An inability to predict does not mean that the apparent randomness is real. Just because we can't observe accurately all the conditions at present does not mean they are necessarily unpredictable. Things appear random but may not actually be.
I don't really want to go down this road too far, but I'll inject my thoughts. In an atheistic world view the question of free will and determinism is potentially unknowable. If however you adopt certain other positions regarding the state of reality you can easily, and consistently arrive at determinism within an atheistic world view. Within a theistic framework the issue also comes back to presuppositions. As a Christian I presuppose that God exists and that He has chosen to reveal Himself through the Bible. From there I arrive at another presupposition: that God is absolutely and immutably sovereign over creation. Because of this I then arrive at the conclusion that all things through orderly progression or sovereign decree occur as God chooses them to: theistic determinism.
Now on the practical side of this: choice appears to be real. I appear, based on experience, to actually make decisions. But in actuality, based on my presuppositions and conclusions, my choices are inescapably bound. Now this isn't fatalism because I don't believe the decisions which are made nor the causes or effects are without meaning. But the idea of "free will" in any libertarian philosophical notion of it is off the table in my mind. Also, there's a tension in my theology that also holds humans morally responsible for their actions, even if they are bound by God's sovereign choices. We make decisions, no argument there; however, those decisions are in no sense "free" as I see it.
The human will exists, but in my estimation it is bound and not free.
Atheists tend to have naturalistic views and that should lead them toward determinism pretty easily. If the universe is governed by immutable laws/forces then there is nothing truly random that occurs and no room for "choice" as conceived of by any kind of "free will" concept. It's somewhat interesting that consistent naturalism leads to a very similar view of "choice" as does consistent sovereign theism: determinism.
I sure as heck wouldn't endorse free will, being a Reformed Baptist, and neither would most of my fellow seminarians. Interestingly enough this is something we would share in common with many consistent naturalists, including the likes of Albert Einstein. Hard determinism makes sense scientifically and theologically. I like how Einstein put it: "God does not play dice with the universe."
I sat through a lecture at the Evangelical Philosophical Society in which Dr. Steve Lemke presented a paper on "How to be a soft libertarian." Worst paper I think I have heard presented; even worse to read. Autonomous free agency or libertarian notions of the will are simply untenable within a consistent naturalistic framework or any theistic theology that asserts a sovereign God.
Perhaps you should read the actual bill. The bill clearly defines the monetary aspect of the whole thing starting in section 211. Stop reading about legislation and just read it...
`(18) PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING-
`(A) IN GENERAL- The term `paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders.
`(B) PAID ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR SEGMENTS THEREOF- The term `paid attempt to influence the general public or segments thereof' does not include an attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the general public.
The 500 person provision is stated in the negative. So paid attempts to reach less than 500 people are exempt. "paid attempt" isn't redefined, it assumes its natural meaning. This legislation isn't rocket science and it is getting all kinds of bad press from people who simply don't feel like reading.
Just like sub-dermal microchipping this process is invasive and has the potential for complications such as infection, allergic reactions and other issues. There is still technology in development though to implement non-invasive techniques such as iris recognition which are much more promising long-term in terms of animal identification. Here's a good dutch web site, with mediocre english translation, that details some problems with microchipping in particular: http://www.invisio.nl/antichip/
The small school I work for is investigating server virtualization because we'll gain exactly what the vendors advertise: better hardware utilization and lower TCO. We can take care of all our needs with a single system and a spare for backups that together cost less than multiple dedicated systems performing the various things we need. Server virtualization is not the best solution for everybody, everywhere by any means, but it certainly fits my organization's needs like a glove.
I had a choice between the ROKR and the nano...I went with the nano, not because the song limit was an issue for me on the ROKR, since my nano won't hold on my music either, but because my current camera/cellphone/organizer thing is barely tolerable let alone if I expected the replacement for my current phone to now play music too. Not to mention I'm not keen on having my cell phone dangling from some sort of lanyard or in my breast pocket in order for me to listen to music, the phone is too bulky. But my nano is just fine hanging on its lanyard. The are lots of reasons for the ROKR not doing so hot, the music limit is a reason but not the only reason, there is also the fact that the ROCKR is pretty darn ugly, looks like an old Qualcom phone. Not to mention that convergence is not such a great idea for the reason the parent poster mentioned...
I would bet on it resulting in lower sales across the board should return policies be drastically changed. Of course, there would be a lot fewer folks buying useless junk which could help increase the overall quality of goods produced. A change would suck for stupid folks who can't match their needs, perceived or actual, to a product but could benefit more savvy individuals should quality improve....
I sadly have to agree...I'm a conservative, but I shudder at how the Right continues to plunge into neoconservatism. As a christian I am also upset with groups like the AFA and others for co-opting what it means to be an evangelical and turning me into a bad guy. What we have going on in Right-wing politics now seems to be a strange blen of Christian Reconstructionism, Corpratism and Facist tendencies. I have enraged some of my fellow seminary students by labelling some among them Christo-Facists, but it is accurate and disheartening that I now respect many liberals more than I do or can 'conservatives'.
When did the Constitution stop mattering? When did federalism die amongst republicans? Where is this land I love going? And will it still be the land of the free and the home of the brave when we get there?
Not true. The dems need only convince some moderate Repubs to side with them and we could have a great show...I hope we see something like those legislatures in Asia have with the fist fights and furniture tossing...
I prefer Bush picking O'Connor's replacement in theory instead of Gore or Kerry...but at this stage I am actually kind of scared of what Bush may do. I'm not a fan of Christian Reconstructionist politics and the way Bush seems to blend that with Corpratism and Facist tendencies is somewhat troubling.
I want judges that rule on what the law says and who are willing to dismiss cases when the legislature needs to be the ones clarifying the law. Judges are not legislators, but someone apparently isn't teaching them that anymore and we are in a sad place because of that.
The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour,... (Article III, Section 1)
Justices can be removed from the bench...I just can't think of anytime this has happened or what the grounds would be for doing so. History geeks help me out on that one...
The issue that I have with our present courts is the failure to decide what the law actually says and instead to make up new law. BOTH liberals and conservatives do this. When the law is silent only the legislative branch has the right to produce laws. But the courts have been able to effectively legislate through their rulings and precedents and that is unconstitutional...
I doubt Linux will be significantly hurt by Apple's move. But, there is always the potential that OS X adoption could slow Linux adoption in the desktop arena. One the server side I would expect Linux to keep gaining ground. But since OS X is Unix and provides a more unified platform in comparison to Linux as a desktop solution there is always the potential that Linux adoption could slow in specific areas.
But remember, everyone is still specualting and until we have Intel based Macs shipping no one has any clue what is going to happen....
Do all nation's laws need to be in sync? Is it possible that one nation has made a grave error and that others should avoid doing the same? Why does our whole world now have a bad case of "keeping up with the Jones'" in relation to legal matters. We all have our own governments, why can't they seem to think independently anymore and make better decisions....
But the more finely you organize things the deeper the structure can get and the more useful a fast search system can become. It's mostly a matter of preference though...
I doubt that folders/files will go away...but powerful search allows the tree to get deeper while still being easy to work with. Thanks to Spotlight I have more finely categorized my folder structure to produce a more organized hard drive but that caused the tree to grow immensely so I end up using Spotlight to help me find stuff quickly while still having a very well organized collection of stuff.
There was the linux kit for PS2, so this opens up the possibility of a similar kit for the PS3 although Sony would most likely have an internal devkit they license to actual game developers. But being able to use the PS3 as a generic platform could be neat from an intellectual standpoint to play with.
Because the state governments are a closer representation of their constituent populations. I'll use Gay Marriage as an example:
If Texas wants to outlaw Gay Marriage but California doesn't then that should be left up to them, as sovereign states, to decide and the Federal government should stay out of it unless there is some EXTREMELY good reason for the Feds to step in. States are not required to recognize each other's marriages and shouldn't be unless it is deemed appropriate to invoke Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution which may be applicable in the specific situtation regarding Gay Marriage.
I'm not neccessarily saying that states SHOULD intervene unless it is of specific and overwhelming interest by their residents. But the power TO intervene should be that of the state governments and them alone regarding issues which are more closely associated with a citizen's daily life. The Federal government should always remain out of its citizen's daily affairs unless EXTREME reasons exist to justify such intrusion.
Slashdot Mirror
An inability to predict does not mean that the apparent randomness is real. Just because we can't observe accurately all the conditions at present does not mean they are necessarily unpredictable. Things appear random but may not actually be.
I don't really want to go down this road too far, but I'll inject my thoughts. In an atheistic world view the question of free will and determinism is potentially unknowable. If however you adopt certain other positions regarding the state of reality you can easily, and consistently arrive at determinism within an atheistic world view. Within a theistic framework the issue also comes back to presuppositions. As a Christian I presuppose that God exists and that He has chosen to reveal Himself through the Bible. From there I arrive at another presupposition: that God is absolutely and immutably sovereign over creation. Because of this I then arrive at the conclusion that all things through orderly progression or sovereign decree occur as God chooses them to: theistic determinism.
Now on the practical side of this: choice appears to be real. I appear, based on experience, to actually make decisions. But in actuality, based on my presuppositions and conclusions, my choices are inescapably bound. Now this isn't fatalism because I don't believe the decisions which are made nor the causes or effects are without meaning. But the idea of "free will" in any libertarian philosophical notion of it is off the table in my mind. Also, there's a tension in my theology that also holds humans morally responsible for their actions, even if they are bound by God's sovereign choices. We make decisions, no argument there; however, those decisions are in no sense "free" as I see it.
The human will exists, but in my estimation it is bound and not free.
Atheists tend to have naturalistic views and that should lead them toward determinism pretty easily. If the universe is governed by immutable laws/forces then there is nothing truly random that occurs and no room for "choice" as conceived of by any kind of "free will" concept. It's somewhat interesting that consistent naturalism leads to a very similar view of "choice" as does consistent sovereign theism: determinism.
I sure as heck wouldn't endorse free will, being a Reformed Baptist, and neither would most of my fellow seminarians. Interestingly enough this is something we would share in common with many consistent naturalists, including the likes of Albert Einstein. Hard determinism makes sense scientifically and theologically. I like how Einstein put it: "God does not play dice with the universe."
I sat through a lecture at the Evangelical Philosophical Society in which Dr. Steve Lemke presented a paper on "How to be a soft libertarian." Worst paper I think I have heard presented; even worse to read. Autonomous free agency or libertarian notions of the will are simply untenable within a consistent naturalistic framework or any theistic theology that asserts a sovereign God.
It worked for Monty Python...
Perhaps you should read the actual bill. The bill clearly defines the monetary aspect of the whole thing starting in section 211. Stop reading about legislation and just read it...
The 500 person provision is stated in the negative. So paid attempts to reach less than 500 people are exempt. "paid attempt" isn't redefined, it assumes its natural meaning. This legislation isn't rocket science and it is getting all kinds of bad press from people who simply don't feel like reading.
Just like sub-dermal microchipping this process is invasive and has the potential for complications such as infection, allergic reactions and other issues. There is still technology in development though to implement non-invasive techniques such as iris recognition which are much more promising long-term in terms of animal identification. Here's a good dutch web site, with mediocre english translation, that details some problems with microchipping in particular: http://www.invisio.nl/antichip/
The small school I work for is investigating server virtualization because we'll gain exactly what the vendors advertise: better hardware utilization and lower TCO. We can take care of all our needs with a single system and a spare for backups that together cost less than multiple dedicated systems performing the various things we need. Server virtualization is not the best solution for everybody, everywhere by any means, but it certainly fits my organization's needs like a glove.
I had a choice between the ROKR and the nano...I went with the nano, not because the song limit was an issue for me on the ROKR, since my nano won't hold on my music either, but because my current camera/cellphone/organizer thing is barely tolerable let alone if I expected the replacement for my current phone to now play music too. Not to mention I'm not keen on having my cell phone dangling from some sort of lanyard or in my breast pocket in order for me to listen to music, the phone is too bulky. But my nano is just fine hanging on its lanyard. The are lots of reasons for the ROKR not doing so hot, the music limit is a reason but not the only reason, there is also the fact that the ROCKR is pretty darn ugly, looks like an old Qualcom phone. Not to mention that convergence is not such a great idea for the reason the parent poster mentioned...
Says who? Can you cite this mythical code?
I would bet on it resulting in lower sales across the board should return policies be drastically changed. Of course, there would be a lot fewer folks buying useless junk which could help increase the overall quality of goods produced. A change would suck for stupid folks who can't match their needs, perceived or actual, to a product but could benefit more savvy individuals should quality improve....
They're theives...they have no moral compass...surprise, surprise...
has frozen over and the devil has taken up hockey and ice fishing...
I sadly have to agree...I'm a conservative, but I shudder at how the Right continues to plunge into neoconservatism. As a christian I am also upset with groups like the AFA and others for co-opting what it means to be an evangelical and turning me into a bad guy. What we have going on in Right-wing politics now seems to be a strange blen of Christian Reconstructionism, Corpratism and Facist tendencies. I have enraged some of my fellow seminary students by labelling some among them Christo-Facists, but it is accurate and disheartening that I now respect many liberals more than I do or can 'conservatives'.
When did the Constitution stop mattering? When did federalism die amongst republicans? Where is this land I love going? And will it still be the land of the free and the home of the brave when we get there?
Sad days these are...sad days...
Not true. The dems need only convince some moderate Repubs to side with them and we could have a great show...I hope we see something like those legislatures in Asia have with the fist fights and furniture tossing...
I prefer Bush picking O'Connor's replacement in theory instead of Gore or Kerry...but at this stage I am actually kind of scared of what Bush may do. I'm not a fan of Christian Reconstructionist politics and the way Bush seems to blend that with Corpratism and Facist tendencies is somewhat troubling.
I want judges that rule on what the law says and who are willing to dismiss cases when the legislature needs to be the ones clarifying the law. Judges are not legislators, but someone apparently isn't teaching them that anymore and we are in a sad place because of that.
Only if they maintain 'good behavior'...
Justices can be removed from the bench...I just can't think of anytime this has happened or what the grounds would be for doing so. History geeks help me out on that one...
The issue that I have with our present courts is the failure to decide what the law actually says and instead to make up new law. BOTH liberals and conservatives do this. When the law is silent only the legislative branch has the right to produce laws. But the courts have been able to effectively legislate through their rulings and precedents and that is unconstitutional...
I doubt Linux will be significantly hurt by Apple's move. But, there is always the potential that OS X adoption could slow Linux adoption in the desktop arena. One the server side I would expect Linux to keep gaining ground. But since OS X is Unix and provides a more unified platform in comparison to Linux as a desktop solution there is always the potential that Linux adoption could slow in specific areas.
But remember, everyone is still specualting and until we have Intel based Macs shipping no one has any clue what is going to happen....
Do all nation's laws need to be in sync? Is it possible that one nation has made a grave error and that others should avoid doing the same? Why does our whole world now have a bad case of "keeping up with the Jones'" in relation to legal matters. We all have our own governments, why can't they seem to think independently anymore and make better decisions....
Damn globalization!
But the more finely you organize things the deeper the structure can get and the more useful a fast search system can become. It's mostly a matter of preference though...
I doubt that folders/files will go away...but powerful search allows the tree to get deeper while still being easy to work with. Thanks to Spotlight I have more finely categorized my folder structure to produce a more organized hard drive but that caused the tree to grow immensely so I end up using Spotlight to help me find stuff quickly while still having a very well organized collection of stuff.
Just using the Happy Hacker version? It's cooler anyways...
There was the linux kit for PS2, so this opens up the possibility of a similar kit for the PS3 although Sony would most likely have an internal devkit they license to actual game developers. But being able to use the PS3 as a generic platform could be neat from an intellectual standpoint to play with.
There are workarounds, but you won't like them.
Thanks Marvin!
Because the state governments are a closer representation of their constituent populations. I'll use Gay Marriage as an example:
If Texas wants to outlaw Gay Marriage but California doesn't then that should be left up to them, as sovereign states, to decide and the Federal government should stay out of it unless there is some EXTREMELY good reason for the Feds to step in. States are not required to recognize each other's marriages and shouldn't be unless it is deemed appropriate to invoke Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution which may be applicable in the specific situtation regarding Gay Marriage.
I'm not neccessarily saying that states SHOULD intervene unless it is of specific and overwhelming interest by their residents. But the power TO intervene should be that of the state governments and them alone regarding issues which are more closely associated with a citizen's daily life. The Federal government should always remain out of its citizen's daily affairs unless EXTREME reasons exist to justify such intrusion.