On the rare occasions when I allowed my dad to browbeat me into reading Dan Brown, I always felt cheap and used. I think this offers some kind of dark psychological parable which I wouldn't touch with a pair of tongs.
It's easy enough to make and investigate a simple simulation of the way evolution works, without being an expert. This would confirm the huge mathematical advantage that the evolutionary process has over the much bruted operation of random chance. And the evidence of an iPad in operation says nothing about the way in which it operates. For all the mass of Creationists are aware, it may be that iPad-shaped stones are carried into the Temple of The Lord, blessed with the relevant incantations, and then sold on to the masses for money with which the good works of Jesus can be done.
If he's a competent, intelligent programmer, then half a day playing with a genetic algorithm would be enough to convince him that evolution works. If he could claim the contrary after doing so, I'd doubt his sanity, his honesty and/or his intelligence.
> Python's good, and pretty well-structured and easy to follow, I'd probably go with that as a modern-day BASIC. So (and I know I'm feeding the troll here) would Python do any 'damage to their understanding of real programming'?
Actually Python's a nice choice - object orientation, some function programming features, the syntax is nice and clear and it's easy to learn. I learned BASIC, REXX and PASCAL before I ever did any assembler - the lessons I learned from having to structure programs in PASCAL transferred well to 6502 assembler. By the time I started learning C, I was already writing code in an object-oriented style where relevant.
The other school of thought looks at the social and political consequences of putting the power to genetically engineer crops in the hands of organisations like Monsanto. I'm in support of research into this area, but the prospect of widespread deployment makes me rather nervous.
It might be worth pointing out that many of these people were alive in times where it was actively *dangerous* to be anything other than a member of the mainstream religion. It's also the case that, lacking a knowledge of the processes of evolution, it's much harder to see how complex organisms can manifest barring the intervention of a God. Evolution was a philosophical watershed - a perfect exemplar of the fallacy of the case where, lacking knowledge of system, one posits some supernatural intervention to make up for the holes in one's understanding.
My dog liked weed - I used to smoke it and he'd come up and sit in front of me while I blew smoke gently towards him. Then he'd get all mellow and go watch the tasty animals on nature documentaries - he used to lick his lips.
Enormously better quality of life? Being able to live how you choose, where you choose, when you choose. Being treated with respect by the kind of fuckwads who judge you by your bank account. Being able to shrug off ordinarily crippling financial crises like the car you use to travel to work breaking down. Being able to afford dental treatment when you're in severe pain. Being able to afford a doctor who *isn't* a cretin. Buying that dress and those shoes. Eating how you please as opposed to whatever you can afford.
That's just a start. You've never been poor, have you? You have no idea whatsoever of what you're talking about, but you just couldn't resist expressing your opinion.
Slashdot Mirror
On the rare occasions when I allowed my dad to browbeat me into reading Dan Brown, I always felt cheap and used. I think this offers some kind of dark psychological parable which I wouldn't touch with a pair of tongs.
That link - is it just me or was it almost content-free and full of ads?
MKULTRA?
grrr... Keany Reeves is *hot*!
Chips with everything?
Check out Accelerando, by Charles Stross.
It's easy enough to make and investigate a simple simulation of the way evolution works, without being an expert. This would confirm the huge mathematical advantage that the evolutionary process has over the much bruted operation of random chance. And the evidence of an iPad in operation says nothing about the way in which it operates. For all the mass of Creationists are aware, it may be that iPad-shaped stones are carried into the Temple of The Lord, blessed with the relevant incantations, and then sold on to the masses for money with which the good works of Jesus can be done.
Blessed is the Name of Our Lord, et cetera...
He's just in touch with his inner 'grumpy old man'.
'ow abaht the 'obbit?
Hate the idiocy, not the idiot.
Just an observation, but you've only ever made one post - this one - and your account is minty fresh. Sock puppet much?
If he's a competent, intelligent programmer, then half a day playing with a genetic algorithm would be enough to convince him that evolution works. If he could claim the contrary after doing so, I'd doubt his sanity, his honesty and/or his intelligence.
I'm already drooling.
> Python's good, and pretty well-structured and easy to follow, I'd probably go with that as a modern-day BASIC. So (and I know I'm feeding the troll here) would Python do any 'damage to their understanding of real programming'?
Actually Python's a nice choice - object orientation, some function programming features, the syntax is nice and clear and it's easy to learn. I learned BASIC, REXX and PASCAL before I ever did any assembler - the lessons I learned from having to structure programs in PASCAL transferred well to 6502 assembler. By the time I started learning C, I was already writing code in an object-oriented style where relevant.
> If you think otherwise go talk to some immigrants from Asian or Easter Europe. They can't not work, it's in their very blood
Are you familiar with the phrase 'self-selecting group'?
The other school of thought looks at the social and political consequences of putting the power to genetically engineer crops in the hands of organisations like Monsanto. I'm in support of research into this area, but the prospect of widespread deployment makes me rather nervous.
You idiot.
It might be worth pointing out that many of these people were alive in times where it was actively *dangerous* to be anything other than a member of the mainstream religion. It's also the case that, lacking a knowledge of the processes of evolution, it's much harder to see how complex organisms can manifest barring the intervention of a God. Evolution was a philosophical watershed - a perfect exemplar of the fallacy of the case where, lacking knowledge of system, one posits some supernatural intervention to make up for the holes in one's understanding.
Satire
> Without patents the SW industry would collapse
How ever did it function in the dark years *before* software patents, then?
My dog liked weed - I used to smoke it and he'd come up and sit in front of me while I blew smoke gently towards him. Then he'd get all mellow and go watch the tasty animals on nature documentaries - he used to lick his lips.
You made me cry...
3
Enormously better quality of life? Being able to live how you choose, where you choose, when you choose. Being treated with respect by the kind of fuckwads who judge you by your bank account. Being able to shrug off ordinarily crippling financial crises like the car you use to travel to work breaking down. Being able to afford dental treatment when you're in severe pain. Being able to afford a doctor who *isn't* a cretin. Buying that dress and those shoes. Eating how you please as opposed to whatever you can afford.
That's just a start. You've never been poor, have you? You have no idea whatsoever of what you're talking about, but you just couldn't resist expressing your opinion.
You left out those nice people with the pink triangles.That happens a lot.
*cheers enthusiastically*
I'd mod you up if I could.