"I lost my faith in faith around the time I started asking questions and got back a lot of crappy answers. However, I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of *some* kind of creative force simply because we may not have the tools to demonstrate or understand it fully."
I think you should consider yourself an atheist until you have good reason to believe an alternative. Of course fairies and magic teapots COULD exist, but you do not consider yourself agnostic about these concepts. Do you have reason to be agnostic about the existence of a "creative force"? If not, you are an atheist.
Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god(s). Do not try to lump any other belief system into it (i.e. implying that 21st century atheists think they are perfectly rational). To do so is fallacious argumentation and a deliberate blurring of the issues at hand.
The reason to use the term "atheist" as opposed to "agnostic" is because we don't feel the need to call ourselves agnostic about fairies and magic teapots. The term "agnostic" gives too much credit to ideas that do not deserve credit (or are on the same footing as other supernatural ideas). There is ZERO evidence supporting Christianity, as well as all of the other supernatural religions out there.
"As a person who does believe in some faith, I seem to be in a small minority (maybe a less vocal group) on Slashdot, but all of these articles bring up the lack of tolerance of people with differing views on both sides - both from people who support some version of Creationism and from those who hold to strict Scientific beliefs. I tend to compromise in the middle which I guess makes me a sell-out to both sides, but at least i'm clear about where I stand."
You could be clear to yourself where you stand, but you have not made it clear to any other readers. Where do you stand? Please clarify what you mean by tolerance (it is important to this discussion).
A reasonable group of people would give differing views "tolerance" based upon the views' legitimacy, not the fact that those views are held by certain people. Do you propose we have "tolerance" for the idea that there is a magic teapot in orbit that controls the universe? Creationist claims deserve no special treatment. Either there is evidence for these claims or there is not. (There is not.) Tolerance is not the correct word to bring up in this discussion.
And, as you probably know, marriage between prominent Hebrews and outsiders weren't exactly rare. Even moabite (supposedly the worst people Israel knew of) married into Israel. Jacob married Arameans, Josef an Egyptian. The wife of Moses is widely held to have been a black women (a cushite). And Boaz' wife Ruth is the role model of all women who marry into the Jewish people today. (The list is much longer, and I seem to remember that it didn't always work out well, but people were people even in biblic times.)"
"we have a massive tradition of DJs in Bristol."
DJing from vinyl is going to be history in a short matter of time. Cd's have become increasing popular, because there are massive advantages to today's DJ cd players (Hotstarts, Effects, Looping, etc..). All of this added functionality, while being able to perform exactly like a turn table. Check out the Denon DN-S3500. (www.denondj.com)
-C
What is the difference between this and the Phalanx system used on U.S. Naval Ships? The Phalanx defense system, currently employed on U.S. Warships, shoots down enemy air projectiles that are heading towards the ship. The Phalanx uses radar to detect incoming missiles and shoots them out of the sky by unleashing an insane amount of bullets in direction of the target. Pictures and info here..
-C
Yes, it makes you weak-minded and foolish to have faith. Definition: faith is belief that is not based on proof. We seldom intend to act randomly in this world, and we base our actions upon past data, mainly memories. In this instance, to act upon data you cannot validate is foolish.
Open heart operations are understandable procedures. There is a finite chemistry and set of geometries specific to a person's heart and body system. The most direct aid you could have provided your son would be to hire the best surgeon and medical staff in the world. The next thing you can control is your son's spirits. By this I mean you should cater to their needs, filling their time with humour, optimism, and a lack of stress. Telling your son that you are praying for him, could in fact be helpful, but your private act of prayer is not. Another indirect option would be to donate money to research in this field. Doing your own research into this field is another option.
In my opinion, prayer is the lazy option, like wishing upon a star. It has nothing to do with proaction. It seems easy to believe that prayer is harmless, but to engage in a mindset whereby you have sacrificed rationality and sensible thought, it fosters a mind that has truly been sacrificed.
According to TFA, autistic people cannot discern or interpret a bored look on someone's face, but can realize that feeling a vibration in their hand means that someone is bored. Using a camera (to detect boredom) means that the autistic person is looking at the person he is speaking to. It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning.
If this interaction is correct, then a big high five to the geniuses that found the vibration communication channel into autistic minds. Of course if this is not the case, how will a vibrator help?
This sounds like an unlikely solution to me, but I have not studied autism. Perhaps, the importance of this study is not that it will actually help autistic people, but that our face recognition capabilities are getting to the point of being useable in today's society.
-C
Is this like analogizing dreaming to taking hallucinogens?
If so, this is like telling Slashdotters "Want to Experience Sex? Stay in Bed and touch yourself."
Obviously, an insufficient "Experience". I suspect the same of the Stay in Bed "Experience". Someone try this and get back to us.
-C
But although anecdotal evidence seems to show that babies younger than one year can learn words, it remains unclear whether they are in fact mastering language.
Last time I spoke with a 10 month old, it became clear to me that sub one-year olds have yet to master language. OR, they have mastered some language concepts, but have yet to develop a worthwhile attention span to convey this mastery.
-C
It is easy to understimate the speed at which technology is changing. Pending brick walls (insurmountable laws of physics), computing in 2020 should be absurdly different from that of today.According to Ray Kurzweil: "An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense "intuitive linear" view. So we won't experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century -- it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today's rate). The "returns," such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There's even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. Within a few decades, machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, leading to The Singularity -- technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history. The implications include the merger of biological and nonbiological intelligence, immortal software-based humans, and ultra-high levels of intelligence that expand outward in the universe at the speed of light."
I guess it depends what you consider to be a robot? And under what conditions it could kill another human? The Phalanx defense system, currentlly employed on U.S. Warships, would allow itself to shoot down an enemy aircraft if it were attempting to crash into the ship. The Phalanx uses radar to detect incoming missiles and shoot them out of the sky by unleashing an insane amount of bullets in direction of the target. Pictures and info here.
-C
Clearly, analog data distribution is dead. On the digital side, the importance lies in the method of distribution.
There are various methods for distribution and these methods are changing quite often.
All things considered, there is obvious importance in staying up to date with technological trends.
-c
Why is the slashdot community obsessed with the iPod? No better news or topics of discussion?
Note: I own an iPod shuffle and 4th Gen. 40 GB iPod, but am growing tired of the fruitless perpetuation of iPod talks.
-C
Lucas fails to mention what has changed in the viewer or economic system. A relatively short period of time ago, big budget films were often hits. There was a placebo effect, whereby people would have high expectations of a big budget film (despite this often not panning out.... i.e. WaterWorld).. Both the Spiderman and X-Men movies have proved that big-budget films, of late, can score big.
It's not just about ticket sales, but merchandising as well. Except for t-shirts and posters, "indie" films cannot compete with the merchandising opportunities of the types of movies that mandate big budgets.
Slashdot Mirror
What are electrolytes? Do you even know?
"I lost my faith in faith around the time I started asking questions and got back a lot of crappy answers. However, I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of *some* kind of creative force simply because we may not have the tools to demonstrate or understand it fully."
I think you should consider yourself an atheist until you have good reason to believe an alternative. Of course fairies and magic teapots COULD exist, but you do not consider yourself agnostic about these concepts. Do you have reason to be agnostic about the existence of a "creative force"? If not, you are an atheist.
Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god(s). Do not try to lump any other belief system into it (i.e. implying that 21st century atheists think they are perfectly rational). To do so is fallacious argumentation and a deliberate blurring of the issues at hand.
The reason to use the term "atheist" as opposed to "agnostic" is because we don't feel the need to call ourselves agnostic about fairies and magic teapots. The term "agnostic" gives too much credit to ideas that do not deserve credit (or are on the same footing as other supernatural ideas). There is ZERO evidence supporting Christianity, as well as all of the other supernatural religions out there.
"As a person who does believe in some faith, I seem to be in a small minority (maybe a less vocal group) on Slashdot, but all of these articles bring up the lack of tolerance of people with differing views on both sides - both from people who support some version of Creationism and from those who hold to strict Scientific beliefs. I tend to compromise in the middle which I guess makes me a sell-out to both sides, but at least i'm clear about where I stand."
You could be clear to yourself where you stand, but you have not made it clear to any other readers. Where do you stand? Please clarify what you mean by tolerance (it is important to this discussion).
A reasonable group of people would give differing views "tolerance" based upon the views' legitimacy, not the fact that those views are held by certain people. Do you propose we have "tolerance" for the idea that there is a magic teapot in orbit that controls the universe? Creationist claims deserve no special treatment. Either there is evidence for these claims or there is not. (There is not.) Tolerance is not the correct word to bring up in this discussion.
Really trying to validate the Slashdot slogan aren't we?
And, as you probably know, marriage between prominent Hebrews and outsiders weren't exactly rare. Even moabite (supposedly the worst people Israel knew of) married into Israel. Jacob married Arameans, Josef an Egyptian. The wife of Moses is widely held to have been a black women (a cushite). And Boaz' wife Ruth is the role model of all women who marry into the Jewish people today. (The list is much longer, and I seem to remember that it didn't always work out well, but people were people even in biblic times.)"
Is that a matter of fact?
Who are you to say what the purpose of a university is? -C
"we have a massive tradition of DJs in Bristol." DJing from vinyl is going to be history in a short matter of time. Cd's have become increasing popular, because there are massive advantages to today's DJ cd players (Hotstarts, Effects, Looping, etc..). All of this added functionality, while being able to perform exactly like a turn table. Check out the Denon DN-S3500. (www.denondj.com) -C
Why do they call it "PMS"? ... Because "Mad Cow" was taken.
This makes the MIT automated dorm room (MIDAS) look like child's play.
GW's grades were better than Kerry's.
What is the difference between this and the Phalanx system used on U.S. Naval Ships? The Phalanx defense system, currently employed on U.S. Warships, shoots down enemy air projectiles that are heading towards the ship. The Phalanx uses radar to detect incoming missiles and shoots them out of the sky by unleashing an insane amount of bullets in direction of the target. Pictures and info here.. -C
Yes, it makes you weak-minded and foolish to have faith. Definition: faith is belief that is not based on proof. We seldom intend to act randomly in this world, and we base our actions upon past data, mainly memories. In this instance, to act upon data you cannot validate is foolish. Open heart operations are understandable procedures. There is a finite chemistry and set of geometries specific to a person's heart and body system. The most direct aid you could have provided your son would be to hire the best surgeon and medical staff in the world. The next thing you can control is your son's spirits. By this I mean you should cater to their needs, filling their time with humour, optimism, and a lack of stress. Telling your son that you are praying for him, could in fact be helpful, but your private act of prayer is not. Another indirect option would be to donate money to research in this field. Doing your own research into this field is another option. In my opinion, prayer is the lazy option, like wishing upon a star. It has nothing to do with proaction. It seems easy to believe that prayer is harmless, but to engage in a mindset whereby you have sacrificed rationality and sensible thought, it fosters a mind that has truly been sacrificed.
According to TFA, autistic people cannot discern or interpret a bored look on someone's face, but can realize that feeling a vibration in their hand means that someone is bored. Using a camera (to detect boredom) means that the autistic person is looking at the person he is speaking to. It's interesting that a human could receive image data and be unable to remember what it means, but receive touch data and be able to remember its meaning. If this interaction is correct, then a big high five to the geniuses that found the vibration communication channel into autistic minds. Of course if this is not the case, how will a vibrator help? This sounds like an unlikely solution to me, but I have not studied autism. Perhaps, the importance of this study is not that it will actually help autistic people, but that our face recognition capabilities are getting to the point of being useable in today's society. -C
Is this like analogizing dreaming to taking hallucinogens? If so, this is like telling Slashdotters "Want to Experience Sex? Stay in Bed and touch yourself." Obviously, an insufficient "Experience". I suspect the same of the Stay in Bed "Experience". Someone try this and get back to us. -C
What sort of asexual computer user considers OS special effects Desktop Eyecandy? He must mean "at-work" Eyecandy.
But although anecdotal evidence seems to show that babies younger than one year can learn words, it remains unclear whether they are in fact mastering language. Last time I spoke with a 10 month old, it became clear to me that sub one-year olds have yet to master language. OR, they have mastered some language concepts, but have yet to develop a worthwhile attention span to convey this mastery. -C
It is easy to understimate the speed at which technology is changing. Pending brick walls (insurmountable laws of physics), computing in 2020 should be absurdly different from that of today.According to Ray Kurzweil: "An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense "intuitive linear" view. So we won't experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century -- it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today's rate). The "returns," such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There's even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. Within a few decades, machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, leading to The Singularity -- technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history. The implications include the merger of biological and nonbiological intelligence, immortal software-based humans, and ultra-high levels of intelligence that expand outward in the universe at the speed of light."
How can the past be truly confirmed? -C
I guess it depends what you consider to be a robot? And under what conditions it could kill another human? The Phalanx defense system, currentlly employed on U.S. Warships, would allow itself to shoot down an enemy aircraft if it were attempting to crash into the ship. The Phalanx uses radar to detect incoming missiles and shoot them out of the sky by unleashing an insane amount of bullets in direction of the target. Pictures and info here. -C
Clearly, analog data distribution is dead. On the digital side, the importance lies in the method of distribution. There are various methods for distribution and these methods are changing quite often. All things considered, there is obvious importance in staying up to date with technological trends. -c
Why is the slashdot community obsessed with the iPod? No better news or topics of discussion? Note: I own an iPod shuffle and 4th Gen. 40 GB iPod, but am growing tired of the fruitless perpetuation of iPod talks. -C
Lucas fails to mention what has changed in the viewer or economic system. A relatively short period of time ago, big budget films were often hits. There was a placebo effect, whereby people would have high expectations of a big budget film (despite this often not panning out.... i.e. WaterWorld).. Both the Spiderman and X-Men movies have proved that big-budget films, of late, can score big. It's not just about ticket sales, but merchandising as well. Except for t-shirts and posters, "indie" films cannot compete with the merchandising opportunities of the types of movies that mandate big budgets.
As much as I can tell, scoping out babes from a distance will continue to be the standard for Slashdotters far past 2050.
You going to adopt by yourself? Very noble... -C