Hi dircha, I was responding to those using this topic to make statements to the effect that people who believe in God are somehow defective. That is my concern here. Look back over some of the other posts and you'll see what I am responding to. I myself do not believe that there are "ghosts" according to the common idea some have. In other words, I don't believe when people die they become ghosts who walk the and haunt the earth. I believe that the Bible teaches we either spend eternity with God or separated from Him-- not "haunting" houses. Sorry if I was not clear.
I do firmly understand one thing about science; a negative cannot be proved. Therefore anyone who says that God does not exist cannot offer scientific proof of their assertion. Therefore, people cannot make iron clad statements that there is no God. They are making a faith statement themselves that cannot be verified.
disproved by scientific means, I remind those who are making statements to the effect that there is no God, realize that they themselves are making a faith statement since they can not prove that God does not exist. To say "there is no God" is to express an opinion for which there can be no evidence given.
It seems to me that in today's climate, religious conservatives (You would probably consider me one) are also threatened with censorship. Some Christian leaders have pointed out the possibility that "hate speech" laws could be utilized to limit the ability of Christians to free practice their faith and voice their beliefs about homosexuality and other matters. It isn't that difficult to posit a future in which the Bible could be banned as "hate speech" and Christians jailed, denied employment, or are otherwise discriminated against because of their beliefs. Secular, totalitarian states have also banned and burned books. There are Christians enduring persecution in many places in the world even as I type this. And if you want to ask someone about government censorship, you may want to talk to the Chinese people where Christians and others are regularly censored by their non-religious government.
Actually, I was making a the joke that there was too much prior art for patent abuse itself. I have no idea is there is prior art for this particular patent.
That's certainly a good point. The Confederate States of America was certainly a more defined target than say "Islamic fundamentalism inspired terrorism". It will be hard to know when to "declare" victory. Terrorism from one source or another seems to be with us for the foreseeable future.
Ok, please forget about the present situation for a moment. Consider this. Do you envision "any" war time situation where you would approve limiting constitutionally granted freedom?
Ok, thanks for your answer. But please speak to the other part of the question. Is it ever permissible for the government to limit or even violate some personal freedoms in time of war?
Slashdot Mirror
Hi dircha, I was responding to those using this topic to make statements to the effect that people who believe in God are somehow defective. That is my concern here. Look back over some of the other posts and you'll see what I am responding to. I myself do not believe that there are "ghosts" according to the common idea some have. In other words, I don't believe when people die they become ghosts who walk the and haunt the earth. I believe that the Bible teaches we either spend eternity with God or separated from Him-- not "haunting" houses. Sorry if I was not clear.
I do firmly understand one thing about science; a negative cannot be proved. Therefore anyone who says that God does not exist cannot offer scientific proof of their assertion. Therefore, people cannot make iron clad statements that there is no God. They are making a faith statement themselves that cannot be verified.
that God does not exist? How do you know you aren't wrong?
disproved by scientific means, I remind those who are making statements to the effect that there is no God, realize that they themselves are making a faith statement since they can not prove that God does not exist. To say "there is no God" is to express an opinion for which there can be no evidence given.
On the other hand, maybe they chose it because it has cross platform support.
Yes, that was another positive thing in my opinion :)
But isn't it possible the pirated versions might also come with a pre-installed root kit?
so that you'll know that it's working. :)
It seems to me that in today's climate, religious conservatives (You would probably consider me one) are also threatened with censorship. Some Christian leaders have pointed out the possibility that "hate speech" laws could be utilized to limit the ability of Christians to free practice their faith and voice their beliefs about homosexuality and other matters. It isn't that difficult to posit a future in which the Bible could be banned as "hate speech" and Christians jailed, denied employment, or are otherwise discriminated against because of their beliefs. Secular, totalitarian states have also banned and burned books. There are Christians enduring persecution in many places in the world even as I type this. And if you want to ask someone about government censorship, you may want to talk to the Chinese people where Christians and others are regularly censored by their non-religious government.
That's actually pretty good ;)
I think I recently saw something about Microsoft pushing out an update that supposed to have cleaned a lot of these machines.
But you have to have a patent portfolio to actually use the patent don't you? That was my point.
He seems to understand the patent.
What I am saying is that I believe (through the help of someone else's comment ahref=http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=334389&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=21054811rel=url2html-9793http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=334389&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=21054811> ) that to use this patent the patent holder would need to hold a portfolio of patents itself.
Actually, I was making a the joke that there was too much prior art for patent abuse itself. I have no idea is there is prior art for this particular patent.
They haven't patented "patent abuse." Read the patent (if you haven't) and then read this post: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=334389&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=21054811 for a better understanding of what the patent actually entails.
Could the EFF use this? I wasn't aware that the EFF held any patents?
Too bad there's already so much prior art.
game plays you. (My first ever Soviet Russia comment).
But how long would it have taken 1.2 million people to download this about as FLAC files?
Thanks for a very thoughtful and interesting answer.
That's certainly a good point. The Confederate States of America was certainly a more defined target than say "Islamic fundamentalism inspired terrorism". It will be hard to know when to "declare" victory. Terrorism from one source or another seems to be with us for the foreseeable future.
Just curious, who would you see as our greatest presidents, and why?
Ok, please forget about the present situation for a moment. Consider this. Do you envision "any" war time situation where you would approve limiting constitutionally granted freedom?
Ok, thanks for your answer. But please speak to the other part of the question. Is it ever permissible for the government to limit or even violate some personal freedoms in time of war?