Yeah, but they have friends. I used to get asked about how to use Kazaa, Limewire, Bittorrent, etc all the time. Now that they've moved on to iTunes and Netflix, the requests are down considerably.
It will be interesting to see how the community responds to this.
Isn't that move a function of the age of your acquaintances instead of how the market evolved? I saw the same thing among my relatives, but it's mostly because they either grew up and stopped downloading music/porn/etc (now that they can buy it), or because the people I now frequent due to my work are mostly non-technical types.
Also be sure not to look at the door handle if it's in plain view; unauthorized viewing without changing its state in any way may still be illegal because our lawmakers don't understand doorknobs.
Simply viewing the door handle *will* change its state!
Actually, I think that's a very good idea - maybe not six years, but double the actual term limit : in eight years, the president gets to do what he wants (with the caveat of having the Congress on his side), and he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected at the end. He can work on a project from the conception phase to the concretization without thinking about whether his electoral base will go for it. I don't see why it would be more dangerous to have a president for eight years instead of four. Can anybody?
It simply might be that there is no 'yet'. Maybe there simply is no way to do it efficiently with the existing laws of nature. The perpetuum mobile is just an example that there are things which will always be impossible regardless of our technological advancements. Maybe space travel is as impossible just not as obvious?
That's the thing : maybe there are laws that will forever forbid us to travel through space, but if there are, we don't know them - and there are no indication that they exist. Let's be optimistic:)
Are you saying that because my metaphor is factually incorrect, you can compare not being able to defy the laws of thermodynamics and not being able to travel through space, a thing that we simply don't know how to do (efficiently) yet?
But similarly, if "scientists" are wrong about the existence of God, that may be equally catastrophic (or at least would fundamentally alter so much of the underpinning of the science as to put it back at square one).
If (a) God(s) was proven to exist tomorrow, what exactly would that entail for science? I'm pretty sure nothing would change.
The whole of Christianity hinges on the Resurrection: whether that tomb really was empty the Sunday after that Passover.
There's pretty good reason to believe that, at least, something unusual happened -- Paul wouldn't have used the argument "Some of you were eye-witnesses to these events" in his letters if he didn't think "these events" supported what he was preaching. (He was writing his letters for particular people at the time, not for us 2000 years later.)
Sadly, the tomb being empty is in no way evidence of resurrection. So first you'd have to prove that it really was empty, and then you'd have to prove that the dead man inside disappeared. Good luck on that.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but they have friends. I used to get asked about how to use Kazaa, Limewire, Bittorrent, etc all the time. Now that they've moved on to iTunes and Netflix, the requests are down considerably.
It will be interesting to see how the community responds to this.
Isn't that move a function of the age of your acquaintances instead of how the market evolved? I saw the same thing among my relatives, but it's mostly because they either grew up and stopped downloading music/porn/etc (now that they can buy it), or because the people I now frequent due to my work are mostly non-technical types.
There has been allegations of sexual agressions by Strauss-Kahn for at least five years : http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/16/dominique-strauss-kahn-tristane-banon
Also be sure not to look at the door handle if it's in plain view; unauthorized viewing without changing its state in any way may still be illegal because our lawmakers don't understand doorknobs.
Simply viewing the door handle *will* change its state!
You're just holding it wrong!
I'm wondering what would happen if we were to mine the moon enough so that there's a significant mass transfered from there to here.
Actually, I think that's a very good idea - maybe not six years, but double the actual term limit : in eight years, the president gets to do what he wants (with the caveat of having the Congress on his side), and he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected at the end. He can work on a project from the conception phase to the concretization without thinking about whether his electoral base will go for it. I don't see why it would be more dangerous to have a president for eight years instead of four. Can anybody?
Corporation, corporate America. Not *cooperate*.
Windows. Windows happened.
Your RNG is broken!
It simply might be that there is no 'yet'. Maybe there simply is no way to do it efficiently with the existing laws of nature. The perpetuum mobile is just an example that there are things which will always be impossible regardless of our technological advancements. Maybe space travel is as impossible just not as obvious?
That's the thing : maybe there are laws that will forever forbid us to travel through space, but if there are, we don't know them - and there are no indication that they exist. :)
Let's be optimistic
Build me a perpetuum mobile.
Are you saying that because my metaphor is factually incorrect, you can compare not being able to defy the laws of thermodynamics and not being able to travel through space, a thing that we simply don't know how to do (efficiently) yet?
Impossible is just a word people use to make themselves feel better when they quit.
1) Not true. 2) Something is very wrong with that.
Science and religion are not incompatible. It's blind faith and science that cannot work together.
But similarly, if "scientists" are wrong about the existence of God, that may be equally catastrophic (or at least would fundamentally alter so much of the underpinning of the science as to put it back at square one).
If (a) God(s) was proven to exist tomorrow, what exactly would that entail for science? I'm pretty sure nothing would change.
The whole of Christianity hinges on the Resurrection: whether that tomb really was empty the Sunday after that Passover.
There's pretty good reason to believe that, at least, something unusual happened -- Paul wouldn't have used the argument "Some of you were eye-witnesses to these events" in his letters if he didn't think "these events" supported what he was preaching. (He was writing his letters for particular people at the time, not for us 2000 years later.)
Sadly, the tomb being empty is in no way evidence of resurrection. So first you'd have to prove that it really was empty, and then you'd have to prove that the dead man inside disappeared. Good luck on that.