Not saying there aren't issues that need addressing, but we can address them more directly than before. We don't need to hide it behind confrontations between alien species.
The reason there isn't any good current SciFi today is because we don't need it anymore.
Good SciFi tackled issues that people didn't want to address at the time, but did it in a semi-fantastical way that removed us and our prejudice from the equation. Now, people are more open-minded to such issues so we don't need the trappings anymore. We explore this ethical space through shows in the present day.
SciFi was never about the science, it was about the humanity. That's also why a lot of SciFi today sucks. It's all about flux capacitors and laser beams.
You do realize that the CC companies already have this data. It is not a choice of scattered or centralized, it is a choice of just centralized or scattered and centralized.
And honestly, I'd prefer the just centralized model. I'd rather not have to worry if Amazon, WalMart, TeleCheck, etc. were all on the ball in regards to security in addition to Chase, Capital One, etc.
Additionally, if you buy third party add-ons for your car that ruins your engine, then Ford isn't liable for the damage done by it. Even if that means a routine oil change will cause the car to fall apart.
I don't see where Apple has to ensure that their firmware update won't brick a modified iPhone. They don't approve of it, they don't endorse it, and they won't make concessions for it. They will make their firmware updates to work on stock iPhones and only guarantee that.
Yes it is your phone and Apple doesn't owe you anything more than what you paid for. These firmware updates are a free service provided by Apple. Apple has no obligation to support third-party modified phones if they don't want to.
Actually, if he stopped accepting royalties, then the record companies will make an even larger profit and they wouldn't care. That would make it an empty gesture.
OT: But in response to your signature. Two spaces after a period was necessary in the days of typewriters. Now with modern word processors and these lovely computer machines, the spacing after the period is part of the typeface and two spaces after a period just results in an ugly mess.
If you must include both, then you can't dual-license with the GPL, because the addition of the BSD license and making it necessary is an added restriction. Now, if it were either/or (which I'm gathering it was), then it is one or the other. Or in code:
if (iChooseGPL) {
applyGPL(); } else if (iChooseBSD) {
applyBSD(); } else {
takeFlyingLeap(); }
Otherwise, what you are saying doesn't make sense. That's like saying that 'This Program is dual licensed under the "You call me God and give me all your money" license or the GPL' means that all people downstream must follow both tenets. And if that is true, I have some dual-licensing I need to do.
But you couldn't add the dual-license requirement per the GPL since the GPL disallows adding any requirements. If you release GPL, you must give all downstream the same freedoms you were allowed with no other restrictions.
I read it. And it is still logically flawed. Even brilliant people develop blind spots.
This is the phrase that cinches it "Similarly, if something is false, God (real or fictitious) would know that as well. Along with this goes the fact that we conceive of God as encompassing all rationality."
So God, even if a fiction, knows everything, even of his own non-existence. But God is a rational being, actually encompassing all rationality, and all rational beings believe in their existence. Since God believes in his own existence, he must exist.
The problem is the definition of the terms causes tautology. Everything else is the equivalent of waving your hands and shouting that you are right. Just because you don't understand what's going on, doesn't mean everyone doesn't.
His argument does effectively cull out all pantheistic religions, however. Or at least is incapable of proving them to exist since most pantheon members are not omniscient. It however gives equal credence to the Invisible Pink Unicorn and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Also any other omniscient character you wish to dream up. It doesn't prove that God exists. It does prove that if there is a divine entity, he works solo.
I know that repeating something a bunch makes people believe in its truthiness, but I'm not buying. What if there is no entity that satisfies "encompasses all rationality"? That's the question we're asking, isn't it? Where's the entity that encompasses all rationality. Godel's argument is that since in an infinite universe, the infinite is possible, there must be some being that satisfies the definition.
And there are many highly intelligent people who both understand and find fault with Godel's proof as well. So stalemate on the appeal to authority issue.
I'd think about removing George Washington from that list. There is considerable evidence that he was at least a deist and probably leaning towards atheism. Unlike Thomas Jefferson who was probably atheist leaning towards deist.
The church was a much more powerful force in people's lives back then and rejecting the concept of God made little political sense back then as well.
Of course this proof begins with the assumption that a god exists in the first place.
Simply put: Let god = rational, omniscient being. Let omniscient = knows the truth of everything Let rational = believes in own existence Since god is both rational and omniscient, he knows the truth of everything and he knows he exists.
We've effectively defined god in terms of himself. It's a mathematical/logical trick.
But, when we consider all of the embedded electronics that get tossed around today (look in a Toys R Us for example), this number quickly becomes irrelevant.
Now, what percentage of embedded devices use this system.
Ah, so it is only ubiquitous in Japan. And that is hardly impressive considering that those little handheld poker and blackjack games are considered embedded devices.
The aerial photos at maps.live.com are spot on for the region. (249 corporate dr. houma, la. 70360 (I judge all mapping sites by this address since I know it is wrong most of the time))
The aerial photos at maps.google.com and maps.yahoo.com are old. Way old.
However, all three sites use the same street maps, which if you use the Hybrid view on maps.live.com show that you will drive straight into a building.
And the streets are mislabeled. Enterprise doesn't intersect with Hollywood. That's Corporate. What they have labeled as Corporate is some small private drive (that I can't recall the name of).
And the aerial photo (maps.live.com) can't be more than one or two years old. I only notice a couple of missing buildings, and they have the Sam's Club they just built on the corner of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd and Main St. (North and slightly East).
Slashdot Mirror
TFA says while the computer is powered off. Not partially booted, not on, off. This is an evolutionary step from Apple's Disk Mode.
So, while Disk Mode is cool, it is still not the same. Because with this, you could transfer files from a desktop to a laptop during a power outage.
Not saying there aren't issues that need addressing, but we can address them more directly than before. We don't need to hide it behind confrontations between alien species.
The reason there isn't any good current SciFi today is because we don't need it anymore.
Good SciFi tackled issues that people didn't want to address at the time, but did it in a semi-fantastical way that removed us and our prejudice from the equation. Now, people are more open-minded to such issues so we don't need the trappings anymore. We explore this ethical space through shows in the present day.
SciFi was never about the science, it was about the humanity. That's also why a lot of SciFi today sucks. It's all about flux capacitors and laser beams.
You do realize that the CC companies already have this data. It is not a choice of scattered or centralized, it is a choice of just centralized or scattered and centralized.
And honestly, I'd prefer the just centralized model. I'd rather not have to worry if Amazon, WalMart, TeleCheck, etc. were all on the ball in regards to security in addition to Chase, Capital One, etc.
"And wallah it started working right."
Hate to be pedantic or a Nazi, but it is voilà (French for "see there" or something like that).
People who reduce themselves to bitching about curse words contribute nothing to the conversation at hand.
What if that switch is flipped to prevent a killer poke? Bounds checking and all that.
Not to mention, I was just trying to show that software can physically damage hardware despite what some people here believe (probably not you).
You say that but don't bother to mention that Bellsouth/Cingular was the last merger to take place (in 2006). After SBC had assumed the AT&T name.
Software can cause physical damage to hardware.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_poke
Where did I mention warranty?
Additionally, if you buy third party add-ons for your car that ruins your engine, then Ford isn't liable for the damage done by it. Even if that means a routine oil change will cause the car to fall apart.
I don't see where Apple has to ensure that their firmware update won't brick a modified iPhone. They don't approve of it, they don't endorse it, and they won't make concessions for it. They will make their firmware updates to work on stock iPhones and only guarantee that.
Yes it is your phone and Apple doesn't owe you anything more than what you paid for. These firmware updates are a free service provided by Apple. Apple has no obligation to support third-party modified phones if they don't want to.
I don't see the problem here.
"which could lead to greater harmony of systems design"
Being male or female neither enables nor disables the ability to create harmonious systems.
Actually, if he stopped accepting royalties, then the record companies will make an even larger profit and they wouldn't care. That would make it an empty gesture.
OT: But in response to your signature. Two spaces after a period was necessary in the days of typewriters. Now with modern word processors and these lovely computer machines, the spacing after the period is part of the typeface and two spaces after a period just results in an ugly mess.
Yeah, looks like I did. The indenting threw me off. After a while, replies stop indenting.
If you must include both, then you can't dual-license with the GPL, because the addition of the BSD license and making it necessary is an added restriction. Now, if it were either/or (which I'm gathering it was), then it is one or the other. Or in code:
if (iChooseGPL) {
applyGPL();
} else if (iChooseBSD) {
applyBSD();
} else {
takeFlyingLeap();
}
Otherwise, what you are saying doesn't make sense. That's like saying that 'This Program is dual licensed under the "You call me God and give me all your money" license or the GPL' means that all people downstream must follow both tenets. And if that is true, I have some dual-licensing I need to do.
But you couldn't add the dual-license requirement per the GPL since the GPL disallows adding any requirements. If you release GPL, you must give all downstream the same freedoms you were allowed with no other restrictions.
I read it. And it is still logically flawed. Even brilliant people develop blind spots.
This is the phrase that cinches it "Similarly, if something is false, God (real or fictitious) would know that as well. Along with this goes the fact that we conceive of God as encompassing all rationality."
So God, even if a fiction, knows everything, even of his own non-existence. But God is a rational being, actually encompassing all rationality, and all rational beings believe in their existence. Since God believes in his own existence, he must exist.
The problem is the definition of the terms causes tautology. Everything else is the equivalent of waving your hands and shouting that you are right. Just because you don't understand what's going on, doesn't mean everyone doesn't.
His argument does effectively cull out all pantheistic religions, however. Or at least is incapable of proving them to exist since most pantheon members are not omniscient. It however gives equal credence to the Invisible Pink Unicorn and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Also any other omniscient character you wish to dream up. It doesn't prove that God exists. It does prove that if there is a divine entity, he works solo.
I know that repeating something a bunch makes people believe in its truthiness, but I'm not buying. What if there is no entity that satisfies "encompasses all rationality"? That's the question we're asking, isn't it? Where's the entity that encompasses all rationality. Godel's argument is that since in an infinite universe, the infinite is possible, there must be some being that satisfies the definition.
And there are many highly intelligent people who both understand and find fault with Godel's proof as well. So stalemate on the appeal to authority issue.
I'd think about removing George Washington from that list. There is considerable evidence that he was at least a deist and probably leaning towards atheism. Unlike Thomas Jefferson who was probably atheist leaning towards deist.
The church was a much more powerful force in people's lives back then and rejecting the concept of God made little political sense back then as well.
Of course this proof begins with the assumption that a god exists in the first place.
Simply put:
Let god = rational, omniscient being.
Let omniscient = knows the truth of everything
Let rational = believes in own existence
Since god is both rational and omniscient, he knows the truth of everything and he knows he exists.
We've effectively defined god in terms of himself. It's a mathematical/logical trick.
Technically, close to none. ;)
But, when we consider all of the embedded electronics that get tossed around today (look in a Toys R Us for example), this number quickly becomes irrelevant.
Now, what percentage of embedded devices use this system.
Ah, so it is only ubiquitous in Japan. And that is hardly impressive considering that those little handheld poker and blackjack games are considered embedded devices.
[citation needed]
It's perfectly okay to use "it's" to signal possession.
Not according to the link you posted.
The aerial photos at maps.live.com are spot on for the region. (249 corporate dr. houma, la. 70360 (I judge all mapping sites by this address since I know it is wrong most of the time))
The aerial photos at maps.google.com and maps.yahoo.com are old. Way old.
However, all three sites use the same street maps, which if you use the Hybrid view on maps.live.com show that you will drive straight into a building.
And the streets are mislabeled. Enterprise doesn't intersect with Hollywood. That's Corporate. What they have labeled as Corporate is some small private drive (that I can't recall the name of).
And the aerial photo (maps.live.com) can't be more than one or two years old. I only notice a couple of missing buildings, and they have the Sam's Club they just built on the corner of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd and Main St. (North and slightly East).