Ooo thanks for the citation. Most fundies i've talked to about homosexuality cite something to do with spilling seed/onanism. Which was I suppose more against jerking off, they applied it to gay sex (as babies wouldn't be produced). Weird.
ID is dressed as science all the time. One person modified charles darwin's origin of species with ID information and things like 'darwin hated women and was racist' in it. BTW gay sex in the US was illegal until 2003, some states you could get over 15years! So don't think that religion isn't creating all kinds of legal harm.
/. is a LOT more open minded than the average populace on this subject. And not all anti-religious posts are modded down for sure but one as inflamatory as op would have been.
Uhm, the speed used is not the speed advertised. Why, because it varies wildly and would be stupid to use. They use averages of speedtests. Which is the best indicator you'll ever get of speed. That kind of makes their point moot.
/. has ads for passerbys and noobs. To support the community they let good users have a free pass, this doesn't cost them much and improves the site. Lastly they allow people to donate/sign up with money.
They plan for and only expect a small chunk of people to sign up, but each signed up person pays for 1000 not signed up people. And the other bit of advertising is additional revenue without annoying anyone you really want on the site. Perfect! All sites should be run this way.
That or have an additional source of revenue and leave the website as a loss in efforts to increase $ to the other products. Put website into 'advertising' as an expense rather than kidding yourself and thinking it is a revenue stream.
There is a subtlty missing in the music comparison.
Pirating music gives the industry nothing yes. The alternative in the vast majority of these cases is simply NOT having the song which also gets the industry nothing. To top it off a chunk of people that pirate go on to buy products (tickets or cds). There is nothing comparable to that in the analogy.
Turning off ads means the site gets less money. The alternative is to leave ads on and the site DOES get money. In cases where the ads are so bad that you'd find a different site then the adblocker doesn't matter.
On a side note I've been thinking that decentralized p2p WEBSITES need to get created. Honestly, while I'm on a site I'm happy to spend some upload helping out. As well sites with files should start using torrents for their stuff. An indie coder with a single ap up that gets a few hundred dls a month could be put in the hole for no reason, why don't i see them offering torrents? Atleast as a suggested alternative.
It may not disprove God but it certainly can disprove each individual religion. Sure God could just create inconsistencies to fuck with us. But Christianity doesn't have that power and fails when the basis for it is crushed.
If the religious need not follow logic then they should be ousted as such. Increasing awareness that a huge group exists which ignores logic and is therefore unpredictable should be a priority. My question was how the hell are we supposed to deal with these people? There is a big disconnect between how we would treat people with totally failed logic driving their ethical decisions and idea of the world and how we treat the religious. Why is that? What difference is there truly aside from popularity of a particular delusion. If schitzofrenics start setting up groups and running for office it wouldn't be stood for...
That's fine. But then they should be paraded publicly as people that admit freely that they don't believe in logic. That would put a sour taste in moderate's mouths.
Thats a silly meme. We can disprove tons of things about religion.
The power of prayer for example. It would be easy to set up a bunch of people to pray for one guy, not for another. Simple.
We can prove that the bible is unreliable. We can show that a large portion of the bible is also immoral. This proves that God is either fallible or that he wanted to fuck us over by giving terrible instructions dooming a large chunk of the world. We can show that god is a giant asshole... repeatedly. We can disprove the bible by contradiction a bunch of times. We can prove that the bible rips off other older religions (so either the real god ripped off someone else's good book and made it come true, or simply the people just ripped off the stories). We can disprove the time line. And so on...
That list goes on for a long LONG time. Eventually the bible will have more holes in it than scarface. The source for the religion is completely worthless (btw, same goes for other well defined religions).
And in the end what makes you think that the cellphone nuts have been more disproven than that? They could say there is extra interdimensional radiation, or undetectable amounts. Or it only affects them when they aren't being tested, who knows. It wouldn't be any crazier than religion, we are just less forgiving.
A lot of those so-called "religious" people are nothing but Luddites in disguise.
In America, there have been cases of communities in uproar, having many people claiming that they have an undetectable "soul" and suffer from "purgatory" to "eternal damnation" and all that, just because there is a magical man in the sky.
Those "religious" people demand that the authority encforce these "holy laws" immediately, and it turns out that, in some of those cases, the so-called "holy laws" aren't even in the bible and never were sinful to begin with (homosexuality)!
Luddites !
I wonder why the above is unnaceptable. Both views are equally insane and unsupported by science. But you can be harsh to the cellphone radiation crazies but not the religious crazies? Is there anything meaningful distinguishing the two groups?
Either we should be more sensitive to the cellphone crazies if indeed sensitivity and equal say is important even for people that are completely wrong. OR if indeed we should be harsh and unforgiving to those spreading falsehoods then we too should jump or religious people with the same or greater energy. So how exactly should we respond these people?
Just thought it interesting that if I posted my rewording of parent's post (in some thread about religion)I'd have been moddded to oblivion but you've been modded up.
I assume however he meant Iraq... Where bush did piss away billions of dollars to make a statement. Revenge perhaps rather than a pissing contest if you want. But still wasted money on war.
And don't give me the 'to bring them democracy bs'. The US gets attacked, huge thing, everywhere on the news. But whilst not getting revenge or making a statement the US gov suddenly rationally decides to invade a country from the region of the attackers and liberate them? BS. Related link: http://i.imgur.com/XyCsb.gif
Want to point out that that ISN'T the trade off. A Public healthcare option would improve health and save money allowing you to spend that on fantastic technology.
Another thing is that when adjusted to today's $; Those houses that have lasted 300yrs would have costed on the order of several million dollars. A bit unfair when houses today are produced at something like 75$/ft^2.
I'll rewite what the op said in a different situation.
A: People seem to be using CFLs rather than incandescents.
B: WRONG.
B: I can never find incandescents these days, they are so rare.
Clearly the statement 'WRONG' doesn't make sense and is inflamatory. Why? Because he immediately proceeds to provide a counter-example AGAINST his own arguement.
Depends, they should be able to contract either way, no issue there. Either pay for a copy of the photos. Or pay for the full rights if they don't want you using them.
"If someone pays you to perform work, they own all rights to that work." Fine assertion...
"When I was married, we had a difficult time finding a photographer that agreed, and simply didn't do business with those that wanted to be paid for their work, and wanted to keep all rights to said photos for use in promotions and fees for reprints." Which you immediately point out doesn't seem to hold true in reality.
Would it have killed you to use 'should' or some other qualifier? Stating opinion as fact is lame enough, giving evidence to disprove yourself in the next line is just sad.
"One hopes that applying it to Youtube will help Google improve the accuracy."
This, if they allow for corrections it could be an incredibly huge resource of data for google. They'd end up with people spending millions of man hours teaching google how to do voice recognition. And having highly accurate voice recognition would be a boon for society generally.
Pretty brilliant idea. It'd be a bit annoying to implement and could only work on data plan phones android - android. But it seems feasible. Wonder how much of an improvement that would reap.
iPhone-esque? I think people may be seeing things where there really is nothing. Hundreds of applications have had home buttons. Plenty of them long before apple too i'm sure. Fairly stupid to mention iphone/apple here.
*speaks japanese* 'kaa supido' (pronounced caw sue-pee-doh) would be acceptable and understood by most everyone. Ty, I think that fills my pedantic quota for the day.
No, the level of complexity isn't comparable. WoW for example could have several hundred characters on a screen, each with many characteristics and equipment. Map data, position, chat, rules about various areas, so on and so on.
In addition WoW was made to prevent people from getting access to the information. They have a customer base of millions and a large chunk of those are hackers. So wow obviously was obfuscated and encrypted to avoid getting hacked. And wow has a budget much larger than toyota's coders. So what makes you think toyota would spend a large large amount of money on securing the data which they don't even really have a duty to do so?
Crackers have done way harder cracks as well: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10625082&pnum=0 for example. The level of difficulty likely 1000s of times harder. Probably another few orders of magnitude on top of that. Seriously, likely ALL game crackers out there currently putting out releases could defeat toyota's obfuscation in a few hours, days tops. Ask a group like Razor1911 or Skid-row to do it, give them a car and it'd be done.
Slashdot Mirror
Ooo thanks for the citation. Most fundies i've talked to about homosexuality cite something to do with spilling seed/onanism. Which was I suppose more against jerking off, they applied it to gay sex (as babies wouldn't be produced). Weird.
ID is dressed as science all the time. One person modified charles darwin's origin of species with ID information and things like 'darwin hated women and was racist' in it. BTW gay sex in the US was illegal until 2003, some states you could get over 15years! So don't think that religion isn't creating all kinds of legal harm.
/. is a LOT more open minded than the average populace on this subject. And not all anti-religious posts are modded down for sure but one as inflamatory as op would have been.
Uhm, the speed used is not the speed advertised. Why, because it varies wildly and would be stupid to use. They use averages of speedtests. Which is the best indicator you'll ever get of speed. That kind of makes their point moot.
/. has ads for passerbys and noobs. To support the community they let good users have a free pass, this doesn't cost them much and improves the site. Lastly they allow people to donate/sign up with money.
They plan for and only expect a small chunk of people to sign up, but each signed up person pays for 1000 not signed up people. And the other bit of advertising is additional revenue without annoying anyone you really want on the site. Perfect! All sites should be run this way.
That or have an additional source of revenue and leave the website as a loss in efforts to increase $ to the other products. Put website into 'advertising' as an expense rather than kidding yourself and thinking it is a revenue stream.
There is a subtlty missing in the music comparison.
Pirating music gives the industry nothing yes. The alternative in the vast majority of these cases is simply NOT having the song which also gets the industry nothing. To top it off a chunk of people that pirate go on to buy products (tickets or cds). There is nothing comparable to that in the analogy.
Turning off ads means the site gets less money. The alternative is to leave ads on and the site DOES get money. In cases where the ads are so bad that you'd find a different site then the adblocker doesn't matter.
On a side note I've been thinking that decentralized p2p WEBSITES need to get created. Honestly, while I'm on a site I'm happy to spend some upload helping out. As well sites with files should start using torrents for their stuff. An indie coder with a single ap up that gets a few hundred dls a month could be put in the hole for no reason, why don't i see them offering torrents? Atleast as a suggested alternative.
It may not disprove God but it certainly can disprove each individual religion. Sure God could just create inconsistencies to fuck with us. But Christianity doesn't have that power and fails when the basis for it is crushed.
If the religious need not follow logic then they should be ousted as such. Increasing awareness that a huge group exists which ignores logic and is therefore unpredictable should be a priority. My question was how the hell are we supposed to deal with these people? There is a big disconnect between how we would treat people with totally failed logic driving their ethical decisions and idea of the world and how we treat the religious. Why is that? What difference is there truly aside from popularity of a particular delusion. If schitzofrenics start setting up groups and running for office it wouldn't be stood for...
That's fine. But then they should be paraded publicly as people that admit freely that they don't believe in logic. That would put a sour taste in moderate's mouths.
Reagan era?
Thats a silly meme. We can disprove tons of things about religion.
... repeatedly. We can disprove the bible by contradiction a bunch of times. We can prove that the bible rips off other older religions (so either the real god ripped off someone else's good book and made it come true, or simply the people just ripped off the stories). We can disprove the time line. And so on...
The power of prayer for example. It would be easy to set up a bunch of people to pray for one guy, not for another. Simple.
We can prove that the bible is unreliable. We can show that a large portion of the bible is also immoral. This proves that God is either fallible or that he wanted to fuck us over by giving terrible instructions dooming a large chunk of the world. We can show that god is a giant asshole
That list goes on for a long LONG time. Eventually the bible will have more holes in it than scarface. The source for the religion is completely worthless (btw, same goes for other well defined religions).
And in the end what makes you think that the cellphone nuts have been more disproven than that? They could say there is extra interdimensional radiation, or undetectable amounts. Or it only affects them when they aren't being tested, who knows. It wouldn't be any crazier than religion, we are just less forgiving.
"Which just goes to show how much the tinfoil hat actively interferes with the thought process...."
Exactly! Tin-foil hats are a plot from the government, they really just amplifying the cellphone radiation! Don't listen to Ondore's lies!
OT (mostly):
I wonder why the above is unnaceptable. Both views are equally insane and unsupported by science. But you can be harsh to the cellphone radiation crazies but not the religious crazies? Is there anything meaningful distinguishing the two groups?
Either we should be more sensitive to the cellphone crazies if indeed sensitivity and equal say is important even for people that are completely wrong. OR if indeed we should be harsh and unforgiving to those spreading falsehoods then we too should jump or religious people with the same or greater energy. So how exactly should we respond these people?
Just thought it interesting that if I posted my rewording of parent's post (in some thread about religion)I'd have been moddded to oblivion but you've been modded up.
Parent said it in a pretty trollish way but his point is true. Republicans can't balance the checkbook:
http://www.thefreespeechzone.net/images/charts/bush_deficit_graphic.gif
I assume however he meant Iraq... Where bush did piss away billions of dollars to make a statement. Revenge perhaps rather than a pissing contest if you want. But still wasted money on war.
And don't give me the 'to bring them democracy bs'. The US gets attacked, huge thing, everywhere on the news. But whilst not getting revenge or making a statement the US gov suddenly rationally decides to invade a country from the region of the attackers and liberate them? BS. Related link: http://i.imgur.com/XyCsb.gif
Want to point out that that ISN'T the trade off. A Public healthcare option would improve health and save money allowing you to spend that on fantastic technology.
Another thing is that when adjusted to today's $; Those houses that have lasted 300yrs would have costed on the order of several million dollars. A bit unfair when houses today are produced at something like 75$/ft^2.
That'd be incredibly expensive. Faster maybe...
I'll rewite what the op said in a different situation.
A: People seem to be using CFLs rather than incandescents.
B: WRONG.
B: I can never find incandescents these days, they are so rare.
Clearly the statement 'WRONG' doesn't make sense and is inflamatory. Why? Because he immediately proceeds to provide a counter-example AGAINST his own arguement.
Depends, they should be able to contract either way, no issue there. Either pay for a copy of the photos. Or pay for the full rights if they don't want you using them.
"If someone pays you to perform work, they own all rights to that work."
Fine assertion...
"When I was married, we had a difficult time finding a photographer that agreed, and simply didn't do business with those that wanted to be paid for their work, and wanted to keep all rights to said photos for use in promotions and fees for reprints."
Which you immediately point out doesn't seem to hold true in reality.
Would it have killed you to use 'should' or some other qualifier? Stating opinion as fact is lame enough, giving evidence to disprove yourself in the next line is just sad.
"One hopes that applying it to Youtube will help Google improve the accuracy."
This, if they allow for corrections it could be an incredibly huge resource of data for google. They'd end up with people spending millions of man hours teaching google how to do voice recognition. And having highly accurate voice recognition would be a boon for society generally.
Pretty brilliant idea. It'd be a bit annoying to implement and could only work on data plan phones android - android. But it seems feasible. Wonder how much of an improvement that would reap.
iPhone-esque? I think people may be seeing things where there really is nothing. Hundreds of applications have had home buttons. Plenty of them long before apple too i'm sure. Fairly stupid to mention iphone/apple here.
In the tech industry it is totally true. I don't see many 100MB hard-drive manufactureres out there these days....
*speaks japanese* 'kaa supido' (pronounced caw sue-pee-doh) would be acceptable and understood by most everyone. Ty, I think that fills my pedantic quota for the day.
No, the level of complexity isn't comparable. WoW for example could have several hundred characters on a screen, each with many characteristics and equipment. Map data, position, chat, rules about various areas, so on and so on.
In addition WoW was made to prevent people from getting access to the information. They have a customer base of millions and a large chunk of those are hackers. So wow obviously was obfuscated and encrypted to avoid getting hacked. And wow has a budget much larger than toyota's coders. So what makes you think toyota would spend a large large amount of money on securing the data which they don't even really have a duty to do so?
Crackers have done way harder cracks as well: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10625082&pnum=0 for example. The level of difficulty likely 1000s of times harder. Probably another few orders of magnitude on top of that. Seriously, likely ALL game crackers out there currently putting out releases could defeat toyota's obfuscation in a few hours, days tops. Ask a group like Razor1911 or Skid-row to do it, give them a car and it'd be done.
I don't think a hacker really gives a shit if a variable is named "carSpeed" or named " " ... well, unless the hackers are the same people that made /.