be accessible to anyone but oneself and one's closest persons do not deserve the same level of respect?
Until you can produce a good explanation that a jury can understand I'll be busy harassing this girl...'s dad.
I suspect the reason they don't do this is because they *like* overselling, if their bill started to correlate to usage they'd have to either charge too much for p2p or charge "too low" for non p2p users, either way, I don't think they want people to even *think* about the price/service ratio.
So women would kick our ass at math, except those jobs are for losers a.k.a. men.
There is a saying that most gender studies are done by feminists and I'm starting to believe so too, I mean, is there anything we are better at? And can they answer in anything besides veiled and not so veiled insults?
Why stop at facebook? I want his house raided, maybe he keeps a personal diary hidden in his daughter's room, camouflaged with flower stickers, stenographically encoded in valley speak.
Not only they changed sharing a song from civil infraction to federal crime but raised it to the level of felony, like, you know, arson, murder, rape etc...
Finally the Evangelion units will be able to fight without an umbilical cord for longer than 5 minutes without risking pilot assimilation or precipitating the third impact!
Do we still use crime anymore? It seems to have been replaced by felony nowadays. I used to think felony was used for anything that was a national threat or heinous crimes, now clicking an ad is a felony, it seems felony now means contrary to big business.
Firstly, understand that "Available for Linux" does not mean "Available for Ubuntu 8.10" nor vice versa. Each distro is a different brand of OS, just like Mac users understand that they have to wait for the MacOS version of some software and the Windows users occasionally have to wait for a Windows port of some software Ubuntu users need to learn to wait for the Ubuntu version of whatever software they want, its not hard.
Yes, tar balls are an option, installing from source is also an option for Mac and Windows users but they wait, why can't you?
Yes, you don't get everything you could possibly get this way but neither Mac nor Windows user do, they wait and pray, why can't you?
This is why I insist we should push Ubuntu as a standard platform, the more Ubuntu users there are, the more likely is software writers will release a version specifically for Ubuntu, not just generic tar balls.
Second, and tied with the first, is that the Ubuntu version of a program is "blessed" for a good reason, it has been tested and checked for compatibility and reviewed for malicious code.
Yes this doesn't work for proprietary packages very well, but if OpenOffice3.0 isn't in the official repository you should trust them better than install your own tar ball.
Third, solutions like the one you ask for actually exist, Zero Install and Klick are distributed package management systems that even operate entirely in user space, installing a package is as easy as clicking an url.
Deb Packages that integrate nicely with apt can be downloaded independently from any source.
Autopackage is an even beefier version of the same.
The only reason you don't know about these options is that apt rules hard, and those who can't be bothered to package for apt don't bother with these tools either (in general, YMMV etc).
Congratulations in your FUD, why compare Apple's to the simple Gnome Application Installer right in the Applications menu when you can use the power user Synaptic inside System>Administration.
From the summary: "This book is about becoming conversant in the very basics, explained with an attempt to frame everything in terms of a woman's perspective."
Even if a libertarian approach would work it would set a bad precedent that says search engines can be blamed for the content they index, its imperative that this suit fails.
IMHO there should be a requirement to defend yourself from slander like in trespassing law.
If someone says something bad about you simply reply saying it isn't so, since the credibility of a fully named, established business is far beyond that of any anonymous poster the commentary gets nullified.
Filing suit when you have failed to make a reasonable attempt to protect your reputation is akin to suing for trespassing while failing to guard your territory.
To put it in another way, if filing suit is more expensive, for both the plaintiff an the public, than simply posting a reply in a BBS specially considering the Streisand effect. Then the suit should be deemed stupid* and be dismissed.
* I don't think that is a valid legal term, but if it isn't it should.
I cannot speak for Safari but as a Firefox user having the tabs on top of the toolbar or the location bar would be a bit too odd for several reasons.
Firstly, the location-bar is a toolbar widget, it can be dragged, replaced or removed from the toolbar, it is a conceptual sibling of the other toolbar widgets and inhabits the same "environment" so the location bar must acompany it's siblings in the toolbar.
Secondly, the toolbar is an application centric methaphor and can and often does provide tools that operate on all tabs, placing buttons to, for instance, save all tabs to del.icio.us inside one of the tabs is confusing at least.
But since Safari probably has no toolbar configurabilities or multi-tab skills I guess it could be made to work, but it doesn't seem very forward thinking to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes it is unreasonable. This is a limitation of our language natural laws is bad language for the way the things are.
Regular laws are often bent or broker, have to be enforced and can be changed. Natural laws have no enforcer because it does not even make sense to "enforce" them, gravity has no intentionality to even think about going up, electrons have no decision in their electrical charge, etc.
Its a language flaw we don't have a separate words for those concepts and I'm not interested waging semantic wars.
The problem is twofold:
Firstly is that a mind, like a clock, is complex, and, like a clock, serves a purpose. The idea that a God Mind "just is" is unacceptable, or if you accept it you could far more easily accept simpler stuff to "just be" including the laws of physics or, yes even just a clock, just there lying in the space.
The other problem is that of the disembodied mind, there is no such thing, the same way there is no sound in space because there is no air, even tough sound is much more than air that carries it sound can not be without a carrier.
Yes, of course, you can summon dualism and invent a category of invisible stuff to forge the mind of your god with it, god still need to create that stuff first and, again, he can't create it if he doesn't exists.
No the real question is, does it blend?
Again, its nonsense. a mind *is* a machine, how can you conceive of a mind that is not made of *parts* whether of ether or fermions, a mind is a *process* carried out by a machine, encoding knowledge as patters in some material and processing them into ideas using an already present set of laws.
An intelligence can not create stuff because intelligence is a behavior of stuff.
I read once that talking about a mind without a body is like talking about a wave without water. Surely the concept of wavefullness can be abstracted away, the same way that squareness, or sphereness can be abstracted from any specific square or sphere, so does the concept of mindfullness.
But the fact that these exists as abstract concepts does not mean that these concepts exist in the concrete world.
Saying that somewhere out there there is a mind without a body that created the universe is like saying somewhere out there there is a cube that is not made of anything teaching algebra on weekdays and singing with Elvis on Sundays.
Agnostic in theory Atheist in practice, that way.
A good rule of thumb is that when the possibility of something being true is infinitesimally less that the possibility of you hallucinating it to be true, that something essentially falls outside the "reasonable" universe.
Even so trying to explain the origin of the world due its complexity by summoning an even more complex "creator" is nonsense and we only do so because we anthropomorphize "fate" or "orderness" the same way we anthropomorphize everything.
Take an anger management course for your own sake.
The word you are looking for is "conflating".
"wouldn't need to raid his house"?
Spoilsport! You are missing the point in investigation harassment! Also I don't get how a jury can assert the difference between a personal diary and a personal online profile.
Explain me, as you would explain an 8 year old kid, why two documents that are not supposed the be accessible to anyone but oneself and one's closest persons do not deserve the same level of respect?
Until you can produce a good explanation that a jury can understand I'll be busy harassing this girl...'s dad.
It almost sounds lucky.
I suspect the reason they don't do this is because they *like* overselling, if their bill started to correlate to usage they'd have to either charge too much for p2p or charge "too low" for non p2p users, either way, I don't think they want people to even *think* about the price/service ratio.
I'm seeing the return of the sneaker-net already.
So women would kick our ass at math, except those jobs are for losers a.k.a. men.
There is a saying that most gender studies are done by feminists and I'm starting to believe so too, I mean, is there anything we are better at? And can they answer in anything besides veiled and not so veiled insults?
There is already an OSS platform for this, its called laconica, there is a public deployment on http://identi.ca/
Why stop at facebook? I want his house raided, maybe he keeps a personal diary hidden in his daughter's room, camouflaged with flower stickers, stenographically encoded in valley speak.
Not only they changed sharing a song from civil infraction to federal crime but raised it to the level of felony, like, you know, arson, murder, rape etc...
We still have 6 years left.
Finally the Evangelion units will be able to fight without an umbilical cord for longer than 5 minutes without risking pilot assimilation or precipitating the third impact!
But they *don't* want to block ads, they just want them to be well behaved, its extensive tracking what's getting on their nerves.
Do we still use crime anymore? It seems to have been replaced by felony nowadays. I used to think felony was used for anything that was a national threat or heinous crimes, now clicking an ad is a felony, it seems felony now means contrary to big business.
Because Adbuster is only against *evil* ads. e.g.
popup, popunder, flash, loud, javascript heavy, annoying animations, privacy invasions, etc.
Firstly, understand that "Available for Linux" does not mean "Available for Ubuntu 8.10" nor vice versa. Each distro is a different brand of OS, just like Mac users understand that they have to wait for the MacOS version of some software and the Windows users occasionally have to wait for a Windows port of some software Ubuntu users need to learn to wait for the Ubuntu version of whatever software they want, its not hard.
Yes, tar balls are an option, installing from source is also an option for Mac and Windows users but they wait, why can't you?
Yes, you don't get everything you could possibly get this way but neither Mac nor Windows user do, they wait and pray, why can't you?
This is why I insist we should push Ubuntu as a standard platform, the more Ubuntu users there are, the more likely is software writers will release a version specifically for Ubuntu, not just generic tar balls.
Second, and tied with the first, is that the Ubuntu version of a program is "blessed" for a good reason, it has been tested and checked for compatibility and reviewed for malicious code.
Yes this doesn't work for proprietary packages very well, but if OpenOffice3.0 isn't in the official repository you should trust them better than install your own tar ball.
Third, solutions like the one you ask for actually exist, Zero Install and Klick are distributed package management systems that even operate entirely in user space, installing a package is as easy as clicking an url.
Deb Packages that integrate nicely with apt can be downloaded independently from any source.
Autopackage is an even beefier version of the same.
The only reason you don't know about these options is that apt rules hard, and those who can't be bothered to package for apt don't bother with these tools either (in general, YMMV etc).
Congratulations in your FUD, why compare Apple's to the simple Gnome Application Installer right in the Applications menu when you can use the power user Synaptic inside System>Administration.
From the summary: "This book is about becoming conversant in the very basics, explained with an attempt to frame everything in terms of a woman's perspective."
IMHO this book is not about education but appearances. You should not pretend to look like some you aren't for reasons too cliché to enumerate.
Even if a libertarian approach would work it would set a bad precedent that says search engines can be blamed for the content they index, its imperative that this suit fails.
IMHO there should be a requirement to defend yourself from slander like in trespassing law.
If someone says something bad about you simply reply saying it isn't so, since the credibility of a fully named, established business is far beyond that of any anonymous poster the commentary gets nullified.
Filing suit when you have failed to make a reasonable attempt to protect your reputation is akin to suing for trespassing while failing to guard your territory.
To put it in another way, if filing suit is more expensive, for both the plaintiff an the public, than simply posting a reply in a BBS specially considering the Streisand effect. Then the suit should be deemed stupid* and be dismissed.
* I don't think that is a valid legal term, but if it isn't it should.
And make lil Foxkeh cry
I cannot speak for Safari but as a Firefox user having the tabs on top of the toolbar or the location bar would be a bit too odd for several reasons.
Firstly, the location-bar is a toolbar widget, it can be dragged, replaced or removed from the toolbar, it is a conceptual sibling of the other toolbar widgets and inhabits the same "environment" so the location bar must acompany it's siblings in the toolbar.
Secondly, the toolbar is an application centric methaphor and can and often does provide tools that operate on all tabs, placing buttons to, for instance, save all tabs to del.icio.us inside one of the tabs is confusing at least.
But since Safari probably has no toolbar configurabilities or multi-tab skills I guess it could be made to work, but it doesn't seem very forward thinking to me.