Yes I do realize that. And I think the same set of questions should be applied there. We weren't talking about in-vitro fertilization though were we?
Just because someone else does it doesn't mean its right. If you going to use that justifcation it just means you can't be bothered with the answers to those questions. As I said, irresponsible.
The key word here being think. And no I don't think conciousness is what we are talking about. I'm talking about life period. If conciousness is your defining characteristic of being worthy of living then you have to decide what level of conciousness. do senile people deserve to live? how about those with a lower mental capacity?
And as far as the soul goes. Are you sure there isn't such a thing? cause in that case why should any human life be valuable? If it is not of use to society then just get rid of it. I'm not sure you really want to go that route.
first you are going to have to prove who is the fox and then you will have to prove the fox actually will eat the chickens. Otherwise you just made an interesing allegory with no real application.
Exactly. Certain Questions need to be asked and answered before we just leap willy nilly into embryo harvesting. Any one who can't say for certain when life actually begins has no business deciding when its ok to destroy a living embryo. That's like a man taking a gun with one bullet and him firing it at someone without knowing if the bullet is in the chamber. It's irresponsible. And saying I didn't know when the bullet would come up is no excuse.
All Bush did was say no government funding of Fetal Stem Cell harvesting. A good choice to make if you aren't sure when life begins or if you think it begins at conception. Harvesting Fetal Tissue from an embryo killed for the purpose would be wrong and evil if life begins at conception. Wisdom isn't always recognized as such though.
Wrong. Stem Cells from your own genetic stock are much more valuable than from foreign stock. Growing a new heart that will be rejected by your body isn't much good. Growing a heart that will be accepted as your own is much better.
Perhaps the question you should be asking is why oil execs and drug companies can't do a good job at writing those laws? Is it because they are automatically evil because of their jobs? Or are you just making snap judgements based on no fact?
I happen to know very well what a scientific theory is. I'm not talking about theology here. I'm talking about the same thing. You still haven't shown how religious belief negates a persons analytical thinking and renders their views meaningless which is my point. You must not have understood my post. I didn't say religious theory. I said theory.
If a religious person comes up to you and says any angle can be trisected is he wrong because he's religious or wrong because you can prove he's wrong? For that matter maybe he isn't wrong. Maybe he just has a new view of the universe that includes more than three dimensions which suddenly makes it possible under certain situations to trisect an angle. And you out of a discriminatory view of his religious beliefs miss out on a find that could revolutionize mathematics and physics.(hypothetical you understand I'm not saying this is actually possible). In science everyone has the right to have their ideas subjected to a rigorous examination based on fact not religious background.
The technology has been around for ages. Now if only more people would start using it. I was designing dynamic Javascript applications on the web years ago. Using JS and an Iframe. Its really cool works really good and no one but google and a few others are using it. Such a shame really
Ahhh now we get to the point. Organized Religious groups do indeed at times act in a way that ignores fact and destroys progress. However many of those heroes of science you just mentioned pursued their studies because of their faith. They believed God created the world to be understandable. So they strove to understand it. Religion is not synonymous with religious buraucracy.
I really have a problem with people who dismiss a theory from someone because they come from a religious background. They have just as much a right to test your theories and challenge your beliefs as you do theirs. Dogmatic statements like "Religion is a crutch for people who want to know the "why" of something but don't want to go to all the trouble of following the "how" backwards long enough to get a real answer." Just demonstrate that you have a prejudice against religious people. Regardless of whether they can back up their claim or not.
Whereas science will continue to try and resolve that open question, religion would just arbitrarily make up some assinine answer on the spot, declare itself completely and unquestionably correct, and then mock anyone who did something so silly as suggest that maybe they should have actually tried some observations and tests before coming to a conclusion.
Care to back up that generalization? It kills me how people seem to think religion means an automatic closed mindedness. Isaac Newton and whole host of other Giants in the world of Science would most certainly disagree. There is even a school of thought that says without Christianity a lot of Scientific discoveries would have been a really late in coming. Since it's largely respobsible for driving out superstion in a lot of cultures. That'a matter for discussion but Religion most certainly does not mean an automatic close minded approach.
Minor? are you crazy? PNG's are everywhere. Graphic Designers use them all the time. Even on websites since at times they are superior to jpeg even without the alpha support. If it was minor they wouldn't support it at all. I use pngs for non web uses too. video compositing, a way to share images for print. TGA is spotty on mac and pict is spotty on windows. PNG is anything but minor. Their continued lack of support can only mean that they don't understand what really provides added value in their products. Users and Designers alike would benefit hugely by its addition. Microsoft has dropped the ball big time on this one. It's not like people haven't been telling them for a while now. We've been practically screaming for it, for years now.
The questions of what is a legitimate government service is a matter of debate. But when you can tell me why making more money means I should pay a higher Percentage of that money then I'll agree that a flat tax is stupid.
A flat tax is fair. An adjusted tax is not. Me I'd prefer fair taxes to unfair taxes anyday.
gameplay is not a function of hardware. It's a function of the game designer. So basically your saying the CELL will do exactly what they are saying it will? You just don't think the game designers are going to be designing games you want to play. This is cleverly offtopic.
Come on, do you really see people writing really complex applications in C anymore?
Yes. I contribute to a complex application written in C. Blender uses C for almost all of its code. It works and it works well. How else do you get a 5meg application that does the work of commercial 30meg applications. C gives you a lot of bang for your buck. Don't assume that just because you don't see it everywhere you look, it's not being used.
maybe it's just me but I "want" to have to su into root to install any thing global. I don't want anyone whether its a respected distribution or a little know developer deciding for me what is safe and what is not. I prefer that extra step making it more difficult to accidentally install something. I can just see the first "spoofing" of debians allowed install system causing users to install a trojan. It's design decisions like that which make Microsoft so virus friendly. So no I don't want any organization making the decision of what gets installed for me. It gets my "express" approval or it doesn't get installed. Period.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you here. There is already a "standard" of sorts./etc will work when nothing else will./usr/bin also will work when nothing else will. The real problem here is that the developers of applications pretty much leave this kind of thing up to the distributions. If developers took the time to come up with one click installs for their apps then people might not be so dependent on the distro's The distribution should not be responsible for solving the install issues for their apps. That is the developers problem. When Gnome or KDE offer a one click install for their product then standardization will come. Until then each distribution will continue to offer their own "unique" way of doing things.
Another reason though is that Linux still can be a hassle like downloading firefox and having to use administrator login to install.
Doing something right is always more of a hassle than doing something the "easy" way. Furthermore, you don't have to be administrator to install firefox. You can "install" it just by dumping the directory in your home folder. you'll be the only one able to run it perhaps but it can be done. If you are installing any app that will be globally available to everyone then there "should" be some extra steps to install it. And it should require higher privileges to do.
Additionally even in NT based machines like Win2k and WinXP you have to be administrator to install certain applications. The difference is most Windows people log in as administrator all the time. Window's makes it very difficult to do it any other way.
This kind of functionality. I basically search when I don't have any sites with the information I'm looking for. If I already have a site with the information I'm looking for generally they have links to similar information on the site. I honestly can't think of a situation when I would want to use it. That's just me though. I'm sure there's a market out there for it, else Why would Yahoo be putting it out there? Right?
It's fun, Gives me an output for my creativity. I think of coding as art in some ways. And OSS gives me the oppotunity get my "art" viewed and appreciated by others. It's as simple as that really.
how strange I see alot of those same features in Eclipse and even KDevelop. I'm sure Anjuta has them too although I haven't tinkered with it much yet. Debugging in GNU is easy with KDevelop and Eclipse. Can't say much about templates since I've never had a use for them but I'm sure when there is demand the GNU tool to handle them will arrive. One really interesting thing about OSS tools is they are driven by real demand not "we think you'll like this" demand.
Re:I read this and found it to be terribly funny
on
Microsoft in 2008
·
· Score: 1
I didn't say microsoft wouldn't consider it. I just couldn't see Linus doing it. Based on his style of work and what "little" I know about microsoft work practices.
I read this and found it to be terribly funny
on
Microsoft in 2008
·
· Score: 3, Funny
and yet somehow totally unrealistic. I can't see Linus fitting in that kind of a work environment. Not that I know that much about Microsoft work environments.
It's too early in the morning. Why on earth would anyone believe this? Heck the cell phone attenna extenders were more believable. To spice it up they could have just sold Nokia faceplates which extended battery life. At least then there would have been another "reason" to purchase one. Maybe CowboyNeal is posting in his sleep?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes I do realize that. And I think the same set of questions should be applied there. We weren't talking about in-vitro fertilization though were we? Just because someone else does it doesn't mean its right. If you going to use that justifcation it just means you can't be bothered with the answers to those questions. As I said, irresponsible.
The key word here being think. And no I don't think conciousness is what we are talking about. I'm talking about life period. If conciousness is your defining characteristic of being worthy of living then you have to decide what level of conciousness. do senile people deserve to live? how about those with a lower mental capacity? And as far as the soul goes. Are you sure there isn't such a thing? cause in that case why should any human life be valuable? If it is not of use to society then just get rid of it. I'm not sure you really want to go that route.
first you are going to have to prove who is the fox and then you will have to prove the fox actually will eat the chickens. Otherwise you just made an interesing allegory with no real application.
Your right I phrased that incorrectly. I don't have any freaks which means I don't have any foes.
Exactly. Certain Questions need to be asked and answered before we just leap willy nilly into embryo harvesting. Any one who can't say for certain when life actually begins has no business deciding when its ok to destroy a living embryo. That's like a man taking a gun with one bullet and him firing it at someone without knowing if the bullet is in the chamber. It's irresponsible. And saying I didn't know when the bullet would come up is no excuse.
All Bush did was say no government funding of Fetal Stem Cell harvesting. A good choice to make if you aren't sure when life begins or if you think it begins at conception. Harvesting Fetal Tissue from an embryo killed for the purpose would be wrong and evil if life begins at conception. Wisdom isn't always recognized as such though.
Wrong. Stem Cells from your own genetic stock are much more valuable than from foreign stock. Growing a new heart that will be rejected by your body isn't much good. Growing a heart that will be accepted as your own is much better.
Perhaps the question you should be asking is why oil execs and drug companies can't do a good job at writing those laws? Is it because they are automatically evil because of their jobs? Or are you just making snap judgements based on no fact?
I happen to know very well what a scientific theory is. I'm not talking about theology here. I'm talking about the same thing. You still haven't shown how religious belief negates a persons analytical thinking and renders their views meaningless which is my point. You must not have understood my post. I didn't say religious theory. I said theory.
If a religious person comes up to you and says any angle can be trisected is he wrong because he's religious or wrong because you can prove he's wrong? For that matter maybe he isn't wrong. Maybe he just has a new view of the universe that includes more than three dimensions which suddenly makes it possible under certain situations to trisect an angle. And you out of a discriminatory view of his religious beliefs miss out on a find that could revolutionize mathematics and physics.(hypothetical you understand I'm not saying this is actually possible). In science everyone has the right to have their ideas subjected to a rigorous examination based on fact not religious background.
The technology has been around for ages. Now if only more people would start using it. I was designing dynamic Javascript applications on the web years ago. Using JS and an Iframe. Its really cool works really good and no one but google and a few others are using it. Such a shame really
Ahhh now we get to the point. Organized Religious groups do indeed at times act in a way that ignores fact and destroys progress. However many of those heroes of science you just mentioned pursued their studies because of their faith. They believed God created the world to be understandable. So they strove to understand it. Religion is not synonymous with religious buraucracy. I really have a problem with people who dismiss a theory from someone because they come from a religious background. They have just as much a right to test your theories and challenge your beliefs as you do theirs. Dogmatic statements like "Religion is a crutch for people who want to know the "why" of something but don't want to go to all the trouble of following the "how" backwards long enough to get a real answer." Just demonstrate that you have a prejudice against religious people. Regardless of whether they can back up their claim or not.
Minor? are you crazy? PNG's are everywhere. Graphic Designers use them all the time. Even on websites since at times they are superior to jpeg even without the alpha support. If it was minor they wouldn't support it at all. I use pngs for non web uses too. video compositing, a way to share images for print. TGA is spotty on mac and pict is spotty on windows. PNG is anything but minor. Their continued lack of support can only mean that they don't understand what really provides added value in their products. Users and Designers alike would benefit hugely by its addition. Microsoft has dropped the ball big time on this one. It's not like people haven't been telling them for a while now. We've been practically screaming for it, for years now.
The questions of what is a legitimate government service is a matter of debate. But when you can tell me why making more money means I should pay a higher Percentage of that money then I'll agree that a flat tax is stupid.
A flat tax is fair. An adjusted tax is not. Me I'd prefer fair taxes to unfair taxes anyday.
gameplay is not a function of hardware. It's a function of the game designer. So basically your saying the CELL will do exactly what they are saying it will? You just don't think the game designers are going to be designing games you want to play. This is cleverly offtopic.
maybe it's just me but I "want" to have to su into root to install any thing global. I don't want anyone whether its a respected distribution or a little know developer deciding for me what is safe and what is not. I prefer that extra step making it more difficult to accidentally install something. I can just see the first "spoofing" of debians allowed install system causing users to install a trojan. It's design decisions like that which make Microsoft so virus friendly. So no I don't want any organization making the decision of what gets installed for me. It gets my "express" approval or it doesn't get installed. Period.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you here. There is already a "standard" of sorts. /etc will work when nothing else will. /usr/bin also will work when nothing else will. The real problem here is that the developers of applications pretty much leave this kind of thing up to the distributions. If developers took the time to come up with one click installs for their apps then people might not be so dependent on the distro's The distribution should not be responsible for solving the install issues for their apps. That is the developers problem. When Gnome or KDE offer a one click install for their product then standardization will come. Until then each distribution will continue to offer their own "unique" way of doing things.
Additionally even in NT based machines like Win2k and WinXP you have to be administrator to install certain applications. The difference is most Windows people log in as administrator all the time. Window's makes it very difficult to do it any other way.
This kind of functionality. I basically search when I don't have any sites with the information I'm looking for. If I already have a site with the information I'm looking for generally they have links to similar information on the site. I honestly can't think of a situation when I would want to use it. That's just me though. I'm sure there's a market out there for it, else Why would Yahoo be putting it out there? Right?
It's fun, Gives me an output for my creativity. I think of coding as art in some ways. And OSS gives me the oppotunity get my "art" viewed and appreciated by others. It's as simple as that really.
how strange I see alot of those same features in Eclipse and even KDevelop. I'm sure Anjuta has them too although I haven't tinkered with it much yet. Debugging in GNU is easy with KDevelop and Eclipse. Can't say much about templates since I've never had a use for them but I'm sure when there is demand the GNU tool to handle them will arrive. One really interesting thing about OSS tools is they are driven by real demand not "we think you'll like this" demand.
I didn't say microsoft wouldn't consider it. I just couldn't see Linus doing it. Based on his style of work and what "little" I know about microsoft work practices.
and yet somehow totally unrealistic. I can't see Linus fitting in that kind of a work environment. Not that I know that much about Microsoft work environments.
Also surely this isn't a first post?
It's too early in the morning. Why on earth would anyone believe this? Heck the cell phone attenna extenders were more believable. To spice it up they could have just sold Nokia faceplates which extended battery life. At least then there would have been another "reason" to purchase one. Maybe CowboyNeal is posting in his sleep?