For all the bad stuff I'd heard about the big pharmaceutical companies, I feel somewhat better about the fact that they'll do the right thing when it doesn't get in the way of profit, as compared to never doing the right thing...
If God's already done what hes going to do and not intervening in anything then who cares if he exists or not?
As an athiest (more or less), that's my line of thinking too. Why is he necessary at all? And if he does exist, where did he come from? And if he didn't come from anywhere and he's always existed, then by that logic the universe could have always existed too, without needing God. I think we can never know if the universe is deterministic though. Is the outcome of anything that happens fixed or random? If it's fixed, then God (being all knowing) should already know how it ends, and we have no control over our destiny. If it's random, then maybe he gets to fiddle with the randomness every now and then, just for a laugh.
OTOH, maybe he's just hanging around waiting for you to die so he can judge you?:)
A null hypothesis must be falsifiable, and therefor "it must be a wizard that did it" cannot be the null hypothesis.
It's a bottomless pit of null hypotheses though.
1. "God made the world exactly as it was, 6000 years ago". That's easily falsifiable.
2. "God made the world and then designed all the living things on it". So... all the extinct animals were Gods mistakes? I thought he didn't make mistakes.
3. "God created the world and let nature evolve itself". That's kind of getting better, but we can see by looking at the stars that things were probably all in one spot originally.
4. "God made the big bang and let the universe happen according to science". That's not falsifiable now, and maybe it never will be, but even if we figure out a scientific explanation for what started the big bang, what started that? My opinion is that if we get this far then science and religion are finally in their correct corners and the null hypothesis doesn't matter any more.
The bible was written based on the science of the time. Can't you imagine all the priests sitting around the lecture hall with God explaining the original singularity, the big bang, the fusion at the core of the stars, gravity, the speed of light? Then after the exam the priests chatting amongst themselves... "what did you put for question 1?" "to be honest I got a bit lost with all that big bang stuff... I just put 'In the beginning there was nothing'... it's kind of right and our descendants will figure out what it means... it's not like they'll take this thing literally".
Nutjobs aside, most sensible Christians seem quite happy to take evolution on board, and indeed any scientific theory right back to the big bang. But when the question "why did the big bang happen?" is asked, what other answer do you have? I don't believe in God myself, but the answer "God did it" seems a little more valid that "we don't know exactly what started the big bang, but we're sure it wasn't God" or "it is what it is". And if someday we figure out how the big bang started, there is still going to be the question of what started that. I almost like "God did it" as the null hypothesis for the start of the universe because it doesn't matter. It means that maybe God (the supposed Intelligent Designer) set the initial parameters for the universe and then let science make everything happen since then, which means science can go on trying to understand the universe, religion can worry about how it all started and what it all means, the two of them can stay out of each others way, and the rest of us can get on with life.
That was my first question... do they mean "it can tell that the object 2 miles away is a human", or "it can tell that the object 2 miles away is the specific human it is after out of the 7 billion on this planet". I guess it could do the latter if the target promised to wear their locating beacon.
The original doom used to have a mode where you could run separate computers (connected to yours via serial or lan) with a command line option (might have been -left and -right), set up the monitors to the left and right of your main monitor, and have a 3 monitor setup. Real clustered gaming.
Which is not to mention that the NSA has done more to contribute to the security of the Linux kernel
Well... Linux is open source so you can't just pay Bill Gates a few billion to install a backdoor or two, you have to submit masses of code with a bunch of carefully hidden and related 'flaws' to create a back door without the maintainers spotting it.
The Credit Card system could be done a lot better. Sony shouldn't need your CC number, all they should need is a magic number that authorizes Sony to transfer funds from your account to theirs. I think that what should happen is something like this:
. I go to Sony's website and sign up for a PSN account . Sony give me their billing number and ask for an authorization number . I go to the bank, log in to my account, and request an authorization number against Sony's billing number, for a maximum amount (eg $50/month) . I go back to Sony's web page and enter in the authorization number and maybe some other identifying details (eg my banks number)
Sony now has a number that is _only_ good for transferring funds from my account to theirs. If someone obtained that number then the worst they could do with it is transfer up to my limit of $50/month to Sony.
It's not bulletproof but at least Sony don't have my CC number to share with the rest of the world.
Our family has a cottage in the middle of nowhere and all the neighbours are nice, but that doesn't stop my urban dwelling brother from obsessively locking his car. I keep asking him if he's worried about the raccoons taking midnight joyrides.
I always lock my car too. I basically promised the insurance company I would, so I do. Your neighbors might be nice, and your neighbors teenage kids might be nice too, but even nice teenage kids with a bit of booze in them can suddenly think that taking an unlocked car for a joy ride is a good idea. And most crimes would be done by non-locals anyway... your nice neighbors might notice them and take a description so you can catch them later, but that doesn't necessarily get your car back. Your brother might just be a creature of habit too - I know I am. If I have to think about locking the car in the city, but not locking it at home, I'll just end up forgetting.
any data loss is catastrophic, if it's your data. They claim "a small percentage" of data was lost... 1% is a small percentage... 10% is also small percentage, but it's a huge amount of data.
Fortunately where I live and work there isn't really sufficient and reliable connectivity to "the cloud" to make it a worthwhile endeavor, so hopefully all the mistakes are learnt from before I have to worry about it.
If the government took the time to build a mainframe to crack the encryption keys, theoretically they could do it with little more than a partyvan equipped with a few dozen microwave radios or cell phones.
Seems easier to just pay a cleaner some money to let you in after hours and plant a few bugs around the places where phone conversations are likely to be held.
I want to see the space elevator or a mech before I die damn it!!
Well the latest Terminator judgement day came and went without incident, but if it turned out to be true a mech could have been the last thing you saw before you died!
They've tried this trick with political policy... "lets leak some possible future policies and see what the reaction is...". Now the scientists are at it too!
Slashdot Mirror
it says... organism incomplete.
For all the bad stuff I'd heard about the big pharmaceutical companies, I feel somewhat better about the fact that they'll do the right thing when it doesn't get in the way of profit, as compared to never doing the right thing...
"Core memory would probably have been a lot less popular had it been a write-only technology" :)
I'm sorry to hear of your pain.
If God's already done what hes going to do and not intervening in anything then who cares if he exists or not?
As an athiest (more or less), that's my line of thinking too. Why is he necessary at all? And if he does exist, where did he come from? And if he didn't come from anywhere and he's always existed, then by that logic the universe could have always existed too, without needing God. I think we can never know if the universe is deterministic though. Is the outcome of anything that happens fixed or random? If it's fixed, then God (being all knowing) should already know how it ends, and we have no control over our destiny. If it's random, then maybe he gets to fiddle with the randomness every now and then, just for a laugh.
OTOH, maybe he's just hanging around waiting for you to die so he can judge you? :)
A null hypothesis must be falsifiable, and therefor "it must be a wizard that did it" cannot be the null hypothesis.
It's a bottomless pit of null hypotheses though.
1. "God made the world exactly as it was, 6000 years ago". That's easily falsifiable.
2. "God made the world and then designed all the living things on it". So... all the extinct animals were Gods mistakes? I thought he didn't make mistakes.
3. "God created the world and let nature evolve itself". That's kind of getting better, but we can see by looking at the stars that things were probably all in one spot originally.
4. "God made the big bang and let the universe happen according to science". That's not falsifiable now, and maybe it never will be, but even if we figure out a scientific explanation for what started the big bang, what started that? My opinion is that if we get this far then science and religion are finally in their correct corners and the null hypothesis doesn't matter any more.
The bible was written based on the science of the time. Can't you imagine all the priests sitting around the lecture hall with God explaining the original singularity, the big bang, the fusion at the core of the stars, gravity, the speed of light? Then after the exam the priests chatting amongst themselves... "what did you put for question 1?" "to be honest I got a bit lost with all that big bang stuff... I just put 'In the beginning there was nothing'... it's kind of right and our descendants will figure out what it means... it's not like they'll take this thing literally".
Nutjobs aside, most sensible Christians seem quite happy to take evolution on board, and indeed any scientific theory right back to the big bang. But when the question "why did the big bang happen?" is asked, what other answer do you have? I don't believe in God myself, but the answer "God did it" seems a little more valid that "we don't know exactly what started the big bang, but we're sure it wasn't God" or "it is what it is". And if someday we figure out how the big bang started, there is still going to be the question of what started that. I almost like "God did it" as the null hypothesis for the start of the universe because it doesn't matter. It means that maybe God (the supposed Intelligent Designer) set the initial parameters for the universe and then let science make everything happen since then, which means science can go on trying to understand the universe, religion can worry about how it all started and what it all means, the two of them can stay out of each others way, and the rest of us can get on with life.
I find it curious that for all the backwards stuff the Catholic Church does, evolution doesn't seem to bother them in the slightest.
So it can identify a target 2 miles (3.2km) away, but runs out of battery 200m before it can get there? I'm shaking in my boots!
That was my first question... do they mean "it can tell that the object 2 miles away is a human", or "it can tell that the object 2 miles away is the specific human it is after out of the 7 billion on this planet". I guess it could do the latter if the target promised to wear their locating beacon.
The original doom used to have a mode where you could run separate computers (connected to yours via serial or lan) with a command line option (might have been -left and -right), set up the monitors to the left and right of your main monitor, and have a 3 monitor setup. Real clustered gaming.
Which is not to mention that the NSA has done more to contribute to the security of the Linux kernel
Well... Linux is open source so you can't just pay Bill Gates a few billion to install a backdoor or two, you have to submit masses of code with a bunch of carefully hidden and related 'flaws' to create a back door without the maintainers spotting it.
While you were busy wasting time reading the article, I was already uninstalling Linux from everywhere I could.
Someone once suggested bacon tipped bullets... use their fanaticism against them
Nice. I figured it was such a good idea it would have been implemented years ago :)
Just a shame it hasn't caught on.
The Credit Card system could be done a lot better. Sony shouldn't need your CC number, all they should need is a magic number that authorizes Sony to transfer funds from your account to theirs. I think that what should happen is something like this:
. I go to Sony's website and sign up for a PSN account
. Sony give me their billing number and ask for an authorization number
. I go to the bank, log in to my account, and request an authorization number against Sony's billing number, for a maximum amount (eg $50/month)
. I go back to Sony's web page and enter in the authorization number and maybe some other identifying details (eg my banks number)
Sony now has a number that is _only_ good for transferring funds from my account to theirs. If someone obtained that number then the worst they could do with it is transfer up to my limit of $50/month to Sony.
It's not bulletproof but at least Sony don't have my CC number to share with the rest of the world.
The summary seems awfully familiar... it reads like the filter-poisoning crap you get tagged onto the end of spam that sneaks past your spam filter.
about 5 probably. My daughter can recite 50 or 100 or something like that.
Our family has a cottage in the middle of nowhere and all the neighbours are nice, but that doesn't stop my urban dwelling brother from obsessively locking his car. I keep asking him if he's worried about the raccoons taking midnight joyrides.
I always lock my car too. I basically promised the insurance company I would, so I do. Your neighbors might be nice, and your neighbors teenage kids might be nice too, but even nice teenage kids with a bit of booze in them can suddenly think that taking an unlocked car for a joy ride is a good idea. And most crimes would be done by non-locals anyway... your nice neighbors might notice them and take a description so you can catch them later, but that doesn't necessarily get your car back. Your brother might just be a creature of habit too - I know I am. If I have to think about locking the car in the city, but not locking it at home, I'll just end up forgetting.
any data loss can be bad to a Website operator.
any data loss is catastrophic, if it's your data. They claim "a small percentage" of data was lost... 1% is a small percentage... 10% is also small percentage, but it's a huge amount of data.
Fortunately where I live and work there isn't really sufficient and reliable connectivity to "the cloud" to make it a worthwhile endeavor, so hopefully all the mistakes are learnt from before I have to worry about it.
If the government took the time to build a mainframe to crack the encryption keys, theoretically they could do it with little more than a partyvan equipped with a few dozen microwave radios or cell phones.
Seems easier to just pay a cleaner some money to let you in after hours and plant a few bugs around the places where phone conversations are likely to be held.
I want to see the space elevator or a mech before I die damn it!!
Well the latest Terminator judgement day came and went without incident, but if it turned out to be true a mech could have been the last thing you saw before you died!
Once you've drunk some, the math will become a lot less important.
They've tried this trick with political policy... "lets leak some possible future policies and see what the reaction is...". Now the scientists are at it too!