In the first instance, the Jewish people at the time would have had to contend with other witnesses who did personally see the miracles. This is not an issue for the present day Jews.
And where does it say, except in your New Testament that the Jewish people at the time (and others of course... cause as far as I remember Romans where pretty vocal against Christians) didn't deny the miracles? You are basing your argument in something completely biased to you personal opinion... the New Testament.
In fact, give me some external source to the New Testament that even talks about some jesus "miracles" please. Cause he is both present in Jewish and Muslin scriptures and the guy was just a simple prophet, there was nothing magical about him... of course... except in the bible, complied 200 years later, by the proponents of his own religion. I mean, not even talking about science, do you think something so low, would even pass in a court of law?
In the second instance, yes, people will martyr themselves based on a belief that they received from someone else. But the first-hand witnesses are in a different basket: not many people would martyr themselves on the basis of a lie they themselves created. (Though there are of course a few wackos that make the exception here).
1st, the world is full of wackos that would sacrify themselves in the name of religion, and you know it. 2nd, sorry, but who where this people directly related to jesus that gave their life? Paul did, but then of course he had a lot to win by being on of the heads of this new found church with so many followers, so he had to defend what was going on. Now, the rest of the people? They started to be persecuted in 64 AD in Rome (a place where he never had been). That's at least 31 years after Jesus died. So, it doesn't seem to me that these people being killed never had seen him, they where not first-hand witnesses. They where just members of some new fanatic religious sect.
See, you come with all that Jesus, this, Jesus that crap, afraid to event think it might be wrong cause it can damn you soul to eternal damnation and say a LOT a easily verified crap, that we have to take from Christians constantly.
Both Jesus' allies and detractors were present. The latter had good political reasons for denying the miracles, but they didn't, which suggests maybe they couldn't.
This is just silly. Mate, you have an ENTIRE religion that denies the guys miracles, they are called JEWS.
There is good archaeological reason to believe that the texts were recorded relatively close to the events and have been transmitted accurately, with respect to all other historical documents.
The archaeological evidence states that the texts in the new testament where written between 50 AD and 150 AD. Now, now, seems to me that to someone that supposedly saw so many miracles, the apostles here quite a bunch a lazy guys. Some of them waited more than 100 years to actually write what they saw (they lived quite a long time back then ei?). Besides, these apostles, there were Jews according to the accounts, must have been a very special kind of fishermen. That kind of fisherman that knew how to write Greek (yeah, the new testament was originally Greek in case you don't know). Gosh, I wished we had Roman public education nowadays, even the fisherman would know how to write chinese here in Portugal.
Many of the writers of the New Testament were so convicted by the things they witnessed, they were willing to be executed on account of their testimonies.
Yeah, mate, you mean like nowadays muslins are so convinced about their profit deeds that they are willing to blow themselves and kill innocents all around? Oh, wait, at least those don't claim they actually saw anything they just believe in what they are told and that doesn't make any sense exactly like you.
To say that the miracles couldn't have happened because they weren't physically possible is to miss the point completely. The miracles only have value to authenticate Jesus and God precisely because they are physically impossible for the rest of us.
Man, that is great, let me try and do the same: "To say that the sun doesn't go around the earth because that's impossible is to miss the point completely. The breaking the laws of gravity only has value to authenticate science because they are physically impossible for the universe." Ei cool. Not bad for a 1st try. Let me try again. "To say that chicken don't have teeth, just because we are not morons and can see they don't have teeth is to miss the point completely. The teeth of the chicken, only have value to authenticate no, sorry, if you say they have teeth you have to be a moron, there is no other explanation".
Ei, but I liked you text. It was very argumentative. I specially like the part where you send me to read a book about some JOURNALIST that was searching for some proof jesus didn't exist and became a catholic. Gosh, that must have been a really scientifically analysis by the part of a NON scientist.
And just to end. Anytime, church actually presents proofs that something magical or that miracles existing, or even hypothesis, science always has proved them either wrong, or that what the holy mother church says it's a proof, it's not actually proof (yeah, sorry, see, telling us, some guy that was fastening 1000 years ago, saw the virgin mary coming to him, it's not considered proof dear. And we also have been there, in the Earth being the centre of the universe thing and that some guy didn't created us in 7 days. Sorry pal), so, stop pressing always the same discourse that science disregards your "proof", that you give us, is not really proof, and many times, science has been able to refute all that you have say even without you explaining exactly what it happened. Yeah, I know, that's the part when you say: "It's not to be taken literally". Ye
Yup. Meaning, if you say something happens one way or another, or came to be this way or another. Then science can prove you wrong or right.
But, if you come with something as low as church comes in some ways, like when they say: "We have an immortal soul." But then, they don't clarify the properties of that soul, or how it came to be and what does it actually do in our world. Then no, we can't refute that as much as we can refute that I actually saw a real spaghetti flying monster this afternoon.
Well, and that would be all good and understandable if you actually saw it. But instead you are trying to believe in something someone claims he saw, or not even that in the scriptures that were written centuries after the events took part. And you believing in them, without using your intelligence and your common sense.
In the middle ages, church actually forbade you from using common sense. Nowadays, you actually forbid yourself when you still believe something you didn't saw and nobody can prove it happen.
The argument you present me, is the last refuge of religion, delusional fools or liars. Look up, look to the sky! Everything there is caused by powers outside our control. And still, we can explain it, more and more each day. Just because something it outside our grasp, it doesn't mean it belongs to a world of fairy tales.
500 years ago, we also didn't knew how we came to be, how life appeared and the universe was formed. They said that the Earth was formed about 4000 years ago and other wild stuff. And I bet that religious people gave exactly the same answer has you gave to me:
Or can there be events that defy the understanding of the observer, is caused by powers outside his control and are none the less true?...Does the fact that science says "insufficient evidence" make it false?
and give me a religious/spiritual answer to it, of some kind of creator, like you are trying to give me now.
But now we know better, we don't need religion and a creator god to be where we are. But still... the argument given be religious people against science remains always the same. No matter how many hundreds of time we already proved them wrong... they still hold to those special cases where we still didn't manage to prove them... as usual, wrong.
Actually I did look it up: "A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.[3]"
I mean, science does not prove or disprove whether there is a soul or if there's an afterlife or any of those things that means we're more than flesh and blood who doesn't have any other purpose than our own.
Just like science doesn't disprove I saw a spaghetti monster abducting cows and taking them to outer space this very afternoon in Lisbon. You cannot just come up with any wild delusional dream, and tell the scientist: "Well, now prove that this never happen." That's not the scientific method. You first have to give tangible proof your self about your theory that can be either based in previous accepted scientific theories or must be able to be reproduced for further analysis. If you don't, scientists not only normally don't have the tools to refute what you are saying, but mostly, they don't have to care about what you claim. It's just a wild dream, a lie, psychotropic drugs... whatever.
So, first, you come and put in the table a proof, any proof that's considered so according to science, that human beings have a soul, or that there was some guy that was born from a virgin, or that woman where created from the ribs of men, or that the world was completely flooded and this guy made an arc for all animals, or that this guy was dead and then resurrected, or any of that crazy stuff. And then, I'll very gladdy and surely completely refute your "proof" by using the scientific method, or suggest a much simpler and less "magical" way of it happening.
Well, in case you are not aware scientific method is not about proving things wrong, is about proving things right in the first place. Only then can come someone and say, there was a problem with the theory someone proved to be correct by experience or mathematical proof
Since nobody ever proved religion to be right, or the existence of any kind of god or any of that stupid stuff, then no, science doesn't have to prove them wrong, they are already wrong in the eyes of science cause they never gave any proof for what they claim.
It should also be noticed that this study was only carried out in American Universities. I would hope (although it's just a hope, not a statistical fact) that in Europe scientists are more... scientific.
Thank you for giving me yet another reason to just pirate your games... has if the DRM stupidity wasn't enough. You do realize that became easier to download and use a pirate copy of the game than actually go trough the painful process of getting the DRMed version to work right? So why the well would I pay to get a worst product than what I can get for free?
The rule, "All terrorists are collectivists or Muslims" is only rarely violated.
Yeah, because to the other people that murder innocents, burn down buildings, and suppress personal freedom, but on the behalf of free market and capitalism, and that are Christians, we normally call either "freedom fighters" or US army.
In fact I remember now, that the III Reich used to call terrorists to the underground resistance cells in France. That's why they have lost war obviously, whenever Hitler told them to stop the terrorists in France nobody knew who he was talking about... surely not those nice "freedom fighters" right ?
No, sorry, at least 6 Americans didn't read the article, because beside the idiot that posted the parent comment, you have 5 other marking it as insightful. Did you chose to forget that part or you simply didn't think about it?
This behavior is unacceptable from companies that have offices in America. That might be how people do business in other places, but they need to leave that shit at the door.
How is the parent comment rated insightful? It was US company and at least one of the crime perpetrators was a US citizen from New Jersey. It was the victim that was foreign.
Seems to me the shit was in the US to begin with and was the people from outside US that were used to good business practices that stand up against it from the story !
Man, then you ask why we Europeans think that Americans are full of crap ! At least in such obvious cases at least give the trouble to actually read the article before coming to advertise your country is the greatest thing this planet ever saw in all recorded history.
Actually if you had some knowledge of the law, you could get a new PSP because of bad pixels in all the countries of the EU (like I did in Portugal).
The strategy is simple. According to EU laws, a non perishable product bought on-line has a 15 days return police. That is, if you don't like the product for some reason and you buy it on-line you can just return it, no questions asked and they even have to refund you everything you paid plus the shipping back costs. So that's the strategy I used. I bought a first PSP and it had 2 bad pixels right in the centre of the screen (they were together), so I returned it and then bought another one on-line (and that one was ok).
I did the same to my MacBook Pro, since at that time (I don't know if they changed the policy now), Apple had the bad habit of treating EU costumers like USA ones (once they even tried to convince me the warranty was only 1 year, not the 2 years we are entitled in EU) and there was this 5 or 6 acceptable dead pixels policy. So, it happened the same, 1st one had bad pixels and nothing could be done about it, so I returned it. 2nd one came with 2 stuck pixels, but I massaged them and they went away.
In EU, even if it said it doesn't matter. An EULA (or any other agreement between parts), cannot override the transaction law (or any other law for that matter). So, imagine, even if you signed something saying that you have only 1 year warranty (like Apple once was trying to make us believe in EU), it doesn't matter, you can sign it, go on with your life and still have exactly the same rights as you had or any new purchase... meaning 2 years warranty.
I believe in this case it's not even a warranty problem. In Portugal, the warranty is 2 years. But they cannot remove functionality just because the warranty is over. Even if it had passed 4 years I would still be entitled to compensation in this case.
Probably will be ranked down to oblivions but still I have to say it.
Just remember that the only way the brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers of these innocent people you just killed here have to get back at you, is to do stuff like it happened in 9/11.
You are both the victims and the guilty ones for all the terrorist attacks you receive.
So, let me see. Toyota is stating that elder people (that obviously have lower reflexes) or people in situations where it's difficult to manoeuvre the vehicle without without causing an accident (parking, etc), are more likely to have an accident when their cars acceleration control fails.
How, genius! Who would ever even reach this overwhelming conclusion? Guys, you deserve a Nobel for this.
Well, Toyota, here is a freebie thought for you. If those are the same guys you have programming and engineering the accelerators, well, perhaps it's time to hire other people, no?
If his assassination outrages Europeans, what that reflects is the lack of respect that Europeans have for fundamental human rights and international law when it comes to Jews.
Dear sir, we are not cowboys and this is not the far-west. In Europe we have this thing called Court of Law. There was no international arrest mandate for al-Mabhouh, and even if there was one, he was supposed to have a trial (call us old fashioned here in good ol' Europe, but we kind of believe that before assassinating people, they are kind of supposed to have a trial and check if the accusations against them stand in a court of law).
I do know that is not something that country believes in so I understand that since you where not raised in a society that values legality, respect for human life and moral, you simply fail to see my point.
Well, I don't really know if Israeli's, would like to join EU. Sincerely, I don't believe it and I think they have much more in common with the united states (including the $3 billion per year military aid USA gives them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_%E2%80%93_United_States_military_relations#Military_aid). What I do know is that except for Berlusconi (and well, if you lived in EU, you would really know that when we talk about Berlusconi it actually means that not only we don't believe a word the guy says, but also that we don't really care about any opinion he might express or not), it would be quite hard to find someone here, both from the populace or from the political leaders that wants Israel in here.
EU is based in a sense of stability and respect for the neighbors that Israel simply doesn't have. I don't want to discuss their motives, cause I know that there are some very educated people here that are clearly pro Israel and can always twist anti-Israel opinions by giving some case in which is not true... but the truth is that most of the times it's true. It's true that you treat the non Israeli population like garbage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisjordania#Annexation), it's true that you are constantly stealing property in Cisjordania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisjordania#Settlements_and_international_law), it's true that you impose a blockade to Gaza that is degrading their population (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%932010_blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip), it's true that you don't let the Palestinian authority sell the vast natural gas reserves they have in their shore line (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11680), it's true that when Israel was formed you committed genocide in several Arab villages during the night (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qibya_massacre). Anyway.
Most of Europeans are anti-war, either cause we are apathetic or simply because we don't believe in it. And we are not accepting a country between us that has the attitude Israel has. For instance, just some days ago you used your ambassadors in France and UK to forge some passports in order for you to go in Dubai and kill some Hamas leader (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/dubai/7294046/Dubai-assassination-eight-British-passports-used-in-Hamas-killing.html)... that shows very well the kind of lack of respect you have.
Also, that is one of the main reasons putting Turkey aside from entering the EU. The problem with Kurdistan is all but controlled... and I don't mean controlled by force, I mean controlled by diplomacy.
Re:Cheating
on
PS3 Hacked?
·
· Score: 5, Informative
No it's not. In this case there is a very valid reason to hack the PS3. Linux with full access to the hardware! So far you couldn't use the GPU and you where only using a small part of the CPU processing power. Now imagine having this great multiprocessor architecture completely unlocked for you to program it. These are great news.
Although you don't put any sources, it's nice to actually see something in this discussion that look like facts instead of all the "name calling" going around in the thread.
For us Europeans and Americans, this may just seem a serious but easily solvable problem.
They will replace the crops, they will pay something to the affected people and in the end all the Monsanto CEO's will be happy and rich as usual (remember, the China milk problem? As much as you can say they are evil as opposed to USA, at least they made the guilty people pay... which obviously will not happen here with Monsanto. They are just too rich and powerfull).
Anyway, for the West this will not be such a big problem, we will just eat other stuff while the crops get replaced. But now, think about all those 3rd world countries, that are using this to survive, do you really think they can afford to eat "other stuff" while they wait?
Slashdot Mirror
Guess you never heard about mathematics and mathematical proof.
In the first instance, the Jewish people at the time would have had to contend with other witnesses who did personally see the miracles. This is not an issue for the present day Jews.
And where does it say, except in your New Testament that the Jewish people at the time (and others of course ... cause as far as I remember Romans where pretty vocal against Christians) didn't deny the miracles? You are basing your argument in something completely biased to you personal opinion ... the New Testament.
In fact, give me some external source to the New Testament that even talks about some jesus "miracles" please. Cause he is both present in Jewish and Muslin scriptures and the guy was just a simple prophet, there was nothing magical about him ... of course ... except in the bible, complied 200 years later, by the proponents of his own religion. I mean, not even talking about science, do you think something so low, would even pass in a court of law?
In the second instance, yes, people will martyr themselves based on a belief that they received from someone else. But the first-hand witnesses are in a different basket: not many people would martyr themselves on the basis of a lie they themselves created. (Though there are of course a few wackos that make the exception here).
1st, the world is full of wackos that would sacrify themselves in the name of religion, and you know it. 2nd, sorry, but who where this people directly related to jesus that gave their life? Paul did, but then of course he had a lot to win by being on of the heads of this new found church with so many followers, so he had to defend what was going on. Now, the rest of the people? They started to be persecuted in 64 AD in Rome (a place where he never had been). That's at least 31 years after Jesus died. So, it doesn't seem to me that these people being killed never had seen him, they where not first-hand witnesses. They where just members of some new fanatic religious sect.
See, you come with all that Jesus, this, Jesus that crap, afraid to event think it might be wrong cause it can damn you soul to eternal damnation and say a LOT a easily verified crap, that we have to take from Christians constantly.
Both Jesus' allies and detractors were present. The latter had good political reasons for denying the miracles, but they didn't, which suggests maybe they couldn't.
This is just silly. Mate, you have an ENTIRE religion that denies the guys miracles, they are called JEWS.
There is good archaeological reason to believe that the texts were recorded relatively close to the events and have been transmitted accurately, with respect to all other historical documents.
The archaeological evidence states that the texts in the new testament where written between 50 AD and 150 AD. Now, now, seems to me that to someone that supposedly saw so many miracles, the apostles here quite a bunch a lazy guys. Some of them waited more than 100 years to actually write what they saw (they lived quite a long time back then ei?). Besides, these apostles, there were Jews according to the accounts, must have been a very special kind of fishermen. That kind of fisherman that knew how to write Greek (yeah, the new testament was originally Greek in case you don't know). Gosh, I wished we had Roman public education nowadays, even the fisherman would know how to write chinese here in Portugal.
Many of the writers of the New Testament were so convicted by the things they witnessed, they were willing to be executed on account of their testimonies.
Yeah, mate, you mean like nowadays muslins are so convinced about their profit deeds that they are willing to blow themselves and kill innocents all around? Oh, wait, at least those don't claim they actually saw anything they just believe in what they are told and that doesn't make any sense exactly like you.
To say that the miracles couldn't have happened because they weren't physically possible is to miss the point completely. The miracles only have value to authenticate Jesus and God precisely because they are physically impossible for the rest of us.
Man, that is great, let me try and do the same: "To say that the sun doesn't go around the earth because that's impossible is to miss the point completely. The breaking the laws of gravity only has value to authenticate science because they are physically impossible for the universe." Ei cool. Not bad for a 1st try. Let me try again. "To say that chicken don't have teeth, just because we are not morons and can see they don't have teeth is to miss the point completely. The teeth of the chicken, only have value to authenticate no, sorry, if you say they have teeth you have to be a moron, there is no other explanation".
Ei, but I liked you text. It was very argumentative. I specially like the part where you send me to read a book about some JOURNALIST that was searching for some proof jesus didn't exist and became a catholic. Gosh, that must have been a really scientifically analysis by the part of a NON scientist.
And just to end. Anytime, church actually presents proofs that something magical or that miracles existing, or even hypothesis, science always has proved them either wrong, or that what the holy mother church says it's a proof, it's not actually proof (yeah, sorry, see, telling us, some guy that was fastening 1000 years ago, saw the virgin mary coming to him, it's not considered proof dear. And we also have been there, in the Earth being the centre of the universe thing and that some guy didn't created us in 7 days. Sorry pal), so, stop pressing always the same discourse that science disregards your "proof", that you give us, is not really proof, and many times, science has been able to refute all that you have say even without you explaining exactly what it happened. Yeah, I know, that's the part when you say: "It's not to be taken literally". Ye
Yup. Meaning, if you say something happens one way or another, or came to be this way or another. Then science can prove you wrong or right.
But, if you come with something as low as church comes in some ways, like when they say: "We have an immortal soul." But then, they don't clarify the properties of that soul, or how it came to be and what does it actually do in our world. Then no, we can't refute that as much as we can refute that I actually saw a real spaghetti flying monster this afternoon.
Well, and that would be all good and understandable if you actually saw it. But instead you are trying to believe in something someone claims he saw, or not even that in the scriptures that were written centuries after the events took part. And you believing in them, without using your intelligence and your common sense.
In the middle ages, church actually forbade you from using common sense. Nowadays, you actually forbid yourself when you still believe something you didn't saw and nobody can prove it happen.
The argument you present me, is the last refuge of religion, delusional fools or liars. Look up, look to the sky! Everything there is caused by powers outside our control. And still, we can explain it, more and more each day. Just because something it outside our grasp, it doesn't mean it belongs to a world of fairy tales.
500 years ago, we also didn't knew how we came to be, how life appeared and the universe was formed. They said that the Earth was formed about 4000 years ago and other wild stuff. And I bet that religious people gave exactly the same answer has you gave to me:
Or can there be events that defy the understanding of the observer, is caused by powers outside his control and are none the less true?...Does the fact that science says "insufficient evidence" make it false?
and give me a religious/spiritual answer to it, of some kind of creator, like you are trying to give me now.
But now we know better, we don't need religion and a creator god to be where we are. But still ... the argument given be religious people against science remains always the same. No matter how many hundreds of time we already proved them wrong ... they still hold to those special cases where we still didn't manage to prove them ... as usual, wrong.
Actually I did look it up: "A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.[3]"
I mean, science does not prove or disprove whether there is a soul or if there's an afterlife or any of those things that means we're more than flesh and blood who doesn't have any other purpose than our own.
Just like science doesn't disprove I saw a spaghetti monster abducting cows and taking them to outer space this very afternoon in Lisbon. You cannot just come up with any wild delusional dream, and tell the scientist: "Well, now prove that this never happen." That's not the scientific method. You first have to give tangible proof your self about your theory that can be either based in previous accepted scientific theories or must be able to be reproduced for further analysis. If you don't, scientists not only normally don't have the tools to refute what you are saying, but mostly, they don't have to care about what you claim. It's just a wild dream, a lie, psychotropic drugs ... whatever.
So, first, you come and put in the table a proof, any proof that's considered so according to science, that human beings have a soul, or that there was some guy that was born from a virgin, or that woman where created from the ribs of men, or that the world was completely flooded and this guy made an arc for all animals, or that this guy was dead and then resurrected, or any of that crazy stuff. And then, I'll very gladdy and surely completely refute your "proof" by using the scientific method, or suggest a much simpler and less "magical" way of it happening.
Well, in case you are not aware scientific method is not about proving things wrong, is about proving things right in the first place. Only then can come someone and say, there was a problem with the theory someone proved to be correct by experience or mathematical proof
Since nobody ever proved religion to be right, or the existence of any kind of god or any of that stupid stuff, then no, science doesn't have to prove them wrong, they are already wrong in the eyes of science cause they never gave any proof for what they claim.
It should also be noticed that this study was only carried out in American Universities. I would hope (although it's just a hope, not a statistical fact) that in Europe scientists are more ... scientific.
Thank you for giving me yet another reason to just pirate your games ... has if the DRM stupidity wasn't enough. You do realize that became easier to download and use a pirate copy of the game than actually go trough the painful process of getting the DRMed version to work right? So why the well would I pay to get a worst product than what I can get for free?
So Steve was this what you were talking about when you said if you want porn get Android?
The rule, "All terrorists are collectivists or Muslims" is only rarely violated.
Yeah, because to the other people that murder innocents, burn down buildings, and suppress personal freedom, but on the behalf of free market and capitalism, and that are Christians, we normally call either "freedom fighters" or US army.
In fact I remember now, that the III Reich used to call terrorists to the underground resistance cells in France. That's why they have lost war obviously, whenever Hitler told them to stop the terrorists in France nobody knew who he was talking about ... surely not those nice "freedom fighters" right ?
Quite funny.
No, sorry, at least 6 Americans didn't read the article, because beside the idiot that posted the parent comment, you have 5 other marking it as insightful. Did you chose to forget that part or you simply didn't think about it?
This behavior is unacceptable from companies that have offices in America. That might be how people do business in other places, but they need to leave that shit at the door.
How is the parent comment rated insightful? It was US company and at least one of the crime perpetrators was a US citizen from New Jersey. It was the victim that was foreign.
Seems to me the shit was in the US to begin with and was the people from outside US that were used to good business practices that stand up against it from the story !
Man, then you ask why we Europeans think that Americans are full of crap ! At least in such obvious cases at least give the trouble to actually read the article before coming to advertise your country is the greatest thing this planet ever saw in all recorded history.
Actually if you had some knowledge of the law, you could get a new PSP because of bad pixels in all the countries of the EU (like I did in Portugal).
The strategy is simple. According to EU laws, a non perishable product bought on-line has a 15 days return police. That is, if you don't like the product for some reason and you buy it on-line you can just return it, no questions asked and they even have to refund you everything you paid plus the shipping back costs. So that's the strategy I used. I bought a first PSP and it had 2 bad pixels right in the centre of the screen (they were together), so I returned it and then bought another one on-line (and that one was ok).
I did the same to my MacBook Pro, since at that time (I don't know if they changed the policy now), Apple had the bad habit of treating EU costumers like USA ones (once they even tried to convince me the warranty was only 1 year, not the 2 years we are entitled in EU) and there was this 5 or 6 acceptable dead pixels policy. So, it happened the same, 1st one had bad pixels and nothing could be done about it, so I returned it. 2nd one came with 2 stuck pixels, but I massaged them and they went away.
In EU, even if it said it doesn't matter. An EULA (or any other agreement between parts), cannot override the transaction law (or any other law for that matter). So, imagine, even if you signed something saying that you have only 1 year warranty (like Apple once was trying to make us believe in EU), it doesn't matter, you can sign it, go on with your life and still have exactly the same rights as you had or any new purchase ... meaning 2 years warranty.
I believe in this case it's not even a warranty problem. In Portugal, the warranty is 2 years. But they cannot remove functionality just because the warranty is over. Even if it had passed 4 years I would still be entitled to compensation in this case.
Well, at least in Portugal, you may choose whether to claim directly with the retailer or the manufacturer.
When I have a problem with any good and want to activate the warranty I normally choose the one that's closer to me, and it works either way.
That's probably because:
1 - The video is in several places now, not just in YouTube.
2 - Many people comment more than once for different parents.
Probably will be ranked down to oblivions but still I have to say it.
Just remember that the only way the brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers of these innocent people you just killed here have to get back at you, is to do stuff like it happened in 9/11.
You are both the victims and the guilty ones for all the terrorist attacks you receive.
So, let me see. Toyota is stating that elder people (that obviously have lower reflexes) or people in situations where it's difficult to manoeuvre the vehicle without without causing an accident (parking, etc), are more likely to have an accident when their cars acceleration control fails.
How, genius! Who would ever even reach this overwhelming conclusion? Guys, you deserve a Nobel for this.
Well, Toyota, here is a freebie thought for you. If those are the same guys you have programming and engineering the accelerators, well, perhaps it's time to hire other people, no?
If his assassination outrages Europeans, what that reflects is the lack of respect that Europeans have for fundamental human rights and international law when it comes to Jews.
Dear sir, we are not cowboys and this is not the far-west. In Europe we have this thing called Court of Law. There was no international arrest mandate for al-Mabhouh, and even if there was one, he was supposed to have a trial (call us old fashioned here in good ol' Europe, but we kind of believe that before assassinating people, they are kind of supposed to have a trial and check if the accusations against them stand in a court of law).
There are international arrest mandates for former Israeli ministers here in EU but that's strange, we don't see intentions here for going after the guy and murdering him: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/15/british-court-issued-arrest-warrant-for-livni/
I do know that is not something that country believes in so I understand that since you where not raised in a society that values legality, respect for human life and moral, you simply fail to see my point.
Well, I don't really know if Israeli's, would like to join EU. Sincerely, I don't believe it and I think they have much more in common with the united states (including the $3 billion per year military aid USA gives them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_%E2%80%93_United_States_military_relations#Military_aid). What I do know is that except for Berlusconi (and well, if you lived in EU, you would really know that when we talk about Berlusconi it actually means that not only we don't believe a word the guy says, but also that we don't really care about any opinion he might express or not), it would be quite hard to find someone here, both from the populace or from the political leaders that wants Israel in here.
EU is based in a sense of stability and respect for the neighbors that Israel simply doesn't have. I don't want to discuss their motives, cause I know that there are some very educated people here that are clearly pro Israel and can always twist anti-Israel opinions by giving some case in which is not true ... but the truth is that most of the times it's true. It's true that you treat the non Israeli population like garbage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisjordania#Annexation), it's true that you are constantly stealing property in Cisjordania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisjordania#Settlements_and_international_law), it's true that you impose a blockade to Gaza that is degrading their population (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007%E2%80%932010_blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip), it's true that you don't let the Palestinian authority sell the vast natural gas reserves they have in their shore line (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11680), it's true that when Israel was formed you committed genocide in several Arab villages during the night (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qibya_massacre). Anyway.
Most of Europeans are anti-war, either cause we are apathetic or simply because we don't believe in it. And we are not accepting a country between us that has the attitude Israel has. For instance, just some days ago you used your ambassadors in France and UK to forge some passports in order for you to go in Dubai and kill some Hamas leader (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/dubai/7294046/Dubai-assassination-eight-British-passports-used-in-Hamas-killing.html) ... that shows very well the kind of lack of respect you have.
Also, that is one of the main reasons putting Turkey aside from entering the EU. The problem with Kurdistan is all but controlled ... and I don't mean controlled by force, I mean controlled by diplomacy.
No it's not. In this case there is a very valid reason to hack the PS3. Linux with full access to the hardware! So far you couldn't use the GPU and you where only using a small part of the CPU processing power. Now imagine having this great multiprocessor architecture completely unlocked for you to program it. These are great news.
Although you don't put any sources, it's nice to actually see something in this discussion that look like facts instead of all the "name calling" going around in the thread.
If I had mod point I would certainly mod you up.
For us Europeans and Americans, this may just seem a serious but easily solvable problem. They will replace the crops, they will pay something to the affected people and in the end all the Monsanto CEO's will be happy and rich as usual (remember, the China milk problem? As much as you can say they are evil as opposed to USA, at least they made the guilty people pay ... which obviously will not happen here with Monsanto. They are just too rich and powerfull).
Anyway, for the West this will not be such a big problem, we will just eat other stuff while the crops get replaced. But now, think about all those 3rd world countries, that are using this to survive, do you really think they can afford to eat "other stuff" while they wait?