The reality is the question of "if something works" and "if something should be done" are two very, very different things. And progress does not happen when you ignore either one.
It might just be me, but I read that several times and I'm still not totally sure what you mean. I'm also not sure how one might 'ignore' either of these 'questions' because of progress.
Is the buyer really going to come back and demand a refund when it doesn't work?
If enough money changes hands (they'll be bought and sold in tens or hundreds of thousands), the buyer's retaliation would probably be to have the seller whacked.
This would seem to pave the way for the erosion of anonymity on the internet, except for those who want and know how to keep it. This satisfies both those who call for accountability on the internet (most people will be accountable), and those who want to stay anonymous.
With regards to content, this may as well be a troll, but it reads serious. I'll bite.
Religion tries to explain everything from above. Science tries to explain everything like a couple of blind people touching an elephant. Sometimes they will be close to the truth sometimes they are completely off.
1. Science and religion are trying to explain completely different things (religion tackles moral issues, science tackles the workings of reality).
2. Hence, if I want to know what the elephant looks like, I'll listen to the blind guys. If I want to know where the elephant came from, I'll listen to that other blind guy who goes to the zoo every Sunday.
The problem with science is that they are missing the moral factor, allowing them to do everything that only hurts us, or destroys our world. They are of course doing some good things too, but the question is if those good things outreach the bad things. Looking at our earth, I would say no.
Science does things. It is up to the consciences of the user of science and observer whether science is used for, and whether that use is, good or bad.
Taking away our believes, in a better life afterwards, makes people lose hope for this live, losing the moral, making humankind do all kind of bad things, making live for themselves or for others unlivable.
You're saying that unless there's the fear of consequences in the afterlife, people won't bother doing good in this life. On the contrary: all the rules of law in human history make doing good for your fellow man profitable now.
People are living worse everyday, no moral anymore, lots of sickness, more struggles, no hope, and still science believes they are god...
I don't know whether this is true or false (only way to know the state of the world is via the media, and the media is useless), but if science is the cause, it's only accelerating the inevitable.
That's like saying it's no biggie that large, hairy gay men are winking suggestively at you on the street since they aren't actually pinning you down and having their way with you.
(Apologies to gays who are into that sort of thing.)
Also, doesn't converting other currencies to virtual currency cause a duplication of the money? I mean, you give the company your Korean won and they have to make you some cash.
Well, unless they move the money to you from a virtual vault they own, and to have such a thing they'd have to change the whole system.
Additionally to the 'political discussion' point, what stories like this do actually help make any real discussion very difficult because people get stoked up with emotions, rather than thinking about facts. Consequently now, a small bunch of people, when thinking who to vote for, will see a candidate's policy on 'reducing healthcare spending' and immediately think 'WE CAN'T HAVE MORE PEOPLE LYING IN THEIR BEDS FOR 23 YEARS, OH GOD HOW HORRIBLE', and not vote for someone who might be a totally sensible candidate.
And, of course, stories like this come out all the time, so the number of people who think like this is growing. Basically, stories like this (and publications like the Daily Mail in general) do nothing but help to shit up the already shitty democratic process by encouraging dumbasses (the majority of the population) to think about garbage.
To clarify your pudding simile, I think you're talking about the fact that python gives you lovely shortcuts and different ways of doing things which help make programming more intuitive - too intuitive. I did exactly the same thing - I started with Perl, and then found myself floundering when I couldn't use foreach or until, or use special variables, in other languages.
Yeah, he should have considered the alternative possible cause: the printer responded with evil electrical signals when it was told it was going to be used as the default printer (printers don't like being told that), which caused Word to crash.
There isn't what you might call 'no difference' between the two things. 'Spanking' refers to using force on children strictly disciplinarily, possibly when the child is not yet old enough to understand verbal commands, and especially to stop them from doing things which might actually hurt them (such as playing with power sockets, stovetops, and the like). 'Beating' refers to hurting children because you're drugged up, sadistic, or both.
Your only contention would appear to be that you are simply not 'hip' to the 'rhymes' from the 'ghetto' like this gentleman or I clearly am. I would be so presumptuous as to suggest that you are the one at error.
Much obliged for you to stop 'hating', Wizzy Bizzy Izzy Thizzy Dogg
Slashdot Mirror
The reality is the question of "if something works" and "if something should be done" are two very, very different things. And progress does not happen when you ignore either one.
It might just be me, but I read that several times and I'm still not totally sure what you mean. I'm also not sure how one might 'ignore' either of these 'questions' because of progress.
http://www.timecube.com/
It's probably in there somewhere.
Fucking fat-ass plants.
Is the buyer really going to come back and demand a refund when it doesn't work?
If enough money changes hands (they'll be bought and sold in tens or hundreds of thousands), the buyer's retaliation would probably be to have the seller whacked.
What exactly is the informative or educational value of pubic lice?
This story is letting me know that yes, people can be and are indeed that passive-aggressive and disgusting.
This would seem to pave the way for the erosion of anonymity on the internet, except for those who want and know how to keep it. This satisfies both those who call for accountability on the internet (most people will be accountable), and those who want to stay anonymous.
Starting a thread: Posting is an art; be proud of your work.
This tells you everything you need to know about these forums.
Religion tries to explain everything from above. Science tries to explain everything like a couple of blind people touching an elephant. Sometimes they will be close to the truth sometimes they are completely off.
1. Science and religion are trying to explain completely different things (religion tackles moral issues, science tackles the workings of reality). 2. Hence, if I want to know what the elephant looks like, I'll listen to the blind guys. If I want to know where the elephant came from, I'll listen to that other blind guy who goes to the zoo every Sunday.
The problem with science is that they are missing the moral factor, allowing them to do everything that only hurts us, or destroys our world. They are of course doing some good things too, but the question is if those good things outreach the bad things. Looking at our earth, I would say no.
Science does things. It is up to the consciences of the user of science and observer whether science is used for, and whether that use is, good or bad.
Taking away our believes, in a better life afterwards, makes people lose hope for this live, losing the moral, making humankind do all kind of bad things, making live for themselves or for others unlivable.
You're saying that unless there's the fear of consequences in the afterlife, people won't bother doing good in this life. On the contrary: all the rules of law in human history make doing good for your fellow man profitable now.
People are living worse everyday, no moral anymore, lots of sickness, more struggles, no hope, and still science believes they are god...
I don't know whether this is true or false (only way to know the state of the world is via the media, and the media is useless), but if science is the cause, it's only accelerating the inevitable.
Ho ho ho ho HO HO HO. Nobody's made THAT fucking joke before.
I reckon if this phrase doesn't set extreme-right-wing America straight, then nothing will.
That's absolutely true. Why could he not have submitted it anonymously?
I had to read through 50 comments of confused, juvenile bullshit and slapfighting to get at this succinct summary of everything in it worth reading?
That's like saying it's no biggie that large, hairy gay men are winking suggestively at you on the street since they aren't actually pinning you down and having their way with you.
(Apologies to gays who are into that sort of thing.)
They speak of 4chan and moot as if anyone here gives a shit...
Whoosh.
Also, doesn't converting other currencies to virtual currency cause a duplication of the money? I mean, you give the company your Korean won and they have to make you some cash. Well, unless they move the money to you from a virtual vault they own, and to have such a thing they'd have to change the whole system.
I hope you're coding a washing machine or something.
Additionally to the 'political discussion' point, what stories like this do actually help make any real discussion very difficult because people get stoked up with emotions, rather than thinking about facts. Consequently now, a small bunch of people, when thinking who to vote for, will see a candidate's policy on 'reducing healthcare spending' and immediately think 'WE CAN'T HAVE MORE PEOPLE LYING IN THEIR BEDS FOR 23 YEARS, OH GOD HOW HORRIBLE', and not vote for someone who might be a totally sensible candidate.
And, of course, stories like this come out all the time, so the number of people who think like this is growing. Basically, stories like this (and publications like the Daily Mail in general) do nothing but help to shit up the already shitty democratic process by encouraging dumbasses (the majority of the population) to think about garbage.
I get that you're being sarcastic, but you're still wrong.
To clarify your pudding simile, I think you're talking about the fact that python gives you lovely shortcuts and different ways of doing things which help make programming more intuitive - too intuitive. I did exactly the same thing - I started with Perl, and then found myself floundering when I couldn't use foreach or until, or use special variables, in other languages.
good
I don't think that word means what you think it does.
Yeah, he should have considered the alternative possible cause: the printer responded with evil electrical signals when it was told it was going to be used as the default printer (printers don't like being told that), which caused Word to crash.
Way to counter his point there, sport!
There isn't what you might call 'no difference' between the two things. 'Spanking' refers to using force on children strictly disciplinarily, possibly when the child is not yet old enough to understand verbal commands, and especially to stop them from doing things which might actually hurt them (such as playing with power sockets, stovetops, and the like). 'Beating' refers to hurting children because you're drugged up, sadistic, or both.
Dear sir or madam,
Your only contention would appear to be that you are simply not 'hip' to the 'rhymes' from the 'ghetto' like this gentleman or I clearly am. I would be so presumptuous as to suggest that you are the one at error.
Much obliged for you to stop 'hating',
Wizzy Bizzy Izzy Thizzy Dogg