As an aside though, jesuits are actually really cool dudes sometimes. They are crazy as fuck, but highly "intelligent" and STILL stick to their beliefs. I have known a few that were awesome people, unfortunately they were loonies. I've told them as much as well. Even smoked weed with one in particular! Gotta respect an actual ordained hardcore priest who does that. Man, religious fanatics are a strange bunch. I do dig the cool ones who will talk to you and relate, as long as they go home. The haters suck.
(Well, me considering them all loonies makes me a hater, but sometimes they are so encrusted with jesus they just don't care. Even the buddhists. Except for the encrusted with jesus part.)
Well, in all honesty, it doesn't really matter one way or the other. No need to get angry with them, its not really their fault, they have little choice. Pity them. What I have observed is that people who were born into religous families can never get over the nagging feeling of "what if I'm wrong?"
Thank GOD (snicker) my parents were atheists. Our brains are wired with basic beliefs, almost instincts, as early children, and shaking the basic wiring of religion is very hard to do. They are absolutely insane, but fully functional as worker bees. (err, name calling again!)
I for one, welcome our martian water born overlords. Peace be with the red sands! All hail the magenta river beds of our lord!
Alrighty, I agree with you I guess. Atheists have no tolerance towards primitive view points, absolutely. Though, in practice, this only really plays out in forums such as this. You can't get very far trying to argue with a religious fanatic in day to day life. Believe me I've tried, but nobody bites. Either they hate you, or are so lovingly tolerant and dismissive because you have no "faith" as to make arguing a pointless exercise. I have had this discussion with jesuit priests who were professors of physics. They just smile, lean back and exude such supreme "whatever-ness" that I have to just laugh. They have the ability to totally seperate observation from belief, which I have a hard time doing.
I really doubt there are any real world examples of major fueds breaking out between atheists and religious folk, at least in any important forum related to world affairs. To be an atheist these days, and be in a position of power, is an oxymoron. Sadly. Even "communist" nations, have internally very widespread religious belief systems. China, the former Soviet Union, etc.
But I agree. Atheists will argue this at any chance just because. Agnostics simply let things be, which is why I labeled them as "pussies."
You were right though, most people would agree I am an asshole;-)
Heh. Well, first of all, I was trying to joke around a bit about this topic. However, the most divisive and harmful attitudes EVER, in all of history, are religious in nature, bar none. To state otherwise is the height of ignorance. I honestly do believe that all who prescribe to these fairy tales are insane and a detriment to society. Name calling aside, my point stands and I'd love to hear you refute my stance that atheism is not closed minded in any sense.
Whats really ironic, is that I used to feel the same way you do. I considered atheists to be too forceful in denying certain points of view, of which I have always prescribed but have always had "an open mind."
Look at it this way: lets say that there is some "supreme" sort of being who engineered reality and the universe as we know it. I am fully willing to accept this if evidence proved such. I am not closed to this possibility in the slightest. What I am opposed to, is that knowing this were true, that we need to perform ritualistic cannibilism, go to church on sunday and pray. When humans engineer bacteria, for instance, do we demand obedience to us? No, we have no concept of their lives or state of being nor do we care except for what they provide to us (utility, knowledge, whatever.) Wouldn't "god" be the same way?
Religion is a primitive concept, dangerous and supremely rediculous. EVEN IF the underlying principles are actually true. How am I being closed minded about this? Atheism asserts there is no traditional concept of "god" in any sense, this I believe. Do I think there could be things in this universe so far beyond our comprehension as to be considered "god"? Absolutely! So, actually, I believe there very well could be a "god". Not anybody on earths "god" but something we would have no choice but to describe as such, because of our primitive level of advancement and understanding.
So some thing engineered us. So what? What am I being closed minded about? Ritual? Control? Widespread bloodshed because of religious belief? I see no evidence of engineering, I believe we are here because of the laws of nature. I could be wrong. Religion is still bullshit.
Do you think any religion on earth would admit the converse to my stance? That THEY could be wrong in their dogma, practice and understanding? No. Hence, atheism is not closed minded or based on beliefs other than those upheld by observation of the universe.
By the way, my attitude is a minority in the extreme, so I doubt it could be divisive and harmful in any way.
I truly would like to get a reasoned reponse to this, if you are so inclined. I will abstain from name calling and being inflamatory.
All feminism ever did was force men to go down on women more often, and make women realize they could expect this.
There is no such thing as equality of the sexes, that is why we have TWO sexes. Different roles, different minds, different natures. There are always exceptions to the rule, but that doesn't invalidate the rule.
Male authority remains dominant because power gets you laid if you are a man. Powerful women simply get to go shopping more often. Sex drive is much more powerful then material drive.
I guess I see faith as choosing a side in something unclear, based on internal rationalizations not based in fact. I think "having faith in people" is not what I am talking about though, because that faith is actually based on personal experience, on reality. For example, you have faith that the guy at the local market isn't trying to rip you off because there is another market across the street. Or perhaps its based on the millions of times you have shopped in various markets and have a good feel for what things cost.
Believing in a god is faith in the sense that it is irrational and based on nonsense. Perhaps at some level they are connected, because as a child you implicitely trust your parents, and if they have told you about god, etc. then you have some basis to hold that faith because you have "faith" in your parents not lying to you, at least not knowingly.
Having faith in people is more like common sense, or even wishful thinking I suppose. Such as having faith that mankind will not destroy itself with nuclear weapons. It is partly based on historical precedence, but mostly on your desire to not be blown up.
Atheists are "certain" there is no god only in the sense that there simply is nothing in this universe we have ever observed to hint otherwise.
If Jesus appeared today and performed absolutely verifiably impossible miracles, atheists would believe it simply because they now CAN, because there it is right in front of you. We would believe that a human/alien hybrid had performed some act we couldn't comprehend as being possible.
Agnostics are pussies who still want to go to heaven and are afraid of death - they just don't want to look like loonies by believing fairy tales.
How in the world are atheists equally as misguided as religious folk (I won't even include fundamentalist there, as it doesn't matter, fairy tales are fairy tales regardless of severity.) Atheists are not misguided by anything, are they? They do not have a dogma, a belief system. The LACK of a belief system is not the same as a belief system. Atheists simply do not believe ghost stories and fables about the creation of the world with zero basis in fact. Atheists believe what their own experience in reality leads them to believe, not what they have been told to believe.
Agnostics are the ones who are equally as misguided as bible thumpers. Being undecided about religion is a belief system, however undefined it may be. It is based on your "feeling there is something greater, maybe not Jesus, but... oh I am just SPIRITUAL." Bleh. It is based on feelings and much more on childhood indoctrination. Most "agnostics" were formerly religious, even only as a child. Any system of belief based on emotions and unspecified "spirituality" is not science, not real, and insane. It is FAITH. A belief in what is contrary to experience.
Yeah. We all know the bible is full of shit about aliens and such. Err, I mean "angels" and Jesus and whatnot. I mean, isn't the bible the only source of Christian mythology? It is the only source of information about god that exists for christians. You can always make up new mythology of course, seeing as its all bullshit anyway, but come on you jesus loving wackos, at least have some semblance of some sort of central dogmatic truth.
Blind militant belief in unsupportable knowledge IS WAY WORSE then blind militant atheism. "Blind militant atheism" is simply not believing mythology which requires irrational "faith" to comprehend. One is far more idiotic than the other. Actually, atheism is a stupid term anyway, it simply means those who believe in the world around them because they can experience it and understand it. All the other religious "isms" are just beliefs in childhood fantasies about your goldfish or cat going to "heaven".
Seriously. He is your manager, somebody hired him. Do you want both your manager and the person who hired him to be pissed off because you are stomping around trying to embarass them?
A manager doesn't necessarily have to know more then you, on the contrary. Think of it like a manager of a rock band. He is not the talent. He directs the talent and gets things done. He doesn't have to be highly talented at music (or IT work). He DOES have to know how to best utilize that talent to get things done. I have never had a more talented manager then myself. I have also managed others who knew far more than I did on certain things. However, coordinating things, prioritizing them, knowing all the ins and outs of having various folks on many disparate tasks, etc. etc. is what managing a team is about. NOT knowing all the piddling details of a persons job.
What do you mean nothing is hack proof?!? Hacking exploits bugs and design flaws. Plain and simple. Remove the bugs, fix the flaws and you have a hack proof system.
Now, finding the bugs is one thing, finding and fixing design flaws is even harder, however both are entirely possible. What kind of professional developer are you if you think that "nothing is hack proof"? People are paying you money to code? Are they aware of your view that all of your code is flawed and impossible to fix? Scary.
Huh? Nature has been eradicating species left and right for around 2 billion years now. In massive quantities. The mass extinctions of historical note are an order of magnitude greater than any human caused extinctions.
What, new species can't exist where old ones did previously? So what if there is a highway there now, that just means some other kind of creature can now inhabit that area.
Also, are you willing to wait for evolution to create brand new species for us to exploit? How long would THAT take?
Humans are just another species of animal on the planet. We are just doing what is in our nature, like all other life forms that have ever existed.
Whats the big deal? You still cannot pretend to know whats best for a system as large as the earth. We just do what we do. As is the way of life.
Boy that was an important observation. Thanks for pointing that out, otherwise the post makes no sense at all. I was just sitting here, scratching my head, thinking "WTF?" until you clarified things. Thanks!
Thats because once you've actually studied said object of fascination, you eventually find it disgusting, boring and ultimately finacially draining. Best left to remote tactile observation.
Re:Replacing what's there
on
Ice Lake on Mars
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Very nicely? The damn place went and lost most of its water and atmosphere, has little or no volcanic activity (anymore) and is a desolate chunk of dirt. Remember, it had vast oceans, flowing water, etc. for some lengthy period of time.
How do you know "we aren't supposed to be there" reason or no? If we weren't "supposed" to be there then why can be go there? Of course, you mean that by divine plan we "aren't supposed to be there". If your god makes things that we aren't supposed to do, then why can we do them?
I don't know where you work or for whom, but thats simply not reality in the united states for ANY corporate job, even CEO. What, you don't fill out your tax forms, insurance forms, 401k, etc. etc.? The company has no record of you, no signature on a letter of acceptance? You are full of it or you work for the mafia. I'm sure other countries are the same with regards to paperwork.
I agree. It smacks of a pompous blowhard who refuses to go through with the required procedures. I was just refuting the statement about him "applying" meant he sought out the job. He still sounds like a pompous asshole who had to bitch and moan about being above such petty annoyances such as following procedure. Its pointless whining on his part.
Dude. You always fill out an application for a job, EVEN if invited for it. Its HR paperwork. He withdrew his "application" from the HR process after he decided he didn't want the offered job. He didn't send them a resume hoping for a job.
Have you never actually had a job before? I've had jobs handed to me, and then had to go through the whole process of being "interviewed", background check, tons of paperwork, etc. Large corporations have to show they hired fairly, hence even when a job is specifically for you, you still have to be chosen acceptable for the job by the HR folks.
He meant that the DMCA makes it illegal to tell you how to use WinDVD to circumvent the copy protection. You can go to jail for telling somebody how to do this.
We are talking IP laws here. Almost every company on the planet lives and dies by IP laws in one way or another. They write highly vertical database software for training and other such things. Nobody would copy that crap anyway.
Its not like he stood up against computerized training software, and they fired him for attacking their bread and butter.
Saying this is justified is like argeeing with firing some guy for doing an interview on TV against coffee, because all companies live and die on coffee.
What if he was a marijuana activist, for instance? Would firing him be justified? What if he was an outspoken racist? Hated children?
Slashdot Mirror
As an aside though, jesuits are actually really cool dudes sometimes. They are crazy as fuck, but highly "intelligent" and STILL stick to their beliefs. I have known a few that were awesome people, unfortunately they were loonies. I've told them as much as well. Even smoked weed with one in particular! Gotta respect an actual ordained hardcore priest who does that. Man, religious fanatics are a strange bunch. I do dig the cool ones who will talk to you and relate, as long as they go home. The haters suck.
(Well, me considering them all loonies makes me a hater, but sometimes they are so encrusted with jesus they just don't care. Even the buddhists. Except for the encrusted with jesus part.)
Well, in all honesty, it doesn't really matter one way or the other. No need to get angry with them, its not really their fault, they have little choice. Pity them. What I have observed is that people who were born into religous families can never get over the nagging feeling of "what if I'm wrong?"
Thank GOD (snicker) my parents were atheists. Our brains are wired with basic beliefs, almost instincts, as early children, and shaking the basic wiring of religion is very hard to do. They are absolutely insane, but fully functional as worker bees. (err, name calling again!)
I for one, welcome our martian water born overlords. Peace be with the red sands! All hail the magenta river beds of our lord!
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/God
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Atheism
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Mars
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Water
Alrighty, I agree with you I guess. Atheists have no tolerance towards primitive view points, absolutely. Though, in practice, this only really plays out in forums such as this. You can't get very far trying to argue with a religious fanatic in day to day life. Believe me I've tried, but nobody bites. Either they hate you, or are so lovingly tolerant and dismissive because you have no "faith" as to make arguing a pointless exercise. I have had this discussion with jesuit priests who were professors of physics. They just smile, lean back and exude such supreme "whatever-ness" that I have to just laugh. They have the ability to totally seperate observation from belief, which I have a hard time doing.
;-)
I really doubt there are any real world examples of major fueds breaking out between atheists and religious folk, at least in any important forum related to world affairs. To be an atheist these days, and be in a position of power, is an oxymoron. Sadly. Even "communist" nations, have internally very widespread religious belief systems. China, the former Soviet Union, etc.
But I agree. Atheists will argue this at any chance just because. Agnostics simply let things be, which is why I labeled them as "pussies."
You were right though, most people would agree I am an asshole
Heh. Well, first of all, I was trying to joke around a bit about this topic. However, the most divisive and harmful attitudes EVER, in all of history, are religious in nature, bar none. To state otherwise is the height of ignorance. I honestly do believe that all who prescribe to these fairy tales are insane and a detriment to society. Name calling aside, my point stands and I'd love to hear you refute my stance that atheism is not closed minded in any sense.
Whats really ironic, is that I used to feel the same way you do. I considered atheists to be too forceful in denying certain points of view, of which I have always prescribed but have always had "an open mind."
Look at it this way: lets say that there is some "supreme" sort of being who engineered reality and the universe as we know it. I am fully willing to accept this if evidence proved such. I am not closed to this possibility in the slightest. What I am opposed to, is that knowing this were true, that we need to perform ritualistic cannibilism, go to church on sunday and pray. When humans engineer bacteria, for instance, do we demand obedience to us? No, we have no concept of their lives or state of being nor do we care except for what they provide to us (utility, knowledge, whatever.) Wouldn't "god" be the same way?
Religion is a primitive concept, dangerous and supremely rediculous. EVEN IF the underlying principles are actually true. How am I being closed minded about this? Atheism asserts there is no traditional concept of "god" in any sense, this I believe. Do I think there could be things in this universe so far beyond our comprehension as to be considered "god"? Absolutely! So, actually, I believe there very well could be a "god". Not anybody on earths "god" but something we would have no choice but to describe as such, because of our primitive level of advancement and understanding.
So some thing engineered us. So what? What am I being closed minded about? Ritual? Control? Widespread bloodshed because of religious belief? I see no evidence of engineering, I believe we are here because of the laws of nature. I could be wrong. Religion is still bullshit.
Do you think any religion on earth would admit the converse to my stance? That THEY could be wrong in their dogma, practice and understanding? No. Hence, atheism is not closed minded or based on beliefs other than those upheld by observation of the universe.
By the way, my attitude is a minority in the extreme, so I doubt it could be divisive and harmful in any way.
I truly would like to get a reasoned reponse to this, if you are so inclined. I will abstain from name calling and being inflamatory.
It was an acid induced dream.
All feminism ever did was force men to go down on women more often, and make women realize they could expect this.
There is no such thing as equality of the sexes, that is why we have TWO sexes. Different roles, different minds, different natures. There are always exceptions to the rule, but that doesn't invalidate the rule.
Male authority remains dominant because power gets you laid if you are a man. Powerful women simply get to go shopping more often. Sex drive is much more powerful then material drive.
I guess I see faith as choosing a side in something unclear, based on internal rationalizations not based in fact. I think "having faith in people" is not what I am talking about though, because that faith is actually based on personal experience, on reality. For example, you have faith that the guy at the local market isn't trying to rip you off because there is another market across the street. Or perhaps its based on the millions of times you have shopped in various markets and have a good feel for what things cost.
Believing in a god is faith in the sense that it is irrational and based on nonsense. Perhaps at some level they are connected, because as a child you implicitely trust your parents, and if they have told you about god, etc. then you have some basis to hold that faith because you have "faith" in your parents not lying to you, at least not knowingly.
Having faith in people is more like common sense, or even wishful thinking I suppose. Such as having faith that mankind will not destroy itself with nuclear weapons. It is partly based on historical precedence, but mostly on your desire to not be blown up.
Atheists are "certain" there is no god only in the sense that there simply is nothing in this universe we have ever observed to hint otherwise.
If Jesus appeared today and performed absolutely verifiably impossible miracles, atheists would believe it simply because they now CAN, because there it is right in front of you. We would believe that a human/alien hybrid had performed some act we couldn't comprehend as being possible.
Agnostics are pussies who still want to go to heaven and are afraid of death - they just don't want to look like loonies by believing fairy tales.
How in the world are atheists equally as misguided as religious folk (I won't even include fundamentalist there, as it doesn't matter, fairy tales are fairy tales regardless of severity.) Atheists are not misguided by anything, are they? They do not have a dogma, a belief system. The LACK of a belief system is not the same as a belief system. Atheists simply do not believe ghost stories and fables about the creation of the world with zero basis in fact. Atheists believe what their own experience in reality leads them to believe, not what they have been told to believe.
Agnostics are the ones who are equally as misguided as bible thumpers. Being undecided about religion is a belief system, however undefined it may be. It is based on your "feeling there is something greater, maybe not Jesus, but... oh I am just SPIRITUAL." Bleh. It is based on feelings and much more on childhood indoctrination. Most "agnostics" were formerly religious, even only as a child. Any system of belief based on emotions and unspecified "spirituality" is not science, not real, and insane. It is FAITH. A belief in what is contrary to experience.
Yeah. We all know the bible is full of shit about aliens and such. Err, I mean "angels" and Jesus and whatnot. I mean, isn't the bible the only source of Christian mythology? It is the only source of information about god that exists for christians. You can always make up new mythology of course, seeing as its all bullshit anyway, but come on you jesus loving wackos, at least have some semblance of some sort of central dogmatic truth.
Blind militant belief in unsupportable knowledge IS WAY WORSE then blind militant atheism. "Blind militant atheism" is simply not believing mythology which requires irrational "faith" to comprehend. One is far more idiotic than the other. Actually, atheism is a stupid term anyway, it simply means those who believe in the world around them because they can experience it and understand it. All the other religious "isms" are just beliefs in childhood fantasies about your goldfish or cat going to "heaven".
Loonies. All of em.
Yeah. Especially since its exactly what raves ARE. Especially the munching pills part.
Seriously. He is your manager, somebody hired him. Do you want both your manager and the person who hired him to be pissed off because you are stomping around trying to embarass them?
A manager doesn't necessarily have to know more then you, on the contrary. Think of it like a manager of a rock band. He is not the talent. He directs the talent and gets things done. He doesn't have to be highly talented at music (or IT work). He DOES have to know how to best utilize that talent to get things done. I have never had a more talented manager then myself. I have also managed others who knew far more than I did on certain things. However, coordinating things, prioritizing them, knowing all the ins and outs of having various folks on many disparate tasks, etc. etc. is what managing a team is about. NOT knowing all the piddling details of a persons job.
What do you mean nothing is hack proof?!? Hacking exploits bugs and design flaws. Plain and simple. Remove the bugs, fix the flaws and you have a hack proof system.
Now, finding the bugs is one thing, finding and fixing design flaws is even harder, however both are entirely possible. What kind of professional developer are you if you think that "nothing is hack proof"? People are paying you money to code? Are they aware of your view that all of your code is flawed and impossible to fix? Scary.
Huh? Nature has been eradicating species left and right for around 2 billion years now. In massive quantities. The mass extinctions of historical note are an order of magnitude greater than any human caused extinctions.
What, new species can't exist where old ones did previously? So what if there is a highway there now, that just means some other kind of creature can now inhabit that area.
Also, are you willing to wait for evolution to create brand new species for us to exploit? How long would THAT take?
Humans are just another species of animal on the planet. We are just doing what is in our nature, like all other life forms that have ever existed.
Whats the big deal? You still cannot pretend to know whats best for a system as large as the earth. We just do what we do. As is the way of life.
Really, isn't that all this is? Its a networked mp3 player that looks like a stereo component - because it is, but whats the big deal? It has linux?
What "throne" is it supposed to capture? Networked dvd players do this, plus they play movies. A mythtv box does much more.
Heh. Help me jebus!
Boy that was an important observation. Thanks for pointing that out, otherwise the post makes no sense at all. I was just sitting here, scratching my head, thinking "WTF?" until you clarified things. Thanks!
Thats because once you've actually studied said object of fascination, you eventually find it disgusting, boring and ultimately finacially draining. Best left to remote tactile observation.
Very nicely? The damn place went and lost most of its water and atmosphere, has little or no volcanic activity (anymore) and is a desolate chunk of dirt. Remember, it had vast oceans, flowing water, etc. for some lengthy period of time.
How do you know "we aren't supposed to be there" reason or no? If we weren't "supposed" to be there then why can be go there? Of course, you mean that by divine plan we "aren't supposed to be there". If your god makes things that we aren't supposed to do, then why can we do them?
Yeah, if Coral used port 80 like all other web mirrors. Coral is useless to many users here because of the strange port.
I don't know where you work or for whom, but thats simply not reality in the united states for ANY corporate job, even CEO. What, you don't fill out your tax forms, insurance forms, 401k, etc. etc.? The company has no record of you, no signature on a letter of acceptance? You are full of it or you work for the mafia. I'm sure other countries are the same with regards to paperwork.
I agree. It smacks of a pompous blowhard who refuses to go through with the required procedures. I was just refuting the statement about him "applying" meant he sought out the job. He still sounds like a pompous asshole who had to bitch and moan about being above such petty annoyances such as following procedure. Its pointless whining on his part.
Dude. You always fill out an application for a job, EVEN if invited for it. Its HR paperwork. He withdrew his "application" from the HR process after he decided he didn't want the offered job. He didn't send them a resume hoping for a job.
Have you never actually had a job before? I've had jobs handed to me, and then had to go through the whole process of being "interviewed", background check, tons of paperwork, etc. Large corporations have to show they hired fairly, hence even when a job is specifically for you, you still have to be chosen acceptable for the job by the HR folks.
How about the US just stops attacking countries over non-political criminal behavior? Panama, Libya, Iraq, Iran, etc. etc.
You can't stop crime with armies. 20 people blowing up a building does not constitute a national threat requiring WAR to settle.
He meant that the DMCA makes it illegal to tell you how to use WinDVD to circumvent the copy protection. You can go to jail for telling somebody how to do this.
link: http://www.aldcliffe.com/
We are talking IP laws here. Almost every company on the planet lives and dies by IP laws in one way or another. They write highly vertical database software for training and other such things. Nobody would copy that crap anyway.
Its not like he stood up against computerized training software, and they fired him for attacking their bread and butter.
Saying this is justified is like argeeing with firing some guy for doing an interview on TV against coffee, because all companies live and die on coffee.
What if he was a marijuana activist, for instance? Would firing him be justified? What if he was an outspoken racist? Hated children?