My understanding is that online gambling can never be fair, since multiple PC's can be used to play networked games at the same table (in poker, for example) sharing their cards with each other and improving their odds over the "honest" players.
I'm assuming sophisticated key catchers do not have to be post keys as they are typed, nor do they have to post the keys in the clear. Keeping that in mind, are you sure you can tell what's going on?
That answer, while appearing to be honest, reinforces the idea that "I can't possibly follow what these 'experts' are talking about." But I'd like to point out that for the curious, Creationism versus Evolution is really not an unattainable subject to delve into, and it can provide a good starting point for learning about Science.
A good starting point is http://www.talkorigins.org./ Creationism is divided into 2 camps: Old-earth Creationism and Young-earth Creationism. For Old-earth Creationism, Hugh Ross' book "The Genesis Question" resorts to simply throwing out verses in Genesis (he does so rather quietly -- the verses are Gen. 1:29-30) in order to make the Bible compatible with Science.
To give Young-earth some serious consideration, try reading Dr. Russell Humphrey's wildly entertaining book "Starlight and Time", which tries to reconcile an old universe with a thousands of years old earth, by resorting to geocentrism.
A good answer to this sentiment, is to examine the predicted "moral decay" of Iceland and other countries who accept evolution more widely than the US.
Mod parent up -- this is pure Buddhism and also appropriate to the thread -- the whole discussion really belongs in a Buddhist forum rather than videogaming. The idea that "things" have a fundamental value (as opposed to assigned values) with regard to mind, is what this addressing. The "self" (which the parent points out isn't real) is another created object of the mind. Self is really handy for locational reference (in time and space) and lets you navigate around your world, come up with schedules, etc. -- however it can be muted, so it's not unavoidable, and thus not fundamental -- it's created by mind.
I've heard that ID fails to generate falsifiable predictions, and is therefore un-scientific. But ID at least predicts "intelligent" designs. Then the question becomes, "how intelligent are the 'designs' we see in nature?" Unfortunately, there are plenty of stupid and wasteful designs out there. For example:
1) Junk DNA 2) Inability to deal with environmental pressures (i.e. vulnerability to extinction)
Any ID curriculum must point out just what sort of incompetent designer would come up with the designs we find in nature.
Slashdot Mirror
Something like?
...on YOU!
In Soviet Russia, government spying on you spying on government spying on you spying on government...
that only works for temperature deltas
My understanding is that online gambling can never be fair, since multiple PC's can be used to play networked games at the same table (in poker, for example) sharing their cards with each other and improving their odds over the "honest" players.
So yes I think that is a problem.
I'm assuming sophisticated key catchers do not have to be post keys as they are typed, nor do they have to post the keys in the clear. Keeping that in mind, are you sure you can tell what's going on?
That answer, while appearing to be honest, reinforces the idea that "I can't possibly follow what these 'experts' are talking about." But I'd like to point out that for the curious, Creationism versus Evolution is really not an unattainable subject to delve into, and it can provide a good starting point for learning about Science.
A good starting point is http://www.talkorigins.org./ Creationism is divided into 2 camps: Old-earth Creationism and Young-earth Creationism. For Old-earth Creationism, Hugh Ross' book "The Genesis Question" resorts to simply throwing out verses in Genesis (he does so rather quietly -- the verses are Gen. 1:29-30) in order to make the Bible compatible with Science.
To give Young-earth some serious consideration, try reading Dr. Russell Humphrey's wildly entertaining book "Starlight and Time", which tries to reconcile an old universe with a thousands of years old earth, by resorting to geocentrism.
A good answer to this sentiment, is to examine the predicted "moral decay" of Iceland and other countries who accept evolution more widely than the US.
Please mod parent up, and delete all other posts to this article, since this was the only relevant post. The article is complete nonsense.
Mod parent up -- this is pure Buddhism and also appropriate to the thread -- the whole discussion really belongs in a Buddhist forum rather than videogaming. The idea that "things" have a fundamental value (as opposed to assigned values) with regard to mind, is what this addressing. The "self" (which the parent points out isn't real) is another created object of the mind. Self is really handy for locational reference (in time and space) and lets you navigate around your world, come up with schedules, etc. -- however it can be muted, so it's not unavoidable, and thus not fundamental -- it's created by mind.
The site appears to be down? After visiting this website I've stuck to Brasso (and it really works great):
/ scratchrepair.htm
http://www.burningissues.net/how_to/scratchrepair
Of course this isn't funny.
http://www.civanon.com/
The incorrect phrasing usage "could care less" is merely anti-intellectualism again raising it's ugly head.
>The predictions were falsifiable.
I've heard that ID fails to generate falsifiable predictions, and is therefore un-scientific. But ID at least predicts "intelligent" designs. Then the question becomes, "how intelligent are the 'designs' we see in nature?" Unfortunately, there are plenty of stupid and wasteful designs out there. For example:
1) Junk DNA
2) Inability to deal with environmental pressures (i.e. vulnerability to extinction)
Any ID curriculum must point out just what sort of incompetent designer would come up with the designs we find in nature.