To clarify the common misconception that a "soul" is some ghostly thing inside a person: as CS Lewis once said "You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body."
You don't have to be religious to believe in the existence of the soul. That word is just a description of that which is emergent from a sufficiently complex neurological system (i.e. thoughts, feelings, personality, etc.).
If a "human" embryo is produced from synthesized DNA and by nuclear transfer into an egg from artificial or animal sources, the resulting organism will be structurally equivalent to human, without any physical connection to the human race.
Does this organism have a soul? Is it subject to original sin?
I don't see why an artificially created human embryo would not eventually develop a soul (i.e. thoughts, feelings, identity, etc.) like a natural human embryo. If the structure is the same, I don't see why the outcome would be any different.
As for being subject to "original sin" -- errant theology aside -- it would still be a person, so, it would still have a human nature, I would imagine.
I think these two questions would be better if they were turned around: why wouldn't an artificially created human embryo develop unto a sapient being (assuming the artificial construction was within certain fault tolerances)? Why wouldn't an artificially created human embryo develop into an adult exhibiting the same human nature as the rest of us?
But the emulator package would be optional. Also, all the 'bloat' would be contained in the emulator and would not affect the new system (i.e. the new system would run jus fine on its own). Eventually, the old programs would be rewritten and the emulator would be run by fewer and fewer users.
...has to do this since a lot more people download their titles instead of buying them...
So, reducing market exposure via pirated copies is somehow magically going to translate into higher sales?
Honestly, who buys a game as a last resort when they can't find a pirated copy of it? Conversely, software piracy has introduced many people to games and game series that have directly led to sales.
It's amazing that some people still think casual piracy is detrimental to the video game market.
The current situation is perfectly fine: people pay for experiences (e.g. movies, concerts) and physical copies (DVDs and CDs) whereas all shared digital information distributed over the internet or on disl or whatever is free. It's been this way for decades and has worked out just fine. Content producers just need to stop wasting their music fighting movie/music sharing and just accept it. There's nothing wrong with sharing.
The music, movie, video game, and book industries (to name a few) have not disappeared and are in no danger of disappearing -- or even being harmed -- because of P2P. That's simply the reality of the situation. This war against P2P is about money and control, nothing more.
The solution? All legal work should be pro bono. Laywers should be publicly salaried employees like any other civil servant. Exposing the Justice System to for-profit desires is just asking for corruption.
This number is meaningless. Is that a lot? It sounds like a lot, but I have no frame of reference. A 30% increase from its previous value sounds significant, but it, too, is meaningless it's based on a value that has no comparison to anything else. It might not be so significant if, for example, accidental stapling of documents to people's fingers (which rarely happens...at least, where I work) costs industry $800 billion a year.
Even though the reign of these little shits is coming to an end, it's going to take a committed leader to chase the rats out of all the little nooks and crannies of our judicial system. It can be done, however
Not if you guys keep electing Democrats and Republicans.
Slashdot Mirror
No.
Don't worry; you're secret's safe with us, Asmodarius, Keeper of the Eight Circle.
Exactly. As long as the justice system remains a for-profit industry, you really have far fewer rights than you realize.
That is, unless you are super-rich.
Well, that and the fact that the legal system is a for-profit industry.
That's what the soul is.
To clarify the common misconception that a "soul" is some ghostly thing inside a person: as CS Lewis once said "You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body."
You don't have to be religious to believe in the existence of the soul. That word is just a description of that which is emergent from a sufficiently complex neurological system (i.e. thoughts, feelings, personality, etc.).
I don't see why an artificially created human embryo would not eventually develop a soul (i.e. thoughts, feelings, identity, etc.) like a natural human embryo. If the structure is the same, I don't see why the outcome would be any different.
As for being subject to "original sin" -- errant theology aside -- it would still be a person, so, it would still have a human nature, I would imagine.
I think these two questions would be better if they were turned around: why wouldn't an artificially created human embryo develop unto a sapient being (assuming the artificial construction was within certain fault tolerances)? Why wouldn't an artificially created human embryo develop into an adult exhibiting the same human nature as the rest of us?
Who are you calling Fscker? I've never checked a file system in my life!
But the emulator package would be optional. Also, all the 'bloat' would be contained in the emulator and would not affect the new system (i.e. the new system would run jus fine on its own). Eventually, the old programs would be rewritten and the emulator would be run by fewer and fewer users.
This is always a legitimate concern with new versions of an OS, but can't emulation solve this problem?
Couldn't he just imagine he was in jail for ten years instead? I think that would be a more appropriate punishment.
Because they feel it less.
Apparently you weren't here in the days of the previous Democratic administration. It was all "Stupid republicans! Leave Bill alone!".
But who cares if people are dying of malaria on the other side of the planet? Poor erections affect me!
Um...wait.
Nope, you're the last one.
heheheheheheheeeeeeeeee!
What?!? Since when???
Honestly, when has this ever -- EVER -- been the case?
So, reducing market exposure via pirated copies is somehow magically going to translate into higher sales?
Honestly, who buys a game as a last resort when they can't find a pirated copy of it? Conversely, software piracy has introduced many people to games and game series that have directly led to sales.
It's amazing that some people still think casual piracy is detrimental to the video game market.
Foremost among these difficulties was finding 42 commercial Linux games.
"Bumblebee! Put some pants on! I can see your 'Cybertron'!"
The current situation is perfectly fine: people pay for experiences (e.g. movies, concerts) and physical copies (DVDs and CDs) whereas all shared digital information distributed over the internet or on disl or whatever is free. It's been this way for decades and has worked out just fine. Content producers just need to stop wasting their music fighting movie/music sharing and just accept it. There's nothing wrong with sharing.
The music, movie, video game, and book industries (to name a few) have not disappeared and are in no danger of disappearing -- or even being harmed -- because of P2P. That's simply the reality of the situation. This war against P2P is about money and control, nothing more.
The solution? All legal work should be pro bono. Laywers should be publicly salaried employees like any other civil servant. Exposing the Justice System to for-profit desires is just asking for corruption.
Well, that certainly would explain the overabundance of /. users who post without RTFA.
This number is meaningless. Is that a lot? It sounds like a lot, but I have no frame of reference. A 30% increase from its previous value sounds significant, but it, too, is meaningless it's based on a value that has no comparison to anything else. It might not be so significant if, for example, accidental stapling of documents to people's fingers (which rarely happens...at least, where I work) costs industry $800 billion a year.
Not if you guys keep electing Democrats and Republicans.