I like to think being Clever is the best real-world tool to have over Intelligence or Wisdom. In some ways it is the product of the two. Wisdom allows one to solve problems involving morals, emotions, culture, interpersonal relations... Intelligence allows one to solve problems involving logic, puzzles, quandaries... Cleverness addresses all of the above.
You could try, anyway. My legion of giant hamster-men might have something to say about it . ..
All i can picture is an army of internet-dancing-hamster men slowly marching across the plains in formation blaring that hamster dancing song on mega-speakers destroying everything in their path.
What if I have my own island and I breed humans for food. Is that wrong? If so then why? it doesn't hurt _you_
While i agree with you that one might want to consider the community's force against you when applying extreme relativistic "gray" moral principles, the fact of the matter is, all things ethical are indeed gray. One thing's good can be another thing's bad (just use your imagination a bit). As soon as you say there are absolute morals of any sort, you are implying there is some absolute judgement, which of course there is not. Your perceived sanity is also relative. And, other animals breed/use animals for food all the time (in horrific ways humans will hopefully never realize themselves).
Whatever happened to doing things because we *could*, rather than because we should?
I totally agree. Also, if I felt someone who is creating suffering sentient mutants needed to be killed, I *could* do that.
But seriously, all morals are obviously relative. I mean what if it turns out humans are to be a very bad addition to the universe. Like all other intelligent aliens out there are magnitudes more peaceful and we are like the equivalent of Species 8472. So, any actions leading to the destruction of the human race would be considered a "good" thing.
Your argument against creationism based on the idea that you can't have something from nothing fails under your logic for agnosticism. One could be agnostic as to the origins of god/God/gods/force/universe (I'll call this thing God... it depends on your religious/philosophical views what terms and understanding are applied) and use the same basic argumentation you used for the universes existence.
I'm not sure what you mean, but my point was that there is no argument to be had. We can't even have the discussion because we can't even ask the right questions. Our questions make no logical sense.
I think we'd agree that if you existed in a closed system you cannot know anything about anything outside of that system (even whether there is or is not anything) without information from outside of your system being made available to you.
If you can step outside of the system then there now is definitely something more and hence we don't understand the universe. So, you keep stepping out further... for arguments sake, if at some point you can absolutely no longer step outside further, well then you can't understand the universe. Or, you've just determined that the system is closed. I can't fathom a universe with boundaries. Seems like a paradox any way you cut it.
This is the typical religious argument... that God has made Himself (or whatever) known in some way. The test of course is how reliable are the claims, are the based in knowable reality, are they somewhat testable, are the claims consistent, etc...
Right, that is the typical argument. It makes no sense. A leap of faith. Religion is trivially dismissed.
The key point in all of this discussion is that our inability to know has no bearing on the actual truth of the matter.
This is an interesting point and I agree at face value. But are you implying or do you think that there is an absolute truth to be known? Thats a big assumption. My philosophical point was that the universe can't be 'known' else it could not exist. How can you close the system? So say we figure it out. Then what? Thats it? End game? Play again? Twiddle thumbs for eternity? Again I'll say that the questions we are asking don't even make sense.
The problem is that creationists, atheists, and agnostics are all missing the bigger picture and missing the point (but, if we must assign a winner, agnostics come closest.) The question as to whether there is a creator is nonsensical as far as we can fathom. Consider the two possible scenarios:
1) "There is a creator; call it god. Some entity created everything." 2) "There is no god. Nothing created the universe; it just came into existence."
Neither of the only two possible scenarios makes any sense. They both fail in the same way: you can't have something come from nothing; whether that be the universe or the creator that made the universe. You don't need to be a philosopher or particularly logical to see this. In fact, you could argue that atheists are creationists since they believe the universe created itself.
So, what are we left with? I can think of two things. But, first I'd like to point out that a true agnostic is one who sees the paradox and futility in taking a position on this. At least that is what I term an Agnostic; one who doesn't know (anything about the origin of the universe) and doesn't care (because they know its futile, not because they are apathetic).
So what can we conclude if our two seeming scenarios are ludicrous?
1) The first is simplistic... there is an explanation and it is beyond any semblance of what we deem as logical. Or even asking the questions of why and how the universe exists is not even the right question. How else would you overcome a paradox? By changing the rules of the game. This means that our language, our thoughts, our logic, etc DO NOT APPLY. We are either too simplistic, lacking the proper whatever to understand what is going on.
2) The one I like the most is this: In a more philosophical bent, it can be argued that the universe (in the most encompassing definition of the word) can not be 'explained' since there can always be an explanation for the explanation; always a viewpoint from outside to that which you have just explained; similar in concept to the paradox that you can always divide something in half to get something smaller. The universe by its very definition of encompassing everything means nothing can be outside of it. It can't be explained or else it couldn't exist. Basically, its a paradox as far as we can see it.
well if *I* were to rig a touch screen voting machine, i'd make it a "Calibration" issue, not a "coding" issue. The former, you could play dumb. The latter, not so much.
This will make me sign up. So, if there are a lot of people out there like me, then this is a good move.
I've been holding out on going this route for buying music because I thought that.99 is too much to pay for one song for most of the music that is offered. New, popular songs in high demand should go for more and people will pay for it.
I really hope though that there pricing algorithm is reasonable; maybe with hi/low caps built in. A really old song that is not being downloaded much should be able to go as low as 0.25. A really popular new song being downloaded frequently should not go over $2 or $3.
I've found it really beneficial to come up with an interesting, small, easy coding project to help learn a new programming language or programming concept.
ie *not* a 'Hello World' program!
Everyone has different learning styles, but I think having something to apply what you are learning to (beyond the usual 'hello world' and other bland examples... "say you have a company with employees - these are your objects..." zzzzz).
I usually pick a game (eg blackjack) or simulation (eg orbital motion) or some tool I personally need (eg online photo album, resume database, etc).
This usually prods you to search all the nooks and crannies of the language to find out what you need to make your project work.
yeah, i know... flamebait written all over that subject title.
Really, my question is... what seperates a *good* big coorporation from a *bad* big coorporation? I like Google. They are innovative and embrace simplicity and they are free. They are however huge and growing fast. What will keep them from succumbing to big, evil, capitalistic empire syndrome? Is it just a natural tendency for succeeding US businesses to do that or is there another way?
Microsoft probably wouldn't be hated so much for their monopoly if they didn't write such crappy software.
Re:how about we STOP pushing our culture, mkay?
on
Homer Becomes Omar
·
· Score: 1
yes, American culture produces some amazing stuff and is pushing the envelope at lightening speed (ironicly much like our capitalistic society is burning thru resources at lightening speed). The problem is that along with all the great innovations and advances in freedom and art and music, there is an incredible amount of crap we produce. I think we are giving everyone around the world steady doses of both. Yes, of course they want it. The kids love it. People who want to break from their country's ultra-conservative or extremist oversight will embrace it. But, the problem is there is a small but significant percentage of the population in these other countries that are still way behind us in these regards and our culture totally threatens their way of life and their percieved safety; they are being forced to change from old ways to new ways. No, really, they are being forced. Just like you were forced to switch from 8-tracks to tapes to CDs to DVDs, etc. If you want to be a part of the modern world then get ready to follow it whatever direction it goes. These other countries are in strange situation. They want to join the modern world and are encouraged to do so, but they stand having to drastically change their ways. We call them extremists and in many ways they absolutely are; their human/womens rights are all out of whack. Religion has a lot to do with it as well. But, they hold a lot of power in these countries and many have argued that the terrorist strikes are more of sign of these people not wanting us to intrude on them and their culture. However harmless it seems (yeah, the simpsons is a bad example) it all adds up and reaches a boiling point for them. I personally think most extremists we could do without on this planet. But its hard to blame them for not being able to keep up. Yes, they probably should change; it would be for the better. But they can't change as fast as we want them to.
And, as you might know, we have a department of the government set up to specifically introduce things like the simpsons and other cultural icons in the middle east to supposedly soften our bad image we have their. But I bet you unconsciously this really is being done to get them used to our presence there.
how about we STOP pushing our culture, mkay?
on
Homer Becomes Omar
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
how about we stop pushing our culture on other countries? hasn't recent history shown that western overload on cultures that aren't ready for it results in some sort of backlash? okay so that was probably more due to US capitalism and oil greed shoving its way around the middle east like a bull in a china shop. but still, do we have to actively seek feeding our dribble-for-culture across the globe? i really do like the Simpsons... ? damn, i must really be hating the US these days.
It's probably NOT a good idea to display sex and violence on tv for any pre-teen to see.
In any case, its ultimately up to the parent to educate and/or prevent there kids from seeing or doing something. If they want it bad enough, kids are smart and will find a way around most things anyway. And if they want something that bad, we should probably ask ourselves why that is, too.
Also, another thing to ask yourself... how long will it be before there IS a game where you can full-on rape someone? It's all a gray line, but i'm pretty sure if i had an 7 year old boy, i wouldn't want him playing a game where he can rape or . Even if you educate them, exposure does have an effect.
There is no perfect solution, but there are good comprimises. The bill is probably too harsh but not far off.
Not being able to play Grand Theft Auto if I were 12 years old again would drive me insane... But, i felt that way about watching R and XXX movies and buying Playboy and drinking and smoking, etc, etc. (i of course found my way around the law for most of them anyway).
I DO think that video games need a rating system and sales limitations, though they should at least make it consistent with the movie industry which is pretty much the same issue. I DON'T think it should be totally open since it seems pretty degenerative to allow your 5 year old access to XXX or R movies OR GAMES. same thing. I do think though that a 11-15 year old can handle much more than the state/govt thinks they can.
If you think your 5 year old is ready for that then you are probably letting him sip off your beers, too, yeah?
don't worry, this is a good thing... the NASA chief was actually sent from the future to stop advances in robotic technology in order to thwart the rise of terminator robots in the near future. The key space-time point is to stop a lowly intern from sending up some new programming to the Mars rovers early next year that, coupled with a lightening strike on Mars, will give rise to sentient intelligence on the rover which will build an army of invading rovers each equipped with rock drill bits that will kill us all by taking core samples through our foreheads. Good work Elachi!
I'm for anything that gets humans populated and self-sufficient into space as fast as possible. The faster we have colonies on our Moon, Mars, and space stations, the better. Of course, there is a balance so as to keep things humming right along here on Earth. I think privatizing the exploration of the frontiers of space and space colonization is giving it a good kick in the pants, where NASA has become complacent.
- decreasing overall intelligence of US workforce and students - a steady climb in oil prices for the most oil-dependent country by far - continued enormous money sink into military spending - the world slowly turning its back on the US - growing, intensifying, global, networked, militant anti-US movement - continued threat of terrorist activity within the US - debt up to our ears
The US is in decline and there is no stopping it. The smart ones will leave. The rest will probably go down in flames because they can't change.
a clear example of "Intelligent Design"...
on
Python vs. Alligator
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
now here is a clear example of "Intelligent Design"; only an all-mighty and all-knowing entity could create a universe that produces something of such beauty and complexity.
Male user: "That was amazing! Your sensual words and animation control of your avatar was just mind-blowing. Let's meet tomorrow for another hour..."
Female user: "Thanks. Not too bad yourself. Oh, btw, my name is Virgil and I'm a lumberjack in the Appalachians. This internet is the best thing ever!"
I can already see it coming... Google will scan the content of your documents with their AdSense program and post their ads over to the right of the content.
but seriously, I don't think Google is going to have any problems funding this. Have you seen their stock price lately. If their funding ever drops, they will have much bigger problems than funding this Open Office project. 90% of their new developments are working on investor money.
I agree. I use both Open Office and MS Office and sadly MS Office is a bit superior in quality. But, maybe with some backing from Google's billions they can get it up to speed. It would be nice to not have worry about getting a hacked copy of MS office every few years.:)
i don't think you are reading it wrongly. Yes, they are painting a big target on the cellular infrastructure. It's the same mentality that hackers have, and it's unfortunately a neccesity in this world. Better to break it asap and make it better. Though i have similar concerns when government experts publish their reports like "Most Vulnerable Methods for Terrorist Attacks in the US". Gee, thanks for putting that out there. I think there are probably better ways to go about such studies... like notifying those who might fix it first before it causes a problem, and if they don't take it seriously then post it for all. But, in this day and age, if you think of something, there are a thousand others who have already thought the same thing or will shortly after you do. Well, expect for those 15 or so minutes of original thought that we all supposedly have in our entire life.
Slashdot Mirror
I like to think being Clever is the best real-world tool to have over Intelligence or Wisdom. In some ways it is the product of the two. Wisdom allows one to solve problems involving morals, emotions, culture, interpersonal relations... Intelligence allows one to solve problems involving logic, puzzles, quandaries... Cleverness addresses all of the above.
You could try, anyway. My legion of giant hamster-men might have something to say about it . . .
All i can picture is an army of internet-dancing-hamster men slowly marching across the plains in formation blaring that hamster dancing song on mega-speakers destroying everything in their path.
What if I have my own island and I breed humans for food. Is that wrong? If so then why? it doesn't hurt _you_
While i agree with you that one might want to consider the community's force against you when applying extreme relativistic "gray" moral principles, the fact of the matter is, all things ethical are indeed gray. One thing's good can be another thing's bad (just use your imagination a bit). As soon as you say there are absolute morals of any sort, you are implying there is some absolute judgement, which of course there is not. Your perceived sanity is also relative. And, other animals breed/use animals for food all the time (in horrific ways humans will hopefully never realize themselves).
Whatever happened to doing things because we *could*, rather than because we should?
I totally agree. Also, if I felt someone who is creating suffering sentient mutants needed to be killed, I *could* do that.
But seriously, all morals are obviously relative. I mean what if it turns out humans are to be a very bad addition to the universe. Like all other intelligent aliens out there are magnitudes more peaceful and we are like the equivalent of Species 8472. So, any actions leading to the destruction of the human race would be considered a "good" thing.
Your argument against creationism based on the idea that you can't have something from nothing fails under your logic for agnosticism. One could be agnostic as to the origins of god/God/gods/force/universe (I'll call this thing God... it depends on your religious/philosophical views what terms and understanding are applied) and use the same basic argumentation you used for the universes existence.
I'm not sure what you mean, but my point was that there is no argument to be had. We can't even have the discussion because we can't even ask the right questions. Our questions make no logical sense.
I think we'd agree that if you existed in a closed system you cannot know anything about anything outside of that system (even whether there is or is not anything) without information from outside of your system being made available to you.
If you can step outside of the system then there now is definitely something more and hence we don't understand the universe. So, you keep stepping out further... for arguments sake, if at some point you can absolutely no longer step outside further, well then you can't understand the universe. Or, you've just determined that the system is closed. I can't fathom a universe with boundaries. Seems like a paradox any way you cut it.
This is the typical religious argument... that God has made Himself (or whatever) known in some way. The test of course is how reliable are the claims, are the based in knowable reality, are they somewhat testable, are the claims consistent, etc...
Right, that is the typical argument. It makes no sense. A leap of faith. Religion is trivially dismissed.
The key point in all of this discussion is that our inability to know has no bearing on the actual truth of the matter.
This is an interesting point and I agree at face value. But are you implying or do you think that there is an absolute truth to be known? Thats a big assumption. My philosophical point was that the universe can't be 'known' else it could not exist. How can you close the system? So say we figure it out. Then what? Thats it? End game? Play again? Twiddle thumbs for eternity? Again I'll say that the questions we are asking don't even make sense.
The problem is that creationists, atheists, and agnostics are all missing the bigger picture and missing the point (but, if we must assign a winner, agnostics come closest.) The question as to whether there is a creator is nonsensical as far as we can fathom. Consider the two possible scenarios: 1) "There is a creator; call it god. Some entity created everything." 2) "There is no god. Nothing created the universe; it just came into existence." Neither of the only two possible scenarios makes any sense. They both fail in the same way: you can't have something come from nothing; whether that be the universe or the creator that made the universe. You don't need to be a philosopher or particularly logical to see this. In fact, you could argue that atheists are creationists since they believe the universe created itself. So, what are we left with? I can think of two things. But, first I'd like to point out that a true agnostic is one who sees the paradox and futility in taking a position on this. At least that is what I term an Agnostic; one who doesn't know (anything about the origin of the universe) and doesn't care (because they know its futile, not because they are apathetic). So what can we conclude if our two seeming scenarios are ludicrous? 1) The first is simplistic... there is an explanation and it is beyond any semblance of what we deem as logical. Or even asking the questions of why and how the universe exists is not even the right question. How else would you overcome a paradox? By changing the rules of the game. This means that our language, our thoughts, our logic, etc DO NOT APPLY. We are either too simplistic, lacking the proper whatever to understand what is going on. 2) The one I like the most is this: In a more philosophical bent, it can be argued that the universe (in the most encompassing definition of the word) can not be 'explained' since there can always be an explanation for the explanation; always a viewpoint from outside to that which you have just explained; similar in concept to the paradox that you can always divide something in half to get something smaller. The universe by its very definition of encompassing everything means nothing can be outside of it. It can't be explained or else it couldn't exist. Basically, its a paradox as far as we can see it.
well if *I* were to rig a touch screen voting machine, i'd make it a "Calibration" issue, not a "coding" issue. The former, you could play dumb. The latter, not so much.
function GetPrice($song) //first time? //increment price by one penny per song d/l in past hour. capped.
{
$total_downloads = GetTotalDownloads($song);
if ($total_downloads == 0)
{
$price = 1.00;
return $price;
}
$price = 0.10;
$num_downloads = GetNumDownloadsInPastHour($song);
$price += $num_downloads;
if ($price > $k_CAP) {$price = $k_CAP;}
return $price;
}
This will make me sign up. So, if there are a lot of people out there like me, then this is a good move.
.99 is too much to pay for one song for most of the music that is offered. New, popular songs in high demand should go for more and people will pay for it.
I've been holding out on going this route for buying music because I thought that
I really hope though that there pricing algorithm is reasonable; maybe with hi/low caps built in. A really old song that is not being downloaded much should be able to go as low as 0.25. A really popular new song being downloaded frequently should not go over $2 or $3.
I've found it really beneficial to come up with an interesting, small, easy coding project to help learn a new programming language or programming concept.
ie *not* a 'Hello World' program!
Everyone has different learning styles, but I think having something to apply what you are learning to (beyond the usual 'hello world' and other bland examples... "say you have a company with employees - these are your objects..." zzzzz).
I usually pick a game (eg blackjack) or simulation (eg orbital motion) or some tool I personally need (eg online photo album, resume database, etc).
This usually prods you to search all the nooks and crannies of the language to find out what you need to make your project work.
yeah, i know... flamebait written all over that subject title.
Really, my question is... what seperates a *good* big coorporation from a *bad* big coorporation? I like Google. They are innovative and embrace simplicity and they are free. They are however huge and growing fast. What will keep them from succumbing to big, evil, capitalistic empire syndrome? Is it just a natural tendency for succeeding US businesses to do that or is there another way?
Microsoft probably wouldn't be hated so much for their monopoly if they didn't write such crappy software.
yes, American culture produces some amazing stuff and is pushing the envelope at lightening speed (ironicly much like our capitalistic society is burning thru resources at lightening speed). The problem is that along with all the great innovations and advances in freedom and art and music, there is an incredible amount of crap we produce. I think we are giving everyone around the world steady doses of both. Yes, of course they want it. The kids love it. People who want to break from their country's ultra-conservative or extremist oversight will embrace it. But, the problem is there is a small but significant percentage of the population in these other countries that are still way behind us in these regards and our culture totally threatens their way of life and their percieved safety; they are being forced to change from old ways to new ways. No, really, they are being forced. Just like you were forced to switch from 8-tracks to tapes to CDs to DVDs, etc. If you want to be a part of the modern world then get ready to follow it whatever direction it goes. These other countries are in strange situation. They want to join the modern world and are encouraged to do so, but they stand having to drastically change their ways. We call them extremists and in many ways they absolutely are; their human/womens rights are all out of whack. Religion has a lot to do with it as well. But, they hold a lot of power in these countries and many have argued that the terrorist strikes are more of sign of these people not wanting us to intrude on them and their culture. However harmless it seems (yeah, the simpsons is a bad example) it all adds up and reaches a boiling point for them. I personally think most extremists we could do without on this planet. But its hard to blame them for not being able to keep up. Yes, they probably should change; it would be for the better. But they can't change as fast as we want them to.
And, as you might know, we have a department of the government set up to specifically introduce things like the simpsons and other cultural icons in the middle east to supposedly soften our bad image we have their. But I bet you unconsciously this really is being done to get them used to our presence there.
how about we stop pushing our culture on other countries? hasn't recent history shown that western overload on cultures that aren't ready for it results in some sort of backlash? okay so that was probably more due to US capitalism and oil greed shoving its way around the middle east like a bull in a china shop. but still, do we have to actively seek feeding our dribble-for-culture across the globe? i really do like the Simpsons... ? damn, i must really be hating the US these days.
It's probably NOT a good idea to display sex and violence on tv for any pre-teen to see.
In any case, its ultimately up to the parent to educate and/or prevent there kids from seeing or doing something. If they want it bad enough, kids are smart and will find a way around most things anyway. And if they want something that bad, we should probably ask ourselves why that is, too.
Also, another thing to ask yourself... how long will it be before there IS a game where you can full-on rape someone? It's all a gray line, but i'm pretty sure if i had an 7 year old boy, i wouldn't want him playing a game where he can rape or . Even if you educate them, exposure does have an effect.
There is no perfect solution, but there are good comprimises. The bill is probably too harsh but not far off.
Not being able to play Grand Theft Auto if I were 12 years old again would drive me insane... But, i felt that way about watching R and XXX movies and buying Playboy and drinking and smoking, etc, etc. (i of course found my way around the law for most of them anyway).
I DO think that video games need a rating system and sales limitations, though they should at least make it consistent with the movie industry which is pretty much the same issue. I DON'T think it should be totally open since it seems pretty degenerative to allow your 5 year old access to XXX or R movies OR GAMES. same thing. I do think though that a 11-15 year old can handle much more than the state/govt thinks they can.
If you think your 5 year old is ready for that then you are probably letting him sip off your beers, too, yeah?
Grand Theft Walker?
FiniteQuest?
Sim Retirement Home?
Denture Kong?
RolaidsMan?
Shuffle Shuffle Revolution?
yeah!
don't worry, this is a good thing... the NASA chief was actually sent from the future to stop advances in robotic technology in order to thwart the rise of terminator robots in the near future. The key space-time point is to stop a lowly intern from sending up some new programming to the Mars rovers early next year that, coupled with a lightening strike on Mars, will give rise to sentient intelligence on the rover which will build an army of invading rovers each equipped with rock drill bits that will kill us all by taking core samples through our foreheads. Good work Elachi!
I'm for anything that gets humans populated and self-sufficient into space as fast as possible. The faster we have colonies on our Moon, Mars, and space stations, the better. Of course, there is a balance so as to keep things humming right along here on Earth. I think privatizing the exploration of the frontiers of space and space colonization is giving it a good kick in the pants, where NASA has become complacent.
Serenity Now!
Consider these factors:
- decreasing overall intelligence of US workforce and students
- a steady climb in oil prices for the most oil-dependent country by far
- continued enormous money sink into military spending
- the world slowly turning its back on the US
- growing, intensifying, global, networked, militant anti-US movement
- continued threat of terrorist activity within the US
- debt up to our ears
The US is in decline and there is no stopping it. The smart ones will leave. The rest will probably go down in flames because they can't change.
now here is a clear example of "Intelligent Design"; only an all-mighty and all-knowing entity could create a universe that produces something of such beauty and complexity.
Female user: "Thanks. Not too bad yourself. Oh, btw, my name is Virgil and I'm a lumberjack in the Appalachians. This internet is the best thing ever!"
I can already see it coming... Google will scan the content of your documents with their AdSense program and post their ads over to the right of the content.
but seriously, I don't think Google is going to have any problems funding this. Have you seen their stock price lately. If their funding ever drops, they will have much bigger problems than funding this Open Office project. 90% of their new developments are working on investor money.
I agree. I use both Open Office and MS Office and sadly MS Office is a bit superior in quality. But, maybe with some backing from Google's billions they can get it up to speed. It would be nice to not have worry about getting a hacked copy of MS office every few years. :)
i don't think you are reading it wrongly. Yes, they are painting a big target on the cellular infrastructure. It's the same mentality that hackers have, and it's unfortunately a neccesity in this world. Better to break it asap and make it better. Though i have similar concerns when government experts publish their reports like "Most Vulnerable Methods for Terrorist Attacks in the US". Gee, thanks for putting that out there. I think there are probably better ways to go about such studies... like notifying those who might fix it first before it causes a problem, and if they don't take it seriously then post it for all. But, in this day and age, if you think of something, there are a thousand others who have already thought the same thing or will shortly after you do. Well, expect for those 15 or so minutes of original thought that we all supposedly have in our entire life.
Sprint: 10-digit-number@messaging.sprintpcs.com
Verizon: 10-digit-nmber@vtext.com
AT&T: 10-digit-number@mobile.att.net
T Mobile: 10-digit-number@tmomail.net
Nextel: 10-digit-number@messaging.nextel.com
Cingular: 10-digit-number@mobile.mycingular.net
Alltel: 10-digit-number@message.alltel.com
email away!