exactly. the ISP's do not help matters at all, when all they are concerned with is getting more customers, and increasing_avg_$_billed/customer. it all goes toward assuming responsibility for your actions. the ISP are not assuming a fair portion of the resonsibility when they continue to add broadband users who are not knowledgable about securing their boxen, and so many who dont even care about doing so.
IMHO, ignorance is only a part of the problem, but it is a part. a bigger problem, at least here in the US, is that those who accept responsibility for their actions & accept the consequences thereof without belly-aching, those who do so seem to be in a very small minority...
ignorance has become acceptable, and is a large contributor to the problem, as well as the laziness already mentioned.
Yes, I know, anecdotal evidence isn't good proof of anything... except for that fact that, at least in one place, punishing somebody for a crime is more important than punishing the right somebody.
while I've never served on a jury, it seems to me that the judge is allowing only that evidence to be admitted which is allowed by law - or at least in the mind of that judge to be legal according to the law. and if there are those that disagree with the judge's opinion on admissible legally / inadmissible evidence, is that not why we have appellate courts, to which these appeals for reconsideration are forwarded?
and No, I don't mind allowing people with that kind of mentality to inflict an irretrievable (sp?) punishment. there are certainly more than adequate appeals processes for those so duly sentenced...
let me ask you this: How do you know that George Washington existed? by documented, validated proof from those who witnessed the event. right? unless, we are lucky enough that you personally met him, or have been informed from someone who did meet him in person. same thing with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
By examining creatures with very short live cycles, scientists have been able to directly observe and maniuplate natural selection
exactly - by manipulation... as in, by result of interaction from an outside force. how can you explain evolution with interaction by an outside force. would that not be, by definition intelligent design?
keeping this ball going...
what makes you say that Intelligent Design is unproven?
has it not been proven already that EVOLUTION ITSELF cannot and has not occurred WERE IT NOT FOR interaction from an outside force of some kind? hasn't it been shown that even the spontaneous creation of basic living protoplasm cannot even be recreated in a lab WITHOUT OUTSIDE INTERACTION? it simply will not "spontaneously" turn from inanimate to animate!... not a science... is it true that Intelligent Design is considered BY SOME to be an alternate story of the origin of earth, man, the universe, etc? in the best sense of education of the students being educated, would it not be best to present alternate theories on a given topic while pointing out any fallacies, facts not proven, facts not in evidence, etc ?
since, as you say "Matters of proven, or at least provable fact belong in the secular classroom." how exactly does evolution fit in here? is it not a fact that evolution itself is at best an unproven theory?
Slashdot Mirror
exactly. the ISP's do not help matters at all, when all they are concerned with is getting more customers, and increasing_avg_$_billed/customer. it all goes toward assuming responsibility for your actions. the ISP are not assuming a fair portion of the resonsibility when they continue to add broadband users who are not knowledgable about securing their boxen, and so many who dont even care about doing so.
ignorance has become acceptable, and is a large contributor to the problem, as well as the laziness already mentioned.
my .02 worth
.. yeah. that one that I sent you... yeah, yeah, I know...key in format c: and hit Return
no, its ok. I promise. Trust Me!!!
even the title itself is kinda redundant, isn't it?
exactly... or that's my excuse, er logic; yeah, logic, thats it...
and this surprises... no one?
whoo hoo! FP!
while I've never served on a jury, it seems to me that the judge is allowing only that evidence to be admitted which is allowed by law - or at least in the mind of that judge to be legal according to the law. and if there are those that disagree with the judge's opinion on admissible legally / inadmissible evidence, is that not why we have appellate courts, to which these appeals for reconsideration are forwarded?
and No, I don't mind allowing people with that kind of mentality to inflict an irretrievable (sp?) punishment. there are certainly more than adequate appeals processes for those so duly sentenced...
agreed. but, it seems that some who have been on the road following the Dead from town to town have no problem boycotting personal hygene
yeah!
let me ask you this: How do you know that George Washington existed? by documented, validated proof from those who witnessed the event. right? unless, we are lucky enough that you personally met him, or have been informed from someone who did meet him in person. same thing with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
By examining creatures with very short live cycles, scientists have been able to directly observe and maniuplate natural selection
exactly - by manipulation... as in, by result of interaction from an outside force. how can you explain evolution with interaction by an outside force. would that not be, by definition intelligent design?
keeping this ball going... what makes you say that Intelligent Design is unproven? has it not been proven already that EVOLUTION ITSELF cannot and has not occurred WERE IT NOT FOR interaction from an outside force of some kind? hasn't it been shown that even the spontaneous creation of basic living protoplasm cannot even be recreated in a lab WITHOUT OUTSIDE INTERACTION? it simply will not "spontaneously" turn from inanimate to animate! ... not a science... is it true that Intelligent Design is considered BY SOME to be an alternate story of the origin of earth, man, the universe, etc? in the best sense of education of the students being educated, would it not be best to present alternate theories on a given topic while pointing out any fallacies, facts not proven, facts not in evidence, etc ?
since, as you say "Matters of proven, or at least provable fact belong in the secular classroom." how exactly does evolution fit in here? is it not a fact that evolution itself is at best an unproven theory?