And Ironicly Darwin, himself, professed Christianity later in his life.
Did he then profess the theory of evolution, and science in general, to be invalid? And, if he professed Christianty, did he also then seek to wipe all other points of view - one of the stated goals of christianity? Just because he professed christianty, you're assuming he agrees with you? That seems presumtious to me.
Darwin didn't argue against god, anyway, but in favor of a scientific explanation for the diversification of species. The problem is that science tends to undermine social control structures which are based on less than rational belief systems. Thus, christianity seeks to discredit much of science, even today.
What's really ironic is that at one point in time, christianity was a force for preserving civilization. Now, it consistantly apears to be opposing it in so many instances.
Is it possible that a genius might exist such that their developed ability would be to easily figure out what's easy and what's hard for someone else?
I just think it must be at least theoretically possible, since I've know people with what seem to be remarkable predispositions for certain intellectual specializations, like math or physics. When I read your earlier comment, I wondered if it might not be possible for someone to possess an intellectual predisposition for knowing what's easy and hard for others to grasp, and also possible to have developed that intellectual gift.
Re:That's great and all, but...
on
Growing Insulin
·
· Score: 1
How about here. Its the closest to a real cure for type 1 so far, and oddly, Denise Faustman has had trouble getting federal funds for what is arguably a real cure for type 1 diabetes. Makes one wonder where the FDA's priorities are - cures or selling maintenance for chronic illness.
The original point is that music 'piracy' should rightfully be the last thing on the minds of world leaders, which is correct. Its a trivial problem when compared to something like world hunger. If you don't think so, try starving yourself and see how important it is to make sure record labels can continue to screw music listeners over and sue infants and dead people for no reason. Try to excercise enough thinking ability to stay on some kind of coherent topic.
No, i think you mean, "give us customers money in exchange for music that we recorded"
The UK recording industry doesn't record music - they're just an organization to protect the existing channels of distribution, and exist exclusively for the benefit of those channels of distribution, not music creators or consumers.
Besides, this should be the last thing for world leaders to be bothered with - ever.
Has everyone forgotten about FIPS-181? Making a non-word password pronounceable at least increases the chances it won't get written down. Then at least if someone steals one part of two factor authentication, there's less of a chance that the password hasn't been lifted as well.
They'd pay a bunch of money to their ISP, get a contract with a Service Level Agreement, and have an external service monitor check their web site response times to make sure that the higher speed they paid for is what they get. Then, lo and behold, they end up not getting what they paid for. Why? Because implementing QOS/Differv across the Internet will not result in consistant higher speeds. After all, each and every piece of equipment on the Internet will need to have a compatible configuration for QOS/Diffserv to work with any consistancy. And, the last mile will make more of a difference that the backbone (the ones youtube most likely paid for higher speeds). The last mile is where traffic is most variable, and fan-out occurs, and where the mapping between Diffserv and QoS will decide whose packets go into which queue. So without getting ALL local ISPs on board with compatible configurations, its unlikey that youtube's ISP will get consistant improvement for youtube.
Even more interesting is that without net neutrality, ISPs will be buried under a mountain of regs dwarfing any legislation. That's because already people are talking about making sure 911 VOIP calls get top priority. If the internet is kept neutral, ISPs can legitmately claim that there's no way to prioritize VOIP 911 calls, so government regulation would be pointless. Once the QoS/Diffserv genie is out of the bottle, they'll have to admit thay can prioritize 911 calls. At that point, there'll be no way to stop government regulation of QoS/Diffserv. After, what politician wants to be know as the one that stopped 911 calls? During a terrorist crisis?
People thinking that being against net neutrality will reduce government regulation have it completely backwards. Without net neutrality, ISPs face a regulation juggernaught out of their worst nightmare. Net neutrality is actually the only chance to limit further government regulation.
Since google is now declared a verb, will that weaken the value of the word 'google' as a trademark? If I register 'googlearound.com' as a domain (not that I would do something so stupid, since godaddy, the Internet's official domain slut, already has), would it be harder for google to sue me?
I wonder if they'll block transfers from arab sounding names to George Bush (not senior). Hate to stop all that Saudi cash headed to republican pockets.
The worst mosquitoes I ever saw were in Minnesota at a military toxic superfund clean up site (not yet cleaned up). They told us not to dig more than an inch into the ground. We were setting up microwave shots for military cellphone towers. I covered myself in DEET. I was ruthlessly swarmed, and they were biting me on my eyelids (up to my eyelashes, and not just the occasional one either, but swarming my eyelids - I couldn't stand to put DEET in my eyes, so they swarmed them), lips, and inside my ears - the only places not soaked in DEET. No kidding- it was unbelievable.
The problem seems to stem from applying laws made to deal with non-abstract tangible mediums that are not very tractable to software, a non-abstract medium which is *highly* tractable. Software needs a unique set of laws, since its distinctly different from both material property or intellectual property. It could be argued that software is one of the most tractable of all mediums, other than pure imagination.
...could be that software is one of the most tractable of all non-abstract mediums, and we're attempting to apply laws intended for much less tractable non-abstract mediums.
So won't work.
Actually, thanks to people designing better bank vaults. That they are motivated by bank robbers shouldn't mean you give credit to the bank robber. Give credit to the engineer building the bank vaults. Bank robbers don't design safes. At least, not yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Christianity does not seek to discredit science
Just the parts of science that explain the diversification of species.
when you obviously know little about it
Why thank you for that sweeping generalization about me. Do you know what 'Ad Homonym' means?
And Ironicly Darwin, himself, professed Christianity later in his life.
Did he then profess the theory of evolution, and science in general, to be invalid? And, if he professed Christianty, did he also then seek to wipe all other points of view - one of the stated goals of christianity? Just because he professed christianty, you're assuming he agrees with you? That seems presumtious to me.
Darwin didn't argue against god, anyway, but in favor of a scientific explanation for the diversification of species. The problem is that science tends to undermine social control structures which are based on less than rational belief systems. Thus, christianity seeks to discredit much of science, even today.
What's really ironic is that at one point in time, christianity was a force for preserving civilization. Now, it consistantly apears to be opposing it in so many instances.
Sure, that's even probable, but we don't measure for that when doing IQ tests.
That sounds like a job for a genius
Is it possible that a genius might exist such that their developed ability would be to easily figure out what's easy and what's hard for someone else?
I just think it must be at least theoretically possible, since I've know people with what seem to be remarkable predispositions for certain intellectual specializations, like math or physics. When I read your earlier comment, I wondered if it might not be possible for someone to possess an intellectual predisposition for knowing what's easy and hard for others to grasp, and also possible to have developed that intellectual gift.
Figuring out what needs extra exposition is actually hard
Even for a genius plus?
Make waste...
Needs more bell...
How about here. Its the closest to a real cure for type 1 so far, and oddly, Denise Faustman has had trouble getting federal funds for what is arguably a real cure for type 1 diabetes. Makes one wonder where the FDA's priorities are - cures or selling maintenance for chronic illness.
Before anyone gets all righteous on me and mods me to death, I'm borderline OCD.
Young males go to blogs for free beer and free sex, finding neither.
The original point is that music 'piracy' should rightfully be the last thing on the minds of world leaders, which is correct. Its a trivial problem when compared to something like world hunger. If you don't think so, try starving yourself and see how important it is to make sure record labels can continue to screw music listeners over and sue infants and dead people for no reason. Try to excercise enough thinking ability to stay on some kind of coherent topic.
No, i think you mean, "give us customers money in exchange for music that we recorded"
The UK recording industry doesn't record music - they're just an organization to protect the existing channels of distribution, and exist exclusively for the benefit of those channels of distribution, not music creators or consumers.
Besides, this should be the last thing for world leaders to be bothered with - ever.
Or AIDS, flu pandemic, nuclear proliferation, or climate change. Just give us other people's money for free.
Greedy shitheads.
They just slowly get virtualized....
FTA:the quasar observations are sometimes interpreted as indicating that light was faster in the past,
They just don't make photons like they use to...
Has everyone forgotten about FIPS-181? Making a non-word password pronounceable at least increases the chances it won't get written down. Then at least if someone steals one part of two factor authentication, there's less of a chance that the password hasn't been lifted as well.
Users found uninteresting in about .036 seconds...
They'd pay a bunch of money to their ISP, get a contract with a Service Level Agreement, and have an external service monitor check their web site response times to make sure that the higher speed they paid for is what they get. Then, lo and behold, they end up not getting what they paid for. Why? Because implementing QOS/Differv across the Internet will not result in consistant higher speeds. After all, each and every piece of equipment on the Internet will need to have a compatible configuration for QOS/Diffserv to work with any consistancy. And, the last mile will make more of a difference that the backbone (the ones youtube most likely paid for higher speeds). The last mile is where traffic is most variable, and fan-out occurs, and where the mapping between Diffserv and QoS will decide whose packets go into which queue. So without getting ALL local ISPs on board with compatible configurations, its unlikey that youtube's ISP will get consistant improvement for youtube.
Even more interesting is that without net neutrality, ISPs will be buried under a mountain of regs dwarfing any legislation. That's because already people are talking about making sure 911 VOIP calls get top priority. If the internet is kept neutral, ISPs can legitmately claim that there's no way to prioritize VOIP 911 calls, so government regulation would be pointless. Once the QoS/Diffserv genie is out of the bottle, they'll have to admit thay can prioritize 911 calls. At that point, there'll be no way to stop government regulation of QoS/Diffserv. After, what politician wants to be know as the one that stopped 911 calls? During a terrorist crisis?
People thinking that being against net neutrality will reduce government regulation have it completely backwards. Without net neutrality, ISPs face a regulation juggernaught out of their worst nightmare. Net neutrality is actually the only chance to limit further government regulation.
Since google is now declared a verb, will that weaken the value of the word 'google' as a trademark? If I register 'googlearound.com' as a domain (not that I would do something so stupid, since godaddy, the Internet's official domain slut, already has), would it be harder for google to sue me?
just wondering
I wonder if they'll block transfers from arab sounding names to George Bush (not senior). Hate to stop all that Saudi cash headed to republican pockets.
The worst mosquitoes I ever saw were in Minnesota at a military toxic superfund clean up site (not yet cleaned up). They told us not to dig more than an inch into the ground. We were setting up microwave shots for military cellphone towers. I covered myself in DEET. I was ruthlessly swarmed, and they were biting me on my eyelids (up to my eyelashes, and not just the occasional one either, but swarming my eyelids - I couldn't stand to put DEET in my eyes, so they swarmed them), lips, and inside my ears - the only places not soaked in DEET. No kidding- it was unbelievable.
A person without religion is like a fish without a bicycle.
The problem seems to stem from applying laws made to deal with non-abstract tangible mediums that are not very tractable to software, a non-abstract medium which is *highly* tractable. Software needs a unique set of laws, since its distinctly different from both material property or intellectual property. It could be argued that software is one of the most tractable of all mediums, other than pure imagination.
...could be that software is one of the most tractable of all non-abstract mediums, and we're attempting to apply laws intended for much less tractable non-abstract mediums. So won't work.
Actually, thanks to people designing better bank vaults. That they are motivated by bank robbers shouldn't mean you give credit to the bank robber. Give credit to the engineer building the bank vaults. Bank robbers don't design safes. At least, not yet.