I've been creating web sites since the 1990s. I still believe that a site should "work" with JavaScript disabled. I like the idea of using AJAX type technologies to just refresh a small portion of the page (eg. scroll or zoom the map), but if JavaScript is disabled clicking on the buttons should cause the whole page to load with the desired adjustment applied.
I also have been creating web sites since the 90s - I'm sorry to say that JavaScript is now just a part of what a normal website is. You can't browse the web without JavaScript anymore.
"When someone says "I installed Linux" or "I use Linux" they mean an operating system"...
The often do, and they are often wrong. Which is why you have people always pointing out that actually it's GNU/Linux that they are running. Technically 'Linux' only refers to the kernel, people should really just state what distro they are running, that would be more accurate.
You can only claim debts from the company to the limit of what the company has. And once that's gone, *poof* the company is gone. The people that started the company have their personal assets outside of the PTY LTD company which is kind of the point.
I disagree, I want a cashless society. In fact we're in a really uncomfortable place right now, in a semi cashless society tending towards cashless. At the moment I often find myself with no actual cash on hand because I can *almost* live my life without it. Consequently it's a real hassle when I actually need coin or note for parking machines or tickets or whatever. Life would be easier without physical money.
All of those things can be had on Windows by using Cygwin, and new versions of Windows 10 will have bash built in. Certainly all of that comes standard with OS X. I think OS X has a nicer more flexible interface than Linux, but I use both.
The nice thing about electronic money as opposed to cash is that it stays in your back account until the moment that you spend it. Which is good for interest etc.
In different parts of the world road laws seem to have different levels of importance. For example: in Australia the speed limit is near to absolute, if you're over you get fined. In the USA the speed limit seems to be a suggested limit where you're really expected to go about the limit +10mph at least on the freeways. Where in the USA some things seem to be more absolute. In some places "one way" might be absolute, and in others it might be more of a suggestion. I mean even compare city to rural driving...
The other weirdness is that you guys still use the term penny to describe an imperial currency, where the rest of the metric world uses cent or some derivative...
Or figure out a way to control population growth. Because you can't continue to "give them money" forever; eventually the well will run dry. Then what?
Why not? It's not like money is a finite resource. Money represents access to resources but if those resources run out that's going to be a problem for everyone.
The only question is what that does to inflation and whether that creates a de facto "tax" on the economy.
Luckily that question has an answer - printing more money the the (only real) cause of inflation and it will act like a universal tax on everyone, as everyone will pay through the devaluation of their earnings. Inflation is possibly the *most* unfair tax that there is.
Not believing there is a god is logically the same as believing there is not a god. You don't need to not believe you are a millionaire because you know it. Even so you're not believing is the same thing to say that you believe you are not.
Atheism is the *belief* that there's no God (or gods).
No it isn't. Atheism is an absence of belief, not a belief in absence.
No it isn't. Atheism is not an absence of belief. The only way you can have an absence of belief is through ignorance. And atheists are not ignorant; they have made a choice and their choice is to believe that there is no god. Atheism is a belief in the absence of belief.
Beliefs regarding gods are religious beliefs, even if it is nonexistence of those gods.
"“Atheism is indeed the most daring of all dogmas . . . for it is the assertion of a universal negative.” -- G. K. Chesterton
END
While I agree with you that atheism is a belief, and scientifically un-testable, there is a distinction between religion and belief; beliefs in the supernatural are considered 'spirituality' where religion provides a framework and a power structure, social norms and dogma.
No, it can't. It is lack of belief in deities, and, by extension, the supernatural. Usually the people claiming it is a religion are religious themselves and do it because they can't handle the possibility of people having morality that lacks dependency on the supernatural.
It can if you equate religion to dogma and compliance rather. To put it another way if a religion is made up of equal parts of dogma, social norms, belief and the supernatural then removing the supernatural leaves you with 75% of what religion provides.
You wouldn't even have to simulate reality - real out of game world might be in 9 dimensional space, and we've just been presented with 3 plus time to reduce processing cost.
Slashdot Mirror
but it is worth it.
Worth it for who?
I've been creating web sites since the 1990s. I still believe that a site should "work" with JavaScript disabled. I like the idea of using AJAX type technologies to just refresh a small portion of the page (eg. scroll or zoom the map), but if JavaScript is disabled clicking on the buttons should cause the whole page to load with the desired adjustment applied.
I also have been creating web sites since the 90s - I'm sorry to say that JavaScript is now just a part of what a normal website is. You can't browse the web without JavaScript anymore.
Vim has nice IDE type features like autocompletion available as plugins which are quite nice...
"When someone says "I installed Linux" or "I use Linux" they mean an operating system"...
The often do, and they are often wrong. Which is why you have people always pointing out that actually it's GNU/Linux that they are running. Technically 'Linux' only refers to the kernel, people should really just state what distro they are running, that would be more accurate.
Teach a man to phish...
You can only claim debts from the company to the limit of what the company has. And once that's gone, *poof* the company is gone. The people that started the company have their personal assets outside of the PTY LTD company which is kind of the point.
It's already impossible to live outside of the banking system if you are employed in a regular job.
I disagree, I want a cashless society. In fact we're in a really uncomfortable place right now, in a semi cashless society tending towards cashless. At the moment I often find myself with no actual cash on hand because I can *almost* live my life without it. Consequently it's a real hassle when I actually need coin or note for parking machines or tickets or whatever. Life would be easier without physical money.
I think the bigger question is what value does a human have beyond their utility and what will they do when they don't need to do anything.
All of those things can be had on Windows by using Cygwin, and new versions of Windows 10 will have bash built in. Certainly all of that comes standard with OS X. I think OS X has a nicer more flexible interface than Linux, but I use both.
The nice thing about electronic money as opposed to cash is that it stays in your back account until the moment that you spend it. Which is good for interest etc.
In different parts of the world road laws seem to have different levels of importance. For example: in Australia the speed limit is near to absolute, if you're over you get fined. In the USA the speed limit seems to be a suggested limit where you're really expected to go about the limit +10mph at least on the freeways. Where in the USA some things seem to be more absolute. In some places "one way" might be absolute, and in others it might be more of a suggestion. I mean even compare city to rural driving...
The other weirdness is that you guys still use the term penny to describe an imperial currency, where the rest of the metric world uses cent or some derivative...
Or figure out a way to control population growth. Because you can't continue to "give them money" forever; eventually the well will run dry. Then what?
Why not? It's not like money is a finite resource. Money represents access to resources but if those resources run out that's going to be a problem for everyone.
You mean the ones with oil and numbered bank accounts to pay for it all? OK. I've looked. I prefer to work for a living.
The problem with the future of AI and automation is that you might not have the opportunity to work.
The only question is what that does to inflation and whether that creates a de facto "tax" on the economy.
Luckily that question has an answer - printing more money the the (only real) cause of inflation and it will act like a universal tax on everyone, as everyone will pay through the devaluation of their earnings. Inflation is possibly the *most* unfair tax that there is.
>health insurance ...
not in Australia...
Incorrect. Atheism is the lack of belief in deities. A negative 'belief' is not a belief.
"I believe there's no god" != "I don't believe in god"
That's true, because you are comparing the general to the specific. But "I believe that God does not exist" == "I don't believe that God exists".
Not believing there is a god is logically the same as believing there is not a god. You don't need to not believe you are a millionaire because you know it. Even so you're not believing is the same thing to say that you believe you are not.
Atheism is the *belief* that there's no God (or gods).
No it isn't. Atheism is an absence of belief, not a belief in absence.
No it isn't. Atheism is not an absence of belief. The only way you can have an absence of belief is through ignorance. And atheists are not ignorant; they have made a choice and their choice is to believe that there is no god. Atheism is a belief in the absence of belief.
There is a difference between belief and disbelief. Stop pretending they are the same word.
Is that actually true? They are etymologically the same word... maybe you mean belief and disinterest are different words?
Beliefs regarding gods are religious beliefs, even if it is nonexistence of those gods.
"“Atheism is indeed the most daring of all dogmas . . . for it is the assertion of a universal negative.” -- G. K. Chesterton
END
While I agree with you that atheism is a belief, and scientifically un-testable, there is a distinction between religion and belief; beliefs in the supernatural are considered 'spirituality' where religion provides a framework and a power structure, social norms and dogma.
No, it can't. It is lack of belief in deities, and, by extension, the supernatural. Usually the people claiming it is a religion are religious themselves and do it because they can't handle the possibility of people having morality that lacks dependency on the supernatural.
It can if you equate religion to dogma and compliance rather. To put it another way if a religion is made up of equal parts of dogma, social norms, belief and the supernatural then removing the supernatural leaves you with 75% of what religion provides.
AR-15 in its standard uses .223 which is orders of magnitude more powerful than your run of the mill .22
You wouldn't even have to simulate reality - real out of game world might be in 9 dimensional space, and we've just been presented with 3 plus time to reduce processing cost.