Perhaps we need two words: one for small-scale evolutionary change due to a shift in the frequency of two competing genes (light versus dark moths) and one for global descent of all living things from non-living things.
There is, the former is called "evolution" while the latter is called "abiogenesis". Our understanding of abiogenesis is still, as far as I'm aware, not too solid though not to the point that "God did it!" is a reasonable alternative, while our understanding of evolution is on the same level as gravity: we know it happens and we have a pretty good idea of how it does, to the point that any future theory that explains it better won't differ significantly from what we use today.
What's commonly called "macro evolution", however, isn't abiogenesis but plain old evolution: the creation of a whole new species starting from an older, different one (man from ape, for instance), the existance of which is easily explained as multiple "micro evolutions" happening over a significant length of time. And, I must add, that has also been shown experimentally with flies, though IIRC the experiment in question took 20 years until the separate groups weren't able to create viable offspring between themselves, so it may be a bit harder to replicate than the GP's plants experiment.
Actually, it's more like Apple = Scientology, Microsoft = Catholicism, Linux = Atheism and *BSDs = Agnosticism. Apple follows a strict "the more you pay the better we'll treat you" policy complete with a personality cult around a let's say 'controversial' individual, Microsoft is awfully intolerant of anything that dares take converts from them and has most of the world under their thumb, Linux requires at least a marginal amount of intelligence and skill not to turn into a sad parody of the mainstream religions but is the only one actively advocating looking upon the world with an educated mind, while the *BSDs mostly follow an ideology of "I don't give a crap, just let me do my work in peace".
The parallels even continue with OSX, which was born when someone from the BSD camp took a look at the work they did and said "hey, I could make a pretty nice buck from this thing".
Even though everyone in the US already has an iPod
Fixed that for you. Thankfully, everywhere else iPods remain as an "also ran" at best, usually falling into obscurity in favor of good old generic flash-based media players.
If I were to go around the internet telling everyone that you are a child molester, wouldn't you want to find out my identity?
If I were to go around the internet telling everyone that you are a child molester, would you want that be enough for the authorities to find out your identity? after all, there are indications that you're a child molester, it'd be irresponsible of them not to investigate you.
Bonus points of course if I'm *part* of said authorities;)
A guy shows how the upgrade procedure goes from DOS -> Windows 7, and in addition of making comments on the robustness of the Windows upgrade system or anything even remotely related to the video, there are also comments about how the poster doesn't use Windows anymore and brags about it.
Fixed that for you. Post an article about Linux GUIs and you'll also inevitably run into a few morons boasting about OSX's "wonderful" interface that the Free world could never hope to match, and more than one idiot going around about how Linux sucks and Windows is so awesome because it autodetected his 1995 printer without recompiling his kernel or such crap.
Fact: all communities have their more 'toxic' elements, pretending it's an isolated problem is either foolishness or pure trolling. So don't.
Government has oversight, and gets oversight already -- especially if the likes of you and I do our jobs as citizens and ensure they remain accountable.
Which you have not, considering all the attrocities the US has been committing ever since they invaded Iraq. Rape, indiscriminatory murder, torture, etc, all of which people have found out practically by chance. And what happens when people actually show these realities to the world? they're called "traitors", just as it happened with Abu Ghraib.
Put it this way: if you have a partner, you're going to be as honest as you can, but you're NOT doing to tell her that her arse looks big in those jeans, are you? Not all secrecy is bad. Real life defies teen basement-dweller logic.
Yeah, I am and in fact I have, with no ill effects. Sorry, but real life *also* defies zealous ultranationalism.
There's also plenty of historical cases where the strong and decisive leadership of an absolute monarch or dictator saved lives and prevented horrible things from happening, yet here we are.
Sometimes, the grey really *is* only a few shades away from black you know, the fact that secrecy isn't entirely without merit doesn't make it a net positive overall.
Popular support is a component of democracy but it's not enough to decide the fairness of laws.
So what is enough? most people that hold your argument seem to believe in nothing more than a "I'll know it when I see it", the idiocy of which ought to be obvious enough.
I'm not an US citizen, but can you also decline to get a Social Security number? and, if you can, are you able to conduct a normal life (ie, keep a job, buy a home, etc) without one?
It seems to me your SS number serves the same role as other countries' national IDs, except with none of the safety checks they usually have.
Heh, iPhone 3G is not supported. Guess that's what happens when you refuse to use an actual standard and do your own propietary crap, isn't it? "we can import photos from any device you may own, except ours".
If the OSX software market is any indication, yes they will and in less than a year you'll be seeing "please upgrade to iPad 2 to run this application".
He only said he had one, not that he bought it. He may have received one as a gift (which doesn't alleviate the stupidity of replacing a perfectly working product with a shinier one) or outright stolen it (which would, but also bring issues of ethics and legality into matter).
Apple knows it has to pay - there is no indication from Apple that it wants to "scam off" Nokia - Apple needs to pay what everyone else paid, and will do so. It doesn't want to "get away with anything", but equally it doesn't want to be taken for a ride either, which is specifically what the RAND licensing is supposed to prevent.
Obviously both companies want to end up with a favourable deal to itself, but Apple is aware what the cost of the GSM patents are - it's the same as everyone else paid.
Which is exactly what Nokia is asking of them, is it not? they're well aware of the worth of both the GSM patents as well as Apple's, and are asking for a fair trade just as everybody else did before them. There's no indication that the situation is any different from that except, of course, Apple's word for it.
Yeah, just yesterday my boss was telling me that MS Office was Windows' "killer exe" and that's why we wouldn't migrate to Linux. And later that day, we all laughed and laughed at poor Bob, who said "I wrote a Windows program to help me organize my music yesterday", not realizing his error until we told him "so you wrote Linux software for Windows?".
Meanwhile, outside of imagination land and back into the real world...
You're assuming that Apple is right and Nokia is undervaluing them, rather than Apple purposely overvaluing their own patents' worth in an effort to scam Nokia off their licensing rights.
Yes, the statement "if App Store generic, then so is Windows", is logically equivalent to (the contrapositive of) "Windows is not generic, then neither is App Store". Microsoft's success at defending the Windows trademark therefore is a precedent for Apple successfully defending the App Store trademark.
Begging the question, neither you nor Apple have proven the initial correlation between the App Store trademark and Windows'.
What's with Apple zealots and blantant revisionism? "Apple created it!" "no it didn't" "oh, anyone that did it before was just some computer nerd, so it doesn't count" "WTF kind of logic is that?" "stop hating on Apple, Apple-hater, those are just the facts" "...forget it, you're just not worth my time" "Glad you see it my way".
Anyways, the big, practical problem with your postulate is that it applies to stuff 10 million years ago just as well as whatever happened 10 seconds ago, making whatever meaning you held of "knowledge" pretty f'in useless.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps we need two words: one for small-scale evolutionary change due to a shift in the frequency of two competing genes (light versus dark moths) and one for global descent of all living things from non-living things.
There is, the former is called "evolution" while the latter is called "abiogenesis". Our understanding of abiogenesis is still, as far as I'm aware, not too solid though not to the point that "God did it!" is a reasonable alternative, while our understanding of evolution is on the same level as gravity: we know it happens and we have a pretty good idea of how it does, to the point that any future theory that explains it better won't differ significantly from what we use today.
What's commonly called "macro evolution", however, isn't abiogenesis but plain old evolution: the creation of a whole new species starting from an older, different one (man from ape, for instance), the existance of which is easily explained as multiple "micro evolutions" happening over a significant length of time. And, I must add, that has also been shown experimentally with flies, though IIRC the experiment in question took 20 years until the separate groups weren't able to create viable offspring between themselves, so it may be a bit harder to replicate than the GP's plants experiment.
Actually, it's more like Apple = Scientology, Microsoft = Catholicism, Linux = Atheism and *BSDs = Agnosticism. Apple follows a strict "the more you pay the better we'll treat you" policy complete with a personality cult around a let's say 'controversial' individual, Microsoft is awfully intolerant of anything that dares take converts from them and has most of the world under their thumb, Linux requires at least a marginal amount of intelligence and skill not to turn into a sad parody of the mainstream religions but is the only one actively advocating looking upon the world with an educated mind, while the *BSDs mostly follow an ideology of "I don't give a crap, just let me do my work in peace".
The parallels even continue with OSX, which was born when someone from the BSD camp took a look at the work they did and said "hey, I could make a pretty nice buck from this thing".
Even though everyone in the US already has an iPod
Fixed that for you. Thankfully, everywhere else iPods remain as an "also ran" at best, usually falling into obscurity in favor of good old generic flash-based media players.
Free speech is not the freedom to libel and slander the innocent. Free speech is not the freedom to make threats with impunity.
Yes, it is, otherwise it is no longer Free.
Free speech is not the freedom to say anything you'd like, as long as I approve of it.
If I were to go around the internet telling everyone that you are a child molester, wouldn't you want to find out my identity?
If I were to go around the internet telling everyone that you are a child molester, would you want that be enough for the authorities to find out your identity? after all, there are indications that you're a child molester, it'd be irresponsible of them not to investigate you.
Bonus points of course if I'm *part* of said authorities ;)
A guy shows how the upgrade procedure goes from DOS -> Windows 7, and in addition of making comments on the robustness of the Windows upgrade system or anything even remotely related to the video, there are also comments about how the poster doesn't use Windows anymore and brags about it.
Fixed that for you. Post an article about Linux GUIs and you'll also inevitably run into a few morons boasting about OSX's "wonderful" interface that the Free world could never hope to match, and more than one idiot going around about how Linux sucks and Windows is so awesome because it autodetected his 1995 printer without recompiling his kernel or such crap.
Fact: all communities have their more 'toxic' elements, pretending it's an isolated problem is either foolishness or pure trolling. So don't.
So what? the GP's point that it doesn't let just any browser that supports its features see it still stands.
Just admit you were wrong and stop this charade, alright?
Those that get new features in every single release, you mean?
Seriously, if Firefox had stagnated like IE6 did for so many years I'd understand your concern, but as it stands...
Government has oversight, and gets oversight already -- especially if the likes of you and I do our jobs as citizens and ensure they remain accountable.
Which you have not, considering all the attrocities the US has been committing ever since they invaded Iraq. Rape, indiscriminatory murder, torture, etc, all of which people have found out practically by chance. And what happens when people actually show these realities to the world? they're called "traitors", just as it happened with Abu Ghraib.
Put it this way: if you have a partner, you're going to be as honest as you can, but you're NOT doing to tell her that her arse looks big in those jeans, are you? Not all secrecy is bad. Real life defies teen basement-dweller logic.
Yeah, I am and in fact I have, with no ill effects. Sorry, but real life *also* defies zealous ultranationalism.
There's also plenty of historical cases where the strong and decisive leadership of an absolute monarch or dictator saved lives and prevented horrible things from happening, yet here we are.
Sometimes, the grey really *is* only a few shades away from black you know, the fact that secrecy isn't entirely without merit doesn't make it a net positive overall.
Popular support is a component of democracy but it's not enough to decide the fairness of laws.
So what is enough? most people that hold your argument seem to believe in nothing more than a "I'll know it when I see it", the idiocy of which ought to be obvious enough.
I'm not an US citizen, but can you also decline to get a Social Security number? and, if you can, are you able to conduct a normal life (ie, keep a job, buy a home, etc) without one?
It seems to me your SS number serves the same role as other countries' national IDs, except with none of the safety checks they usually have.
Heh, iPhone 3G is not supported. Guess that's what happens when you refuse to use an actual standard and do your own propietary crap, isn't it? "we can import photos from any device you may own, except ours".
But it does the 1% thing that it *can* do better than anyone else, and for everything else you may as well get a laptop or netbook.
If the OSX software market is any indication, yes they will and in less than a year you'll be seeing "please upgrade to iPad 2 to run this application".
He only said he had one, not that he bought it. He may have received one as a gift (which doesn't alleviate the stupidity of replacing a perfectly working product with a shinier one) or outright stolen it (which would, but also bring issues of ethics and legality into matter).
Because pricing your product lower than the competition is the height of innovation.
Apple knows it has to pay - there is no indication from Apple that it wants to "scam off" Nokia - Apple needs to pay what everyone else paid, and will do so. It doesn't want to "get away with anything", but equally it doesn't want to be taken for a ride either, which is specifically what the RAND licensing is supposed to prevent.
Obviously both companies want to end up with a favourable deal to itself, but Apple is aware what the cost of the GSM patents are - it's the same as everyone else paid.
Which is exactly what Nokia is asking of them, is it not? they're well aware of the worth of both the GSM patents as well as Apple's, and are asking for a fair trade just as everybody else did before them. There's no indication that the situation is any different from that except, of course, Apple's word for it.
Yeah, just yesterday my boss was telling me that MS Office was Windows' "killer exe" and that's why we wouldn't migrate to Linux. And later that day, we all laughed and laughed at poor Bob, who said "I wrote a Windows program to help me organize my music yesterday", not realizing his error until we told him "so you wrote Linux software for Windows?".
Meanwhile, outside of imagination land and back into the real world...
So people may or may not think that 'app store' is something they said before the iPhone, but the majority of people definitely didn't use it.
But they did use X Windows?
Not being pro-Apple there, sure. You really should've thought your argument through.
You're assuming that Apple is right and Nokia is undervaluing them, rather than Apple purposely overvaluing their own patents' worth in an effort to scam Nokia off their licensing rights.
Wrong, and I find no coherent way of explaining how you'd believe so with your UID. Living under a rock for the past decade or something?
Yes, the statement "if App Store generic, then so is Windows", is logically equivalent to (the contrapositive of) "Windows is not generic, then neither is App Store". Microsoft's success at defending the Windows trademark therefore is a precedent for Apple successfully defending the App Store trademark.
Begging the question, neither you nor Apple have proven the initial correlation between the App Store trademark and Windows'.
What's with Apple zealots and blantant revisionism? "Apple created it!" "no it didn't" "oh, anyone that did it before was just some computer nerd, so it doesn't count" "WTF kind of logic is that?" "stop hating on Apple, Apple-hater, those are just the facts" "...forget it, you're just not worth my time" "Glad you see it my way".
Calling it anything other than a theory means you don't understand how science works at all.
Ohhh, the irony.
Anyways, the big, practical problem with your postulate is that it applies to stuff 10 million years ago just as well as whatever happened 10 seconds ago, making whatever meaning you held of "knowledge" pretty f'in useless.