Script my own AI for my units so all the micromanaging I would have done can be scripted by me. Of course depending on how powerful you made the scripting options it may have limited appeal for the non programmer player. But hey It's *my* wish.
As for the flood and the ark, would you explain how at least two of every single species which exists today could fit on one boat? Don't forget food for all of them too. And where did all the water come from?
I didn't say two of every speicies existing today. I said two of every kind. Big difference. Where we divide species is not necessarily the same thing as a kind. Speciation (not sure on that spelling) is not the same thing as evolution in my mind. so if you have just one dog precursor on the ark and it is the "father" of all the wolves, dogs, dingos, hyeana's and so on then It suddenly becomes more possible. as for water? It rained the whole time remember? Also the animals may have been young. requiring smaller space and less food.
What evidence is there that dinosaur extinction resulted from a flood (as opposed to say a meteorite impact, a theory which does have evidence)?
Fossil records repeatedly show land dinosaurs in the same bed as ocean dinosaurs. They also indicate, according to some schools of thought, a large sudden deposit of silt buried the creatures there. Also those same fossil beds indicate that a large number of other species were present at a point in history where they weren't even supposed to evolve yet. All of this is predicted by a creationist theory.
The scale that's important here is that there were more than seven days between start of universe, creation of earth, and appearance of humans.
Again still not proveable. As for your invisible elephants? I can prove it by showing there is no body heat, no weight, no obstruction, or any other of a number of non sight related methods. If you saying invisible, weightless, immaterial, and temperatureless. Well then its a moot point cause they can have no effect on the universe then. Creation and Evolutions don't fall in the same category since one of them most definitely did have an effect.
Again I reiterate faith in creation has still not been shown to be irrational.
Pixel Count has next to nothing to do with movie quality rendering. Shading, Lighting, and Animation are what make movie quality rendering. Real Time Global Illumination? I don't thinks that's going to be a feature of these consoles. How about Caustic effects? Real Time Refraction? probably not. Those are some of what set a movie quality renderer apart from your 3d accelerator chipset. Not even polygon count does as much as those things to increase the realism in a rendering.
I very much doubt you *need* an integrated PIM in your email client. You just like the convenience. You could work with an unintegrated one, you just don't want to. People who don't switch for that reason are saying the convenience of an integrated PIM outweighs the inconvenience of no real email filter.
Congratulations on using popfile. You found a great solution to outlooks inadequacies. The point of my post is that people aren't using good filters. And when they don't then they deserve what they get. The technology is out there to fix there problem.
Now I admit I should have been more generic when I said the was no excuse for using outlook anymore. My intent was that there was no excuse for not using the technology that is "freely" available for spam blocking. Popfile is one of those and so is thunderbird.
They give away code for free that is worth millions perhaps even billions. Driving down the cost of software and bringing computing to millions who otherwise could not afford it. They also give away code for free that enables handicapped people to enter the computing world. People like the blind. The linux community has given. Saving companies money enables them to keep people employed and donate more to other charities. I really don't think you could even calculate just how much the linux community has given back monetarily. Its a silly comparison to make if you ask me.
I have little sympathy for users who and companies who get buried by spam. The solutions for their problems are out there. Any company not pushing a client like Thunderbird with "real" built in spam filtering deserve what they get. There is no excuse for using outlook anymore. I honestly don't have a spam problem. I may get 50+ spam mails a day but I don't see a single one of them. Every one except for the occasional mail a month gets swept into my spam box and then automatically cleaned out of there after a set period of time. Users will stop buying spam when spam stops showing up for them. And educating users on how to avoid it has to be part of the problem.
Uhmmm... Actually I've been doing this for a while now using iframes and javascript. It's not that hard and also avoids the xml bloat. This just gives a "standard" api to use when doing it. It still uses Iframes you just don't have to create them yourself. Most people who have been doing this already have a set of custom tools to help them do it. The functionality has been there for a while. This will help boost its use though and for that I'm grateful. Gmail makes excellent use of it in their UI making it hugely more useable than most other webmail clients. More people need to be recognizing the, already present, power for dynamic applications in the web.
And many if not all of the testable claims have been disproven (eg, age of the earth, age of the Universe, age of fossils, dinosaurs), with Creationists responding either by retracting the claims ("seven days doesn't really mean seven days"), or converting them to untestable claims ("God put dinosaur bones there to confuse us").
First of all each of the examples you list above have not been disproven. Age of the universe? That's fundamentally unprovable since you have no scale outside of the universe to measure it against. There is no conclusive proof concerning the age of the universe. Fossils are an excellent example however. Creation says that
Intermediate forms from higher to lower will be scarce or nonexistent
The fossil layers will mix forms from various of the stated ages of life on earth (eg. mesozoic, paleozoic and so on).
The fossil layers will exhibit evidence of global catastrophe resulting in mass extinction of various species
Additional testable claims? Creation predicts that formerly "extinct species" will turn up virtually unchanged.
Creation predicts that there will be no other intelligent life in the universe.
There are more but I can't think of them off the top of my head. Just because one set of academia says they have been disproven doesn't mean they have. There are plenty of other respected scientists who say they haven't. So again I ask you can you come up with definitive proof that creation didn't occur? If you can't then faith in creation is just as rational as faith in evolution.
Myself I still believe seven day creation is rational. I believe the flood is rational. I don't think dinosaur bones were put there to confuse us. I think they just died out after the flood due to an inability to compete or just not being included in the ark.
And that's exactly why it's an entirely non-scientific belief. Something which cannot be disproven (eg, "there exist invisible unicorns") is of no use, in comparison to a hypothesis which can be tested and either confirmed or disproven.
Creation can indeed be tested just as easily as Evolution. You can make certain predictions about creation as seen in the bible. For instance what form will the fossile record take? Will it have higher forms mixed with lower forms. Will the epochs be in order? How about the whole "irreducibly complex" question? These items are hotly debated today and you can find supporting evidence for both sides. Again for every supporting evidence you find for evolution I can find one for creation. It still comes down to rational faith.
yet on the other hand, creationist stories such as the story on Genesis can be disproven
I challenge you to disprove Creation. If Creation could be disproven then it would be irrational to believe it. I happen to believe faith in Creation is rational and no on yet has shown real proof otherwise.
Yeah it disturbs me too. They really don't have any curtailing influence on them. All they have to do is pull the "its unconstitutional" card and bingo we have a new law. The problem is that we depend only on their honesty and integrity to stick within the bounds of their job description but have no real consquences for when they step out of them.
Oh Please yes let's keep it that way. Last haven for the geek to hang out. Let the little kiddies have there AOL IM and Yahoo Messenger. I'll stick to IRC hangin out with my fellow programmers in channels like #blendercoders and #planeshift. Course I'm like the guy who wrote the article I'm mostly on Freenode.
I always wonder just how exactly you test the theory of the big bang. Start a new big bang? Go Back and watch the big bang happen? There is quite simply no way to test the big bang. Yes you can mathematically show how it might be possible given a certain set of conditions. But you can't prove the conditions existed before. You can't prove that those conditions aren't caused by something else. All you can prove is that there is a statistical probability given a certain set of base premises that they did.
Therefore a Creation viewpoint has just as much validity as the big bang. It all depends on what you accept for your premises. If God does not exist then the big bang is the more likely explanation. If God does exist however then the whole ballgame changes. Thus your qualifier. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. Me I think I can but the only way for you to experience the proof is to experience christ. It's a personal proof only and can't translate into a scientific explanation. That's why its a Faith thing and not Science.
I only object to people when they say my faith is not rational. As far as I can see it fits all the facts. It accounts for all the evidence and can't be disproved. There is nothing irrational about that.
Some of us happen to have widely diverging interests in a broad range of areas. Me for instance. I like cooking, coding, reading, workin on my car, gaming and the list goes on. I'd sign up for the subscription just cause I like to learn new things in any subject. I don't think the topic is too broad at all. Now mayhap I am in the minority and they misjudged the size of the market but there is a market at least.
Seems to me if you make binary xml its not really xml either. its xbml or extensible binary meta-language. What these people want is not a binary form of xml they want a standard for encoding data in binary. Fine with me just don't confuse the issue by calling it binary "xml". Cause its not xml.
I'd be delighted to hear a well reasoned argument that describes how we now have resistant strains of bacteria that relies on intelligent design instead. Maybe God *wants* us to get gangrene so he just creates a new variety while we wern't looking and tricks us meanwhile by allowing observed bacteria as they evolve in a laboratory?
Here is your well reasoned argument. Resistant strains of bacteria occur not by the creation of "new" genes in the bacteria but by new arrangements of genes in the bacteria. or by genetic travel between bacteria strains. How does intelligent design account for this? Simple you have "in the beginning" just a few types of bacteria. These bacteria have lots of different attributes to allow them to be useful in a myriad of different places. The bacteria tend to specialize or breed out certain characteristics that either hinder or are unused. Some times this loss of charactistics results in harmful bacteria. Sometimes this loss also results in weaker bacteria. Here's the kicker though bacteria can trade genes. (whoah) So when a little used trait is needed its available in a smaller subset of the strain perhaps but still there. Additionally in any given strain of bacteria there are already resistent bacteria they just haven't gained dominance because that trait isn't giving them an edge. This is,contrary to popular belief, not an evolutionary leap because they were already there. They didn't show up magically because the environment changed.
First of all, evolution has been PROVEN to take place in some form or another, from bones and fossles, and whick would you be more inclined to believe - A modern theory with -=*PROOF*=- or a child's story that dates back c. 2000 years ago?
Hrmmm very interesting. Can you provide some references to your statement concerning proof of evolution occuring? Is this definitive proof or merely evidence which could support the theory? Could this "childs story" also account for the evidence or is the evidence exclusively for Evolution? Which type of evolution exactly are we talking about? Macro or Micro?
All these questions must be answered before your statement can be validated.
I spend a lot of time working in schools and your right. Instead of taking the opportunity to teach real HTML they teach "dreamweaver" or even worse "frontpage". The student learns all about making a tacky website and nearly nothing about the real world of web development. (FTP, HTML, CSS, XML even)
This is a prime opportunity to teach students, interested in learning, how the web really works. Instead the student has to be retrained by whatever company or college they end up in. If only the teachers took the time to learn the subject they are teaching instead of relying on some piece of software to hold them by the hand. At least the school could hire someone who knew the subject instead of pushing some guy who demonstrated some knowledge about Word.
The solution is to put in a content managment system for them and let them just submit it via text on a webform. No DW or HTML needed. They really shouldn't be responsible for layout and such anyway. Just have an automated process for them to submit their "content" and let someone who knows what they are doing handle the layout stuff. That's what a CMS is for. Heck a Wiki would be better than teaching them dreamweaver.
First of all if your editing 96,000 pages without a content management system then you deserve the headache. If by chance you do have a content management system then it probably uses templating, so you can indeed use Kate to modify the template and then upload it and Bingo you've just edited 96,000 pages. Even really large complex sites get coded and updated in a Text editor. Some of them even get edited in the browser (gasp).
So actually your wrong he probably isn't assuming what you thought he was.
"What's even cooler about that approach is you suddenly have a huge library of games available to you. If you ever get bored with Tux Racer..."
You can get bored of tuxracer? surely not. I still haven't made it all the way down the mountain on Desperation. That has to be one of the most addictive games out there. Too bad windows only users miss out on it:-)
Exactly, They could at least have let the stores sell out the games they did have. Instead they pulled the games and player from the market practically overnight. It's not like they couldn't have at least left the games for those of us who recognized the platforms superior attributes and invested in it.
I also Eat anything and often find that cooking is relaxing. Besides half the reason I like technology is because it allows me to create so get just as excited about my new garlic press as I do about a new video card. Who says geeks can't have diverse interests?
It was called the Neogeo pocket. Fantastic platform. Then the company threw a fit and pulled it from the US Market. Hopefully Sony won't be that way.
Anyone want a used Neogeo Pocket with one game?
Slashdot Mirror
Script my own AI for my units so all the micromanaging I would have done can be scripted by me. Of course depending on how powerful you made the scripting options it may have limited appeal for the non programmer player. But hey It's *my* wish.
Again I reiterate faith in creation has still not been shown to be irrational.
Pixel Count has next to nothing to do with movie quality rendering. Shading, Lighting, and Animation are what make movie quality rendering. Real Time Global Illumination? I don't thinks that's going to be a feature of these consoles. How about Caustic effects? Real Time Refraction? probably not. Those are some of what set a movie quality renderer apart from your 3d accelerator chipset. Not even polygon count does as much as those things to increase the realism in a rendering.
hrmmm... all bold that's what I get for not previewing. Sorry about that.
I very much doubt you *need* an integrated PIM in your email client. You just like the convenience. You could work with an unintegrated one, you just don't want to. People who don't switch for that reason are saying the convenience of an integrated PIM outweighs the inconvenience of no real email filter.
Congratulations on using popfile. You found a great solution to outlooks inadequacies. The point of my post is that people aren't using good filters. And when they don't then they deserve what they get. The technology is out there to fix there problem.
Now I admit I should have been more generic when I said the was no excuse for using outlook anymore. My intent was that there was no excuse for not using the technology that is "freely" available for spam blocking. Popfile is one of those and so is thunderbird.
They give away code for free that is worth millions perhaps even billions. Driving down the cost of software and bringing computing to millions who otherwise could not afford it. They also give away code for free that enables handicapped people to enter the computing world. People like the blind. The linux community has given. Saving companies money enables them to keep people employed and donate more to other charities. I really don't think you could even calculate just how much the linux community has given back monetarily. Its a silly comparison to make if you ask me.
I have little sympathy for users who and companies who get buried by spam. The solutions for their problems are out there. Any company not pushing a client like Thunderbird with "real" built in spam filtering deserve what they get. There is no excuse for using outlook anymore. I honestly don't have a spam problem. I may get 50+ spam mails a day but I don't see a single one of them. Every one except for the occasional mail a month gets swept into my spam box and then automatically cleaned out of there after a set period of time. Users will stop buying spam when spam stops showing up for them. And educating users on how to avoid it has to be part of the problem.
Uhmmm... Actually I've been doing this for a while now using iframes and javascript. It's not that hard and also avoids the xml bloat. This just gives a "standard" api to use when doing it. It still uses Iframes you just don't have to create them yourself. Most people who have been doing this already have a set of custom tools to help them do it. The functionality has been there for a while. This will help boost its use though and for that I'm grateful. Gmail makes excellent use of it in their UI making it hugely more useable than most other webmail clients. More people need to be recognizing the, already present, power for dynamic applications in the web.
- Intermediate forms from higher to lower will be scarce or nonexistent
- The fossil layers will mix forms from various of the stated ages of life on earth (eg. mesozoic, paleozoic and so on).
- The fossil layers will exhibit evidence of global catastrophe resulting in mass extinction of various species
Additional testable claims? Creation predicts that formerly "extinct species" will turn up virtually unchanged. Creation predicts that there will be no other intelligent life in the universe. There are more but I can't think of them off the top of my head. Just because one set of academia says they have been disproven doesn't mean they have. There are plenty of other respected scientists who say they haven't. So again I ask you can you come up with definitive proof that creation didn't occur? If you can't then faith in creation is just as rational as faith in evolution. Myself I still believe seven day creation is rational. I believe the flood is rational. I don't think dinosaur bones were put there to confuse us. I think they just died out after the flood due to an inability to compete or just not being included in the ark.Yeah it disturbs me too. They really don't have any curtailing influence on them. All they have to do is pull the "its unconstitutional" card and bingo we have a new law. The problem is that we depend only on their honesty and integrity to stick within the bounds of their job description but have no real consquences for when they step out of them.
Oh Please yes let's keep it that way. Last haven for the geek to hang out. Let the little kiddies have there AOL IM and Yahoo Messenger. I'll stick to IRC hangin out with my fellow programmers in channels like #blendercoders and #planeshift. Course I'm like the guy who wrote the article I'm mostly on Freenode.
I always wonder just how exactly you test the theory of the big bang. Start a new big bang? Go Back and watch the big bang happen? There is quite simply no way to test the big bang. Yes you can mathematically show how it might be possible given a certain set of conditions. But you can't prove the conditions existed before. You can't prove that those conditions aren't caused by something else. All you can prove is that there is a statistical probability given a certain set of base premises that they did.
Therefore a Creation viewpoint has just as much validity as the big bang. It all depends on what you accept for your premises. If God does not exist then the big bang is the more likely explanation. If God does exist however then the whole ballgame changes. Thus your qualifier. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. Me I think I can but the only way for you to experience the proof is to experience christ. It's a personal proof only and can't translate into a scientific explanation. That's why its a Faith thing and not Science.
I only object to people when they say my faith is not rational. As far as I can see it fits all the facts. It accounts for all the evidence and can't be disproved. There is nothing irrational about that.
Some of us happen to have widely diverging interests in a broad range of areas. Me for instance. I like cooking, coding, reading, workin on my car, gaming and the list goes on. I'd sign up for the subscription just cause I like to learn new things in any subject. I don't think the topic is too broad at all. Now mayhap I am in the minority and they misjudged the size of the market but there is a market at least.
Seems to me if you make binary xml its not really xml either. its xbml or extensible binary meta-language. What these people want is not a binary form of xml they want a standard for encoding data in binary. Fine with me just don't confuse the issue by calling it binary "xml". Cause its not xml.
All these questions must be answered before your statement can be validated.
I spend a lot of time working in schools and your right. Instead of taking the opportunity to teach real HTML they teach "dreamweaver" or even worse "frontpage". The student learns all about making a tacky website and nearly nothing about the real world of web development. (FTP, HTML, CSS, XML even)
This is a prime opportunity to teach students, interested in learning, how the web really works. Instead the student has to be retrained by whatever company or college they end up in. If only the teachers took the time to learn the subject they are teaching instead of relying on some piece of software to hold them by the hand. At least the school could hire someone who knew the subject instead of pushing some guy who demonstrated some knowledge about Word.
cool thanks for the info. I didn't know it was available there. Now I can show some friends what my kids keep begging me to play. :-)
The solution is to put in a content managment system for them and let them just submit it via text on a webform. No DW or HTML needed. They really shouldn't be responsible for layout and such anyway. Just have an automated process for them to submit their "content" and let someone who knows what they are doing handle the layout stuff. That's what a CMS is for. Heck a Wiki would be better than teaching them dreamweaver.
First of all if your editing 96,000 pages without a content management system then you deserve the headache. If by chance you do have a content management system then it probably uses templating, so you can indeed use Kate to modify the template and then upload it and Bingo you've just edited 96,000 pages. Even really large complex sites get coded and updated in a Text editor. Some of them even get edited in the browser (gasp).
So actually your wrong he probably isn't assuming what you thought he was.
You can get bored of tuxracer? surely not. I still haven't made it all the way down the mountain on Desperation. That has to be one of the most addictive games out there. Too bad windows only users miss out on it
Exactly, They could at least have let the stores sell out the games they did have. Instead they pulled the games and player from the market practically overnight. It's not like they couldn't have at least left the games for those of us who recognized the platforms superior attributes and invested in it.
I also Eat anything and often find that cooking is relaxing. Besides half the reason I like technology is because it allows me to create so get just as excited about my new garlic press as I do about a new video card. Who says geeks can't have diverse interests?
It was called the Neogeo pocket. Fantastic platform. Then the company threw a fit and pulled it from the US Market. Hopefully Sony won't be that way. Anyone want a used Neogeo Pocket with one game?