I don't recall saying it was bad to have choices. You do have the freedom to choose any license you like. That is a good thing.

That's your choice of course. I guess I'm glad not everyone is like you.

That's fine, but if you're using any free software at all in your life, you should think about your attitude.

You would need an impartial observer to make such an experiment. Perhaps some kind of machine that can measure such a force? Then do the experiment with two groups, etc. If you do not have that, then there is absolutely no functional difference between such a "force" and faith/placebo. Unless of course if such a machine doesn't exist. So the problem isn't with science. It's that we don't yet have machines that can measure everything. When we understand consciousness better, we'll do experiments with that as well. Or would you prefer we all went with faith instead? That isn't science.

I don't know why you say that James Randi is not a man of science. Yes, I suspect that you do, as do I, perceive him as kind of cynical and dismissive of paranormal arguments. But then again, so would you be if you had been dealing with the world's biggest crazy nutty self-deluded crackpots for the last 50 years. And it doesn't really surprise me that no one won the prize. After all, it would be about the most important profound scientific discovery of recent times if it ever happened.

Forget about Randi's challenge. Just prove scientifically something paranormal. Get a Nobel prize (or at least some recognition).

Laser beams, dude. Frickin' laser beams!

And what happens after you have downloaded 3 Linux distros and then get your internet removed for "illegal downloading"?

Even if such a massive boycott took place(which will never happen), the RIAA would be all like "Shit, look, now everyone is pirating out shit!!!111 ZOMG!" And then they would sue everyone on earth who has an internet connection.

..which is really stupid when you think about it. If you are at war, you've already forsaken any honor and reason you could possibly have anyway, so why bother? It's like that thing with sterilizing a needle before using it to inject someone with lethal poison.

I think it's because humans simply don't want to be fighting each other, so they try to hold on to their humanity somewhat even when it contradicts the situation.

They do that already with cars, graphics cards, and all kinds of products. It's called "marketing".

What he probably meant is that the only difference between a cult and religion is size. If you have only a few followers, you have a cult. If you have a million or more followers, you have a religion.

What I mean is, it's strange to me how you imply that it's somehow more "wrong" to kill a medic than anyone else. I never understood this phenomenon.

I like how you use the words "play fair" about a real-life fight to the death.

Downloading is a perfectly valid word in this case.

I want "bacon and a kiss airlines", where you eat a strip of bacon and give someone of the same sex as you a kiss. This proves you're not a muslim, and you can get on the airplane without any additional security theatrics.