Okay, so I get that these are cool animals which are headed for extinction. I agree that it would be nice if they stayed around, but what amount of resources are worth spending to avoid that? If all basic human needs were being met then by all means, lets save the birds next... but basic human needs aren't being met in many places.
If private organizations are funding these efforts then they certainly have a right to, though I'd personally rather see that money go to humanitarian efforts. If it is governments, then that means they are putting animals above their own citizens - either valuing animal life more, or believing that they have the right to take people's money and give it (in effect) to animals / animal care. That seems like a mix-up in priorities to me.
To summarize, I am in favor of passive things to help encourage animal survival: making laws preventing the hunting of endangered species, for example, but I don't want my tax dollars going to save animals when they could stay in my pocket. Then again, I'm not from NZ... so it is up to their citizens how they want to spend their hard-earned dollars (*and yes, the currency of NZ is called the dollar).
As interesting as all that is, why are we so hell-bent on keeping them alive? Obviously they aren't a key part of a food chain, or the effects of such a low population would already have been felt. Sure it may or may not be humans that were originally responsible for introducing the predators, but how does that make it legitimate to spend so much on preserving them? Does the government of NZ really not have better things to do?
I'm not a fan of that website's design either, but for the record the Jewish / Christian use of the rainbow as a symbol of God's mercy and promise far predates the modern homosexual movement. See Genesis 9:12-16 for details - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%209:12-16&version=NIV
I've been a long-time fan of HDR photography, and was just thinking about ways that HDR could be implementing in video camcorders as well. Personally I'd like to see a correctly-exposed stream mixed in with the other two, as is common in photography, but even without that the effect is pretty darn cool.
By the way, in case any camcorder manufacturers are watching, consider this idea: make a video camera with three (or more) times the required number of sensors for the resolution you want to record at. Set the logic in the device up to use three unique sets of sensors inside to pick up three different sets of images, at differing exposure settings. Then have them saved separately so that they can be integrated later on for various editing effects - or have a mode where they are integrated on-the-fly for easier use by non-professionals. I imagine it would be expensive to make such a complex sensor and camera, but it might be easier to manage than multiple cameras as the folks in the article did.
There is an Atom / Ion version that may suffice for your needs (Echo I) and a more powerful Core i3 / i5 model if you need extra horsepower (Echo II). Both are very small, pretty darn quiet, and could run whatever software you'd like. I personally prefer the Windows 7 Media Center interface, but it sounds as though you aren't a big fan. Other nice options to check out are MythTV (Linux) and Boxxe (Windows or Linux).
God has indeed 'seen what will become', as you put it: He is not constrained by our sense of time or space, as He created it. The focus of our existence shouldn't be examined in view of things like that, though - it is about relationships. Our relationships to each other, and more importantly to Him, are paramount. It is because of God's love for us that we exist in the first place, and that He saved us from our disobedience by sending Jesus to die for us.
I agree that the number of people affected is quite different, but that is why I am curious about the years lost. For example, one child killed in a drunk driving accident is a comparable loss of life-years to several 60-something people dying from heart disease who might otherwise have lived to 70 or 80 years old. Also, the one has no choice in the situation (assuming they are the victim, not the drunk driver) while those who choose not to drink are making an active choice which may affect their life expectancy. Thank you for pulling up the numbers, though!
Amazing... you have the *exact* same situation I do! Every single item you listed, right down to the addictive personality. I applaud your choice, sir, and I hope that despite this research we both live as long as our more-inclined-to-drink friends:)
I am a bit surprised myself (and yes I'd label myself as 'religious right' too) but not for the reason you might think. There is nothing in my book (the Bible) wrong with drinking - it is drinking, or anything else, *in excess* that is a problem. I've known for a long time that there were various health benefits to drinking a little wine each day, though I choose myself not to. In fact, I think God designed alcohol that way on purpose... but that gets off topic a bit.
What I am interested in, from a societal standpoint, is the number of years of combined human life lost because of not drinking vs the number lost due to alcohol-related accidents (drunk driving, specifically). That is a pretty big killer here in the US, and strikes at all people regardless of age - whereas this seems to be something affecting mostly the older among us. That would be a very interesting comparison I think!
I know that was written somewhat tounge-in-cheek, and that on its own this does not demonstrate a significant enough change vis-a-vie the common age-dating methods... but what it *does* do is call into question the very premise that those methods are based on. If research bears out these ideas, then other solar activity in the past could easily have affected things - either to make the apparent age of the earth greater or less. It seems that the more we study the more we find out that these things humanity has been 'sure of' at points in history are just plain wrong: the earth isn't flat, the earth isn't the center of the solar system, and maybe the earth isn't billions of years old...
I am not a biologist, nor an evolutionist, but as I understand it 'evolution' (talking macro-evolution here, not micro) is believed to be random mutations that turn out to be beneficial to a creature and so enable it to survive and pass along its genetic code to the next generation - so it is indeed random, and if you elevate it to anything higher you are anthropomorphizing the idea of evolution itself.
From which the question arises from where that intelligence came. Back to square one.
Only if you hypothesize the intelligence that created us to be confined within the bounds of the universe as we know it. If you take the path instead that it created the whole universe, then it exists outside it and things like time, entropy, etc do not necessarily act on it - and thus it may not need an origin / creator itself. Of course, that can never be scientifically tested - but I think studying things like the complexity of life, sentience and other topics leads toward the conclusion that what exists cannot have come about without some outside aid.
I think it is interesting that while we, with all our technology and intelligence, *haven't* yet been able to make AI we assume that random mutations given enough time *did*.
Personally, I think *we* are AI - biological, no doubt, but artificial intelligence / created sentient beings nonetheless.
Well, you *could* - Thomas Jefferson had his own version with a lot removed (1), and others have added to it (2) - but there is a warning toward the end of Revelation (the last book in the Bible) which applies at the very least to that book itself: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book." (Rev 22:18-19, NIV)
With the search widget, which I assumed was built into Android itself, you can already do a myriad of similar tasks. I can call, pull up a contact, search, get directions, and more. I am *not* talking about Nuance, which Sprint also provides as their own app - I'm just talking about the generic search widget which takes either text or voice input. Is this new 'feature' just an improvement upon that, or is there some other nuance about the new service which I am missing?
Where I work (www.pugetsystems.com) we provide two recovery options with every Windows-based system: a DVD containing an image of that unique system, created through Windows 7's built-in tools, and the *original* Microsoft install disc. That way you have full control: you can restore to factory settings, or you can start completely fresh if you prefer. I think this is the ideal setup, at least for custom computers like we build, and our customers appreciate the options it gives them.
Maybe that isn't an option for the 'big boys' who are all about the cheapest prices, but I think that mentality comes at a high price in terms of customer satisfaction and overall quality. Paying more for a system with more reliable hardware, better support, etc is well worth it in my opinion. Oh, and for those who might say some can't afford it - that may well true, but you also have to consider lifespan. If a crappy system is cheap but only lasts 3 years, but you could get twice that length of time from a higher quality computer, then which is the better choice for those on a budget?
This is the whole point of ID: is it easier to believe that a single intelligent being (or a few, in polytheistic models) has 'always existed' or that a bunch of material has 'always existed' and given rise, without any outside interference, to intelligent life? Personally I find the former much more believable; especially since that is what virtually *EVERY* religion before the advent of modern science claimed. Why would our ancestors have all, en mass, made up this idea that someone created them?
Thats nice for those five phones, but what about the dozens of other Android devices out there? I personally have the Samsung Moment, and while bloatware so far hasn't been *horrible* it is kind of annoying to have the kill a bunch of apps after a reboot, and periodically close the few that like to come back constantly. Rooting may end up being the way I have to go, but it would be nice if the phone companies made some of that junk removable... or at least let you turn it off more permanently.
I work at Puget Systems, and if you want Linux we can remove the cost of Windows from a system. We don't support Linux, as we aren't getting any money from providing it, but we will pre-install it for you. We can also sell systems with no OS, if you want to do that yourself. The only exception to this is our Certified Systems (http://www.pugetsystems.com/certified.php) where we require a Windows install (along with having other hardware restrictions).
Feel free to email us at sales@pugetsystems.com for more info.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone really should have warned the Romans before that battle: 'never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!'
Okay, so I get that these are cool animals which are headed for extinction. I agree that it would be nice if they stayed around, but what amount of resources are worth spending to avoid that? If all basic human needs were being met then by all means, lets save the birds next... but basic human needs aren't being met in many places.
If private organizations are funding these efforts then they certainly have a right to, though I'd personally rather see that money go to humanitarian efforts. If it is governments, then that means they are putting animals above their own citizens - either valuing animal life more, or believing that they have the right to take people's money and give it (in effect) to animals / animal care. That seems like a mix-up in priorities to me.
To summarize, I am in favor of passive things to help encourage animal survival: making laws preventing the hunting of endangered species, for example, but I don't want my tax dollars going to save animals when they could stay in my pocket. Then again, I'm not from NZ... so it is up to their citizens how they want to spend their hard-earned dollars (*and yes, the currency of NZ is called the dollar).
As interesting as all that is, why are we so hell-bent on keeping them alive? Obviously they aren't a key part of a food chain, or the effects of such a low population would already have been felt. Sure it may or may not be humans that were originally responsible for introducing the predators, but how does that make it legitimate to spend so much on preserving them? Does the government of NZ really not have better things to do?
I'm thinking it is more likely that several things are constantly whooshing around the OP...
I guess it's Large Hadron Colliders all the way down after all...
I'm sure it is a typo, but if you really only have 8Gb (1GB) of RAM paired with a quad-core CPU then I feel bad for you :/
I'm not a fan of that website's design either, but for the record the Jewish / Christian use of the rainbow as a symbol of God's mercy and promise far predates the modern homosexual movement. See Genesis 9:12-16 for details - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%209:12-16&version=NIV
I've been a long-time fan of HDR photography, and was just thinking about ways that HDR could be implementing in video camcorders as well. Personally I'd like to see a correctly-exposed stream mixed in with the other two, as is common in photography, but even without that the effect is pretty darn cool.
By the way, in case any camcorder manufacturers are watching, consider this idea: make a video camera with three (or more) times the required number of sensors for the resolution you want to record at. Set the logic in the device up to use three unique sets of sensors inside to pick up three different sets of images, at differing exposure settings. Then have them saved separately so that they can be integrated later on for various editing effects - or have a mode where they are integrated on-the-fly for easier use by non-professionals. I imagine it would be expensive to make such a complex sensor and camera, but it might be easier to manage than multiple cameras as the folks in the article did.
Wooossshhhh....
I'm pretty sure the poster above you was making a joke....
Dude - thats my birthday this year! My birthday is the meaning of life! Makes me feel important :)
I don't know, man - it looks legit (finally). Check out all the coverage from PAX on the Kotaku home page: http://kotaku.com/
Puget Systems Echo: http://www.pugetsystems.com/echo.php
There is an Atom / Ion version that may suffice for your needs (Echo I) and a more powerful Core i3 / i5 model if you need extra horsepower (Echo II). Both are very small, pretty darn quiet, and could run whatever software you'd like. I personally prefer the Windows 7 Media Center interface, but it sounds as though you aren't a big fan. Other nice options to check out are MythTV (Linux) and Boxxe (Windows or Linux).
God has indeed 'seen what will become', as you put it: He is not constrained by our sense of time or space, as He created it. The focus of our existence shouldn't be examined in view of things like that, though - it is about relationships. Our relationships to each other, and more importantly to Him, are paramount. It is because of God's love for us that we exist in the first place, and that He saved us from our disobedience by sending Jesus to die for us.
I agree that the number of people affected is quite different, but that is why I am curious about the years lost. For example, one child killed in a drunk driving accident is a comparable loss of life-years to several 60-something people dying from heart disease who might otherwise have lived to 70 or 80 years old. Also, the one has no choice in the situation (assuming they are the victim, not the drunk driver) while those who choose not to drink are making an active choice which may affect their life expectancy. Thank you for pulling up the numbers, though!
Amazing... you have the *exact* same situation I do! Every single item you listed, right down to the addictive personality. I applaud your choice, sir, and I hope that despite this research we both live as long as our more-inclined-to-drink friends :)
I am a bit surprised myself (and yes I'd label myself as 'religious right' too) but not for the reason you might think. There is nothing in my book (the Bible) wrong with drinking - it is drinking, or anything else, *in excess* that is a problem. I've known for a long time that there were various health benefits to drinking a little wine each day, though I choose myself not to. In fact, I think God designed alcohol that way on purpose... but that gets off topic a bit.
What I am interested in, from a societal standpoint, is the number of years of combined human life lost because of not drinking vs the number lost due to alcohol-related accidents (drunk driving, specifically). That is a pretty big killer here in the US, and strikes at all people regardless of age - whereas this seems to be something affecting mostly the older among us. That would be a very interesting comparison I think!
I know that was written somewhat tounge-in-cheek, and that on its own this does not demonstrate a significant enough change vis-a-vie the common age-dating methods... but what it *does* do is call into question the very premise that those methods are based on. If research bears out these ideas, then other solar activity in the past could easily have affected things - either to make the apparent age of the earth greater or less. It seems that the more we study the more we find out that these things humanity has been 'sure of' at points in history are just plain wrong: the earth isn't flat, the earth isn't the center of the solar system, and maybe the earth isn't billions of years old...
Not simply random mutations. Evolution.
I am not a biologist, nor an evolutionist, but as I understand it 'evolution' (talking macro-evolution here, not micro) is believed to be random mutations that turn out to be beneficial to a creature and so enable it to survive and pass along its genetic code to the next generation - so it is indeed random, and if you elevate it to anything higher you are anthropomorphizing the idea of evolution itself.
From which the question arises from where that intelligence came. Back to square one.
Only if you hypothesize the intelligence that created us to be confined within the bounds of the universe as we know it. If you take the path instead that it created the whole universe, then it exists outside it and things like time, entropy, etc do not necessarily act on it - and thus it may not need an origin / creator itself. Of course, that can never be scientifically tested - but I think studying things like the complexity of life, sentience and other topics leads toward the conclusion that what exists cannot have come about without some outside aid.
I think it is interesting that while we, with all our technology and intelligence, *haven't* yet been able to make AI we assume that random mutations given enough time *did*.
Personally, I think *we* are AI - biological, no doubt, but artificial intelligence / created sentient beings nonetheless.
Well, you *could* - Thomas Jefferson had his own version with a lot removed (1), and others have added to it (2) - but there is a warning toward the end of Revelation (the last book in the Bible) which applies at the very least to that book itself: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book." (Rev 22:18-19, NIV)
1 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible
2 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon
With the search widget, which I assumed was built into Android itself, you can already do a myriad of similar tasks. I can call, pull up a contact, search, get directions, and more. I am *not* talking about Nuance, which Sprint also provides as their own app - I'm just talking about the generic search widget which takes either text or voice input. Is this new 'feature' just an improvement upon that, or is there some other nuance about the new service which I am missing?
Where I work (www.pugetsystems.com) we provide two recovery options with every Windows-based system: a DVD containing an image of that unique system, created through Windows 7's built-in tools, and the *original* Microsoft install disc. That way you have full control: you can restore to factory settings, or you can start completely fresh if you prefer. I think this is the ideal setup, at least for custom computers like we build, and our customers appreciate the options it gives them.
Maybe that isn't an option for the 'big boys' who are all about the cheapest prices, but I think that mentality comes at a high price in terms of customer satisfaction and overall quality. Paying more for a system with more reliable hardware, better support, etc is well worth it in my opinion. Oh, and for those who might say some can't afford it - that may well true, but you also have to consider lifespan. If a crappy system is cheap but only lasts 3 years, but you could get twice that length of time from a higher quality computer, then which is the better choice for those on a budget?
This is the whole point of ID: is it easier to believe that a single intelligent being (or a few, in polytheistic models) has 'always existed' or that a bunch of material has 'always existed' and given rise, without any outside interference, to intelligent life? Personally I find the former much more believable; especially since that is what virtually *EVERY* religion before the advent of modern science claimed. Why would our ancestors have all, en mass, made up this idea that someone created them?
Thats nice for those five phones, but what about the dozens of other Android devices out there? I personally have the Samsung Moment, and while bloatware so far hasn't been *horrible* it is kind of annoying to have the kill a bunch of apps after a reboot, and periodically close the few that like to come back constantly. Rooting may end up being the way I have to go, but it would be nice if the phone companies made some of that junk removable... or at least let you turn it off more permanently.
I work at Puget Systems, and if you want Linux we can remove the cost of Windows from a system. We don't support Linux, as we aren't getting any money from providing it, but we will pre-install it for you. We can also sell systems with no OS, if you want to do that yourself. The only exception to this is our Certified Systems (http://www.pugetsystems.com/certified.php) where we require a Windows install (along with having other hardware restrictions).
Feel free to email us at sales@pugetsystems.com for more info.