This really gets me excited for the possibility of malware using exploits to take advantage of Vista's Trusted Computing (TM) framework. Won't that be spiffy if somehow, once it gets into your system, a piece of malware can suddenly decide that your monitor, ethernet/modem, and sound card aren't Trusted (TM)?
What we need is an Internet Bill of Rights to guarantee several conditions of the Internet as it exists today. The Internet today only enjoys things like freedom of speech and freedom from taxation because that is the current policy of the U.S. -- but who knows when that could change? I'm not giving disrespect to how the U.S. currently runs the Internet; rather, I think some of the U.S.'s policies of Internet governance need to be codefied into international law. Then and only then should we even consider handing the Internet over to the U.N.
With a low price-point, it sounds like they want to clean up in the Chinese market that's sprouted up this time 'round. And it's not like they have a lot of HDTVs.
Personally, I could care less about HD... I've seen what it can do, and it doesn't seem to be that great of an advancement to me. Besides, a non-HD Nintendo means beautiful frame rates... and games with a cell-shaded look to them will look the same whether on HD or regular TV.
It is... notice the constructor is private. I suppose I could go all the way and add a.getInstance(), but I feel making the act of creation a public static method on the God class to be adequate according to popular monotheistic views.
Assuming that we did teach ID in schools... what would be the material?
"And so God created all the organisms on earth."
Little Johnny asks, "How?"
Teacher replies, "Well, he just created them. Poof! And there they were."
That's all ID would contribute to science.
If someone wants to believe now that the HOW is evolution, and the WHAT/WHO that started it all is God, then great, but it's not science. Science (apart from cosmology) makes no attempts at explaining the origin of Origin, just all the processes. In the end, to explain the origin of everything, you have to get axiomatic about something: everyone agrees that axiom to be some form of infinity, whereas some attribute consciousness to that Infinity and others, non-consciousness. Did Void spawn the Universe, or did the er... opposite of Void (God) do it?
As someone who believes God exists, I think evolution is fine. I accept spiritual evolution as a necessity for myself, so I don't see why physical evolution would be a problem either.
Turbolinux or Red Flag linux would make more sense. And what would make even more sense would be the government helping to partially fund any local Korean distros that are basing themselves on Asianux (which is turn is based on DCC I believe, so it should be a pretty solid system).
In general, I hope countries around the world try to move to localized distributors of Linux. This is the real strength of Linux.
Long after the United States is gone, there will still be the Internet.
Though it's also very possible we'll eventually see three internets: one controlled by multinationals and market forces, one controlled by a council of governments, and another controlled solely by individuals secretly piggybacking on the infrastructure of the other two internets.
I'll try to find something for you, but I don't really have any of my old college textbooks lying around! I'm pretty sure at least these kind of statements were only in the introduction or concluding chapters, and are probably just an unintentional outpouring of the writer's passion. Also, I bet a lot of times it had more to do with how a teacher would present the information, rather than the information itself.
Just look out for it, and you'll see something eventually. There aren't a lot of examples in textbooks and papers, fortunately, though there are plenty in pop-science stuff (Sagan, Hawking, stuff like that) -- which is fine; that's where opinionated metaphysics derived from science belong.
Wine is always going to be late with the latest Windows APIs, true... but many corporations have a lot of stuff running that was coded for Win98, Win2k. Wine will be great for these apps.
If people want to write new applications in Windows, then they're committing to Windows for longer and aren't migrating. If migrating, then Wine can cover their old apps and new apps will be for Linux or whatever.
The Mono Project is to.NET what Wine is to the Win32 api. Wine is not "Windows Compatibility" as you seem to think, but "Win32 implementation in UNIX". There is a huge need for this. It's kind of like the reverse of what Microsoft is considering with implementing a POSIX layer in Vista.
It's not only the theistic scientists who seem to want to mix philosophy and science together: it is clear from reading school textbooks that a few atheistic scientists have also acted very unprofessionally in pushing their own agendas in the classroom, when they combine scientific facts with popular metaphysics from the "church of science". Seriously, some scientists act as though science is their religion, and they get away with publishing these non-scientific thoughts a lot more often than theistic scientists do.
Neither should get away with it. Ideas on origins and other extra-universe concepts are NOT science. Science is a tool, constrained by the testable universe. We have plenty of other avenues for truth-seekers other than science: religion, art, and other parts of culture. When the day is done, the best any one person can do is make a well-thought judgement that is only partially based on objective fact, but largely based on gut instinct as well.
I remember from my AI class in college that we don't even have a concrete scientific definition of intelligence. So then how can "intelligent design" even be a topic of discussion?
We should show students that there is an amazing and remarkable pattern in the evolution of species and in the complexity of their composition, and that this pattern extends throughout the universe. But what to conclude from this pattern is either:
1) It appears to be a pattern only because if the universe weren't so ordered, we wouldn't be here to perceive it in the first place (anthropic principle). This would also lead you to think that there must be an infinity of universes: a continuum infinity of dud universe that have bad physics, and a countable infinity of successful universes that have good physics which actually work out.
2) There is only one universe, so some huge meta-physic must guide its processes. Some may call this meta-physic God.
From (1) you might also decide that we're actually living in a dud universe, since it really is breaking down. Who knows, maybe it's nothing more than a flash-in-the-pan pop, and there are actually far more elegant and robust, eternal universes out there.
Wine should eventually be able to take care of older Win32 stuff. New stuff should just be written cross-platform. For apps and situations that Wine can't handle -- well, you probably have a lot of Windows lisences, so just don't upgrade, and run those legacy Windows apps under Xen 3.0.
But I believe Wine will become an integral part of the Linux desktop, once it hits version 1.0. It'll possibly make a bigger impact than Firefox did.
There needs to be more discussion of the possibility that natural selection is not the only driving factor in evolution.
What if some fundamental principle of life is guiding evolution? Much like how a tree grows from a seed, perhaps the entire tree of species adheres to a pattern as well. It can be partially random, but it also follows a "path of least resistance", like a ripple in water.
Here, your own Bible says that God didn't directly create animals, but that he gave his blessing for the earth to produce life:
And God said, "Let the land produce living creatues, according to their kinds..."
Gen 1:24
So, even if I chose to argue with the creationist point of view solely from the Bible, you can't say that God just popped a creature into existence. He let the land produce the living creatures -- can this leave room for interpretation that God said, "let life evolve?"
It would make for an interesting study whether evolution is completely random or not. Perhaps the whole tree of species is following some sort of pattern, like a literal tree growing from a single seed -- some randomness is involved, but overall, there is a meaning and order to how the growing tree develops.
This kind of science would overlap more with Gaia theory than theology.
... in America at least. But overseas, where Microsoft is viewed as a foreign entity, migration to ODF, and by effect, OpenOffice, will be swift.
I think more American companies will begin migrating to ODF as a web-services ecosystem builds up around the format. Everyone who thinks that "web office" is a good idea is silly, silly, IMHO. Instead, what's really exciting is the ability of ODF to accomplish in a real way what everyone thought barebones XML was going to do for inter-company document processing.
Wherever there's a crack, Linux does seep in. At first, it just looks as though the crack swallowed it up... but eventually, the Linux that has seeped in there crystalizes a community around it, spreads the crack wider, lets more Linux seep in....
Slashdot Mirror
This really gets me excited for the possibility of malware using exploits to take advantage of Vista's Trusted Computing (TM) framework. Won't that be spiffy if somehow, once it gets into your system, a piece of malware can suddenly decide that your monitor, ethernet/modem, and sound card aren't Trusted (TM)?
Oh frapjuous day.
I'm in healthcare IT, and needless to say, we test the daylights out of our code.
What we need is an Internet Bill of Rights to guarantee several conditions of the Internet as it exists today. The Internet today only enjoys things like freedom of speech and freedom from taxation because that is the current policy of the U.S. -- but who knows when that could change? I'm not giving disrespect to how the U.S. currently runs the Internet; rather, I think some of the U.S.'s policies of Internet governance need to be codefied into international law. Then and only then should we even consider handing the Internet over to the U.N.
Heheh, I'm not advocating. Buy what you want, but I know I'm not interested in HD or XBox/PS3. So I'll buy what I want then too!
With a low price-point, it sounds like they want to clean up in the Chinese market that's sprouted up this time 'round. And it's not like they have a lot of HDTVs.
... I've seen what it can do, and it doesn't seem to be that great of an advancement to me. Besides, a non-HD Nintendo means beautiful frame rates ... and games with a cell-shaded look to them will look the same whether on HD or regular TV.
Personally, I could care less about HD
Red Hat would be Doc Holiday.
It is ... notice the constructor is private. I suppose I could go all the way and add a .getInstance(), but I feel making the act of creation a public static method on the God class to be adequate according to popular monotheistic views.
public final class God {
private God() {}
public static Universe createUniverse() {
Universe uni = new EvolvingUniverseImpl();
return uni;
}
}
public static void main() {
Universe theUniverse = God.createUniverse();
}
Assuming that we did teach ID in schools ... what would be the material?
... opposite of Void (God) do it?
"And so God created all the organisms on earth."
Little Johnny asks, "How?"
Teacher replies, "Well, he just created them. Poof! And there they were."
That's all ID would contribute to science.
If someone wants to believe now that the HOW is evolution, and the WHAT/WHO that started it all is God, then great, but it's not science. Science (apart from cosmology) makes no attempts at explaining the origin of Origin, just all the processes. In the end, to explain the origin of everything, you have to get axiomatic about something: everyone agrees that axiom to be some form of infinity, whereas some attribute consciousness to that Infinity and others, non-consciousness. Did Void spawn the Universe, or did the er
As someone who believes God exists, I think evolution is fine. I accept spiritual evolution as a necessity for myself, so I don't see why physical evolution would be a problem either.
They almost missed it ... November's here already, less than two months left to enter!
Turbolinux or Red Flag linux would make more sense. And what would make even more sense would be the government helping to partially fund any local Korean distros that are basing themselves on Asianux (which is turn is based on DCC I believe, so it should be a pretty solid system).
In general, I hope countries around the world try to move to localized distributors of Linux. This is the real strength of Linux.
Long after the United States is gone, there will still be the Internet.
Though it's also very possible we'll eventually see three internets: one controlled by multinationals and market forces, one controlled by a council of governments, and another controlled solely by individuals secretly piggybacking on the infrastructure of the other two internets.
Damn, I should write a sci-fi novel!
However, an anal-ogg hole would _not_ be approved at this time.
I meant my old high school textbooks.
I'll try to find something for you, but I don't really have any of my old college textbooks lying around! I'm pretty sure at least these kind of statements were only in the introduction or concluding chapters, and are probably just an unintentional outpouring of the writer's passion. Also, I bet a lot of times it had more to do with how a teacher would present the information, rather than the information itself.
Just look out for it, and you'll see something eventually. There aren't a lot of examples in textbooks and papers, fortunately, though there are plenty in pop-science stuff (Sagan, Hawking, stuff like that) -- which is fine; that's where opinionated metaphysics derived from science belong.
Wine is always going to be late with the latest Windows APIs, true ... but many corporations have a lot of stuff running that was coded for Win98, Win2k. Wine will be great for these apps.
.NET what Wine is to the Win32 api. Wine is not "Windows Compatibility" as you seem to think, but "Win32 implementation in UNIX". There is a huge need for this. It's kind of like the reverse of what Microsoft is considering with implementing a POSIX layer in Vista.
If people want to write new applications in Windows, then they're committing to Windows for longer and aren't migrating. If migrating, then Wine can cover their old apps and new apps will be for Linux or whatever.
The Mono Project is to
It's not only the theistic scientists who seem to want to mix philosophy and science together: it is clear from reading school textbooks that a few atheistic scientists have also acted very unprofessionally in pushing their own agendas in the classroom, when they combine scientific facts with popular metaphysics from the "church of science". Seriously, some scientists act as though science is their religion, and they get away with publishing these non-scientific thoughts a lot more often than theistic scientists do.
Neither should get away with it. Ideas on origins and other extra-universe concepts are NOT science. Science is a tool, constrained by the testable universe. We have plenty of other avenues for truth-seekers other than science: religion, art, and other parts of culture. When the day is done, the best any one person can do is make a well-thought judgement that is only partially based on objective fact, but largely based on gut instinct as well.
I remember from my AI class in college that we don't even have a concrete scientific definition of intelligence. So then how can "intelligent design" even be a topic of discussion? We should show students that there is an amazing and remarkable pattern in the evolution of species and in the complexity of their composition, and that this pattern extends throughout the universe. But what to conclude from this pattern is either: 1) It appears to be a pattern only because if the universe weren't so ordered, we wouldn't be here to perceive it in the first place (anthropic principle). This would also lead you to think that there must be an infinity of universes: a continuum infinity of dud universe that have bad physics, and a countable infinity of successful universes that have good physics which actually work out. 2) There is only one universe, so some huge meta-physic must guide its processes. Some may call this meta-physic God. From (1) you might also decide that we're actually living in a dud universe, since it really is breaking down. Who knows, maybe it's nothing more than a flash-in-the-pan pop, and there are actually far more elegant and robust, eternal universes out there.
Wine should eventually be able to take care of older Win32 stuff. New stuff should just be written cross-platform. For apps and situations that Wine can't handle -- well, you probably have a lot of Windows lisences, so just don't upgrade, and run those legacy Windows apps under Xen 3.0.
But I believe Wine will become an integral part of the Linux desktop, once it hits version 1.0. It'll possibly make a bigger impact than Firefox did.
There needs to be more discussion of the possibility that natural selection is not the only driving factor in evolution.
What if some fundamental principle of life is guiding evolution? Much like how a tree grows from a seed, perhaps the entire tree of species adheres to a pattern as well. It can be partially random, but it also follows a "path of least resistance", like a ripple in water.
Here, your own Bible says that God didn't directly create animals, but that he gave his blessing for the earth to produce life:
..."
And God said, "Let the land produce living creatues, according to their kinds
Gen 1:24
So, even if I chose to argue with the creationist point of view solely from the Bible, you can't say that God just popped a creature into existence. He let the land produce the living creatures -- can this leave room for interpretation that God said, "let life evolve?"
It would make for an interesting study whether evolution is completely random or not. Perhaps the whole tree of species is following some sort of pattern, like a literal tree growing from a single seed -- some randomness is involved, but overall, there is a meaning and order to how the growing tree develops.
This kind of science would overlap more with Gaia theory than theology.
Wow, crackers and script kiddies around the world are going to oggle this kill and salivate.
... in America at least. But overseas, where Microsoft is viewed as a foreign entity, migration to ODF, and by effect, OpenOffice, will be swift.
I think more American companies will begin migrating to ODF as a web-services ecosystem builds up around the format. Everyone who thinks that "web office" is a good idea is silly, silly, IMHO. Instead, what's really exciting is the ability of ODF to accomplish in a real way what everyone thought barebones XML was going to do for inter-company document processing.
Wherever there's a crack, Linux does seep in. At first, it just looks as though the crack swallowed it up ... but eventually, the Linux that has seeped in there crystalizes a community around it, spreads the crack wider, lets more Linux seep in ....