Or the boss needs a new private jet... this time painted blue.
When I got laid off from Cisco in 2013, the CEO got a 60% raise despite a lousy fiscal year. Rumor had it that he needed a new yacht to keep up with the other CEOs.
What I'm sayin is that, as a person of "faith", you're more willing to write off stuff as "well it's just God's way" versus "there's a logical explanation".
If I write something off, I'll say "gamma radiation" and be done with it. I'm not going to waste my time flipping a quarter to determine if it's God's will or a neutrino from an exploding supernova. For all we know, it might be one and the same.
I would believe that would make you a much weaker scientist than one who knows (or believes) that EVERYTHING can be explained - even supposed "miracles".
Because I consider religion, I'm a "weak" scientist. Because I consider science, I'm a "weak" Christian. These labels don't mean anything to me.
The whole entire book could be figurative...it's just people deciding whatever is convenient for them to believe.
As a Jewish friend pointed out, only the rabbi can pick and chose what rules to follow. But the people can pick and chose the rabbi they want to follow.
But the mental leaps required to be a believer makes me wonder how a religious (well Christian in this case) person can devise and execute any scientific process in an impartial manner.
They're two different mindsets. When you walk into the church, you have the religious mindset. When you walk into the lab, you have the scientific mindset. If you try to impose one over the other, you're going to have trouble.
Contractors don't get severance or benefits (and are generally compensated better), but employees most definitely do (particularly at companies like Cisco).
As a contractor at Cisco, I got benefits (health/dental/vision/401k) but no severance or stock options. Most contracting jobs these days offer benefits.
Companies need to invest in their workers, not just dump them whenever they change direction.
Not at Cisco. I worked there for nine months before I got caught up in the 2013 layoff. My boss told me he could train me but it would be a waste of his time since I could leave Cisco and get a better paying job at a competitor. Ironically, because of the lack of training, many employees train themselves in Cisco certifications and get a better paying job at a competitor.
Not quite. For every announced layoff by a tech company, many other tech companies are quietly hiring. Unemployment in Silicon Valley is very low these days.
It is an ageist world which has no loyalty to workers at all, and falsely believes that people can't be retrained.
Loyalty went out the door a long time ago. When I get a new job, I start thinking about my next job and what training I will need to acquire on my own. As a tech professional, you need to actively manage your career.
Except for severance payments to laid off workers.
As a contractor who got laid off from Cisco in 2013, the only thing I got was a two-week notice. My boss wasn't thrilled that I spent those remaining two weeks having phone interviews with recruiters.
Somebody in senior management wants to make their bonus this year.
When I got laid off from Cisco in 2013, the CEO got a 60% raise despite having a lousy fiscal year. Rumor had it among the workers that he needed a new yacht to keep up with the other CEOs.
What I am saying is that you cannot have a genuine belief in science, because you are unwilling and unable to challenge your faith.
This attitude is why many devoted scientists stay quiet about their religion.
You can't - your religion's rules dictate that "because this book said that our god said that he was our god and thus he is god and there are no other gods and you cannot question this".
Only if you believe that the book of God is the literal word of God. As a Christian, I do not.
But you cannot believe in science (or the scientific method, specifically) while believing that some things just can't be questioned.
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." - F. Scott Fitzgerald
In the sense that the writer of that drivel did not study enough mathematics to understand the axiomatic systems of logic, the constraints upon those systems and how the sort of integer arithmetic that most people are familiar with is consistent under a set of axioms and 2+2=4 can be and is proven to be true under those same axioms.
I did flunked out of Calculus II in college, where the numbers stopped making sense and I lost faith. Calculus was a brick wall.
My comp-sci degree covered it, but these days you can learn it from YouTube videos.
When I went back to community college to learn computer programming, I got a 4.0 GPA and made the president's list. I don't recall logic being discussed in computer programming. That's usually covered in philosophy. Boolean gate logic was covered in a electronic class.
How can you believe in god and science when science clearly, without any doubts whatsoever, establishes that there does not exist any evidence of god?
"The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying... it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity." - Carl Sagan
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you."
Werner Heisenberg
Slashdot Mirror
If you call people with differing political opinions "assholes" in online discussion, there's a good chance it's you who's the asshole in person.
I work in IT. So, yes, I have to be an asshole. Otherwise, nothing will get done.
Or the boss needs a new private jet... this time painted blue.
When I got laid off from Cisco in 2013, the CEO got a 60% raise despite a lousy fiscal year. Rumor had it that he needed a new yacht to keep up with the other CEOs.
Good News: We beat Wall Street expectations!
Bad New: We're still laying off people because the CEO needs a raise to buy another yacht.
What I'm sayin is that, as a person of "faith", you're more willing to write off stuff as "well it's just God's way" versus "there's a logical explanation".
If I write something off, I'll say "gamma radiation" and be done with it. I'm not going to waste my time flipping a quarter to determine if it's God's will or a neutrino from an exploding supernova. For all we know, it might be one and the same.
I would believe that would make you a much weaker scientist than one who knows (or believes) that EVERYTHING can be explained - even supposed "miracles".
Because I consider religion, I'm a "weak" scientist. Because I consider science, I'm a "weak" Christian. These labels don't mean anything to me.
I guess I just don't get how that can happen - how you can reconcile two vastly different thought processes.
Treat each one separately. If you don't have the mental disciple to keep them separate, don't try to reconcile them.
The whole entire book could be figurative...it's just people deciding whatever is convenient for them to believe.
As a Jewish friend pointed out, only the rabbi can pick and chose what rules to follow. But the people can pick and chose the rabbi they want to follow.
But the mental leaps required to be a believer makes me wonder how a religious (well Christian in this case) person can devise and execute any scientific process in an impartial manner.
They're two different mindsets. When you walk into the church, you have the religious mindset. When you walk into the lab, you have the scientific mindset. If you try to impose one over the other, you're going to have trouble.
Contractors don't get severance or benefits (and are generally compensated better), but employees most definitely do (particularly at companies like Cisco).
As a contractor at Cisco, I got benefits (health/dental/vision/401k) but no severance or stock options. Most contracting jobs these days offer benefits.
Companies need to invest in their workers, not just dump them whenever they change direction.
Not at Cisco. I worked there for nine months before I got caught up in the 2013 layoff. My boss told me he could train me but it would be a waste of his time since I could leave Cisco and get a better paying job at a competitor. Ironically, because of the lack of training, many employees train themselves in Cisco certifications and get a better paying job at a competitor.
This is the real tech world folks.
Not quite. For every announced layoff by a tech company, many other tech companies are quietly hiring. Unemployment in Silicon Valley is very low these days.
It is an ageist world which has no loyalty to workers at all, and falsely believes that people can't be retrained.
Loyalty went out the door a long time ago. When I get a new job, I start thinking about my next job and what training I will need to acquire on my own. As a tech professional, you need to actively manage your career.
Except for severance payments to laid off workers.
As a contractor who got laid off from Cisco in 2013, the only thing I got was a two-week notice. My boss wasn't thrilled that I spent those remaining two weeks having phone interviews with recruiters.
Somebody in senior management wants to make their bonus this year.
When I got laid off from Cisco in 2013, the CEO got a 60% raise despite having a lousy fiscal year. Rumor had it among the workers that he needed a new yacht to keep up with the other CEOs.
What I am saying is that you cannot have a genuine belief in science, because you are unwilling and unable to challenge your faith.
This attitude is why many devoted scientists stay quiet about their religion.
You can't - your religion's rules dictate that "because this book said that our god said that he was our god and thus he is god and there are no other gods and you cannot question this".
Only if you believe that the book of God is the literal word of God. As a Christian, I do not.
Systems of proof was a necessary pre-req for understanding formal verification of algorithms and code and correct-by-construction systems.
Unit tests. I know them well.
It takes logic to understand why 2+2 =4 consistent with a specific set of axioms.
I read somewhere that a mathematician wrote a 250-page book to explain why 2 + 2 = 4 works the way it does. I haven't been able to track it down.
Religon can't explain science. Science can explain religion (and everything else).
How do you explain the human soul in scientific terms?
But you cannot believe in science (or the scientific method, specifically) while believing that some things just can't be questioned.
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." - F. Scott Fitzgerald
In the sense that the writer of that drivel did not study enough mathematics to understand the axiomatic systems of logic, the constraints upon those systems and how the sort of integer arithmetic that most people are familiar with is consistent under a set of axioms and 2+2=4 can be and is proven to be true under those same axioms.
I did flunked out of Calculus II in college, where the numbers stopped making sense and I lost faith. Calculus was a brick wall.
My comp-sci degree covered it, but these days you can learn it from YouTube videos.
When I went back to community college to learn computer programming, I got a 4.0 GPA and made the president's list. I don't recall logic being discussed in computer programming. That's usually covered in philosophy. Boolean gate logic was covered in a electronic class.
Maybe you should stop trying to throw out progressively more inane one-liners and platitudes and actually read what people are writing.
Slashdot exists to amuse me while I'm waiting for a script to get done at work.
There is an interesting discussion you are missing.
Interesting, yes. Amusing, no.
Thankyou. You have once again proved (not that we believe it but that it's actually a proven fact) at how stupid the "logic" of some people can be.
This is Slashdot. You must be new around here.
Damn, I honestly can't tell if you're you're just goofing or if you're really that stupid.
I find your lack of faith disturbing. ;)
Go nuts, toss the integers out the window, devise a system where [nothing] plus equals {%%%}.
That would be formatting a float as a string in programming. ;)
How can you believe in god and science when science clearly, without any doubts whatsoever, establishes that there does not exist any evidence of god?
"The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying... it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity." - Carl Sagan
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you."
Werner Heisenberg
The last swallow is always bitter. ;)
Science is not a belief.
It takes faith to believe that 2 + 2 is 4. The word "because" isn't a good answer.
As a moderate conservative and registered Democrat, I believe in both God and Science. Believing in one doesn't cancel out the other.