I name my boxes after the transfinite cardinals, assuming the generalized continuum hypothesis, aleph0, aleph1, ... etc.

jdb2

I wonder if this has anything to do with the FSF's "Brick Nintendo" campaign. Perhaps the hacker in question was trying to further the FSF's efforts with regard to bringing attention to the super-draconian TOS of the 3DS, but in the wrong way of course. Since this is not "Anonymous" it makes me think that the answer to the former hypothesis is "no" and this is just another immature teenager up to stupid sh*t.

Oh, BTW, have you bought and sent your bricks yet?

jdb2

In that case I switched to KDE 4.6 around the end of January. If you count minor versions, then I switched 4.6.3 about 4 weeks ago.

jdb2

Seems they don't have any data on the Nokia N900. That's OK; We can get it off of Nokia's web page :

"The highest SAR value under the ICNIRP guidelines for use of the device at the ear is 0.80 W/kg."

Not bad at all, especially compared to the HTC Nexus One or the Motorola Droid Pro at 1.39 W/kg .

jdb2

I've tried to run the game under wine 1.3.21. It installs perfectly ( as does Steam ) but crashes when you click "PLAY".

This might not be entirely Wine related though as a lot of other people ( see the Gearbox forums ) have been getting crashes upon start-up that look almost exactly like the one I'm getting under wine and furthermore the demo is *extremely* buggy.

See the wine AppDB page for it :

http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=23644

jdb2

This is *exactly* why I have my Gmail account linked to Thunderbird via IMAP and I perform regular backups.

jdb2

Look up GPS on Wikipedia ( specifically this ) before spouting ignorant bullshit. Besides positioning, GR also has applications in celestial and orbital mechanics and hence spacecraft maneuvering. In fact, just look up GR, the subject of your diatribe, on Wikipedia, before making a fool of yourself.

jdb2

Hmmm.... I wonder what would have happened if this guy would have lived circa 1853 right before Bernhard Riemann invented calculus on smooth manifolds, also known as Riemannian Geometry. Maybe Riemann would have been discouraged and scrapped his work. Too bad, since that work, which had no useful applications at the time, would turn out to be the core mathematics Einstein needed to complete General Relativity some 61 years later.

Math is the language that describes the universe. Stop pursuing new heights in math an you will never reach new heights in reality.

jdb2

It's also standard argumentation practice for your thesis statement to support your evidence, which it did not.

And I think you're deliberately misconstruing the point. Human blastocysts are a small collection of Human cells -- nothing more. They are not conscious and they do not suffer. There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary regarding this point. And about the DNA, we share 94% of it with chimps and some fraction will all life on earth. What is "Human" is a continuous gradient whether you look at it genetically or evolutionarily. The 4% that is unique to us gives us our sapience.

They are distant genetic cousins, and they are cells, so why is their destruction any less worse than the destruction of tiny quantities of nascent Human cells?

They are alive by the definition provided to us by biology. The fallacy you are perpetrating is using life to conflate a self-sustaining chemical system and the ability to experience.

And neither can blastocysts unless implanted into a working uterus. Your argument is vacuous. Whether something can grow into a human is beside the point. You are talking about potential, which the DNA of any cell in one's body can provide, but what you ignore is that potential has to be coupled with a conscious choice.

"If the blastocyst is 'alive'" --> "then it's a human being, at one stage of development." The implication here is fallacious. "Alive" here is nebulous and undefined. Your logic fails because you are once again equivocating your use of the term "life" which in this context could mean "ability to experience", which we already know is wrong, "ability to develop into a human" which we know is wrong because it is implicated on conscious choice, or some other unknown definition which brings us back full circle to "what is life?." You can't wish away a non-statement or pretend to to be too obtuse to recognize it.

Just because something is a "fundamental premise" doesn't mean it's right or isn't open to debate. In my opinion it is seriously flawed. Talk to a Buddhist.

That's a nice straw man you have their. I never said anything about killing a handicapped child. Nice appeal to emotion as well. You've deliberately twisted my words. The untwisted version was meant to emphasize that ignoring the real suffering of the other species we live with is arrogant at best, and criminal at worst. And the thing about the bull is disgusting. Don't we have animal rights laws that prohibit such unnecessary mistreatment?

You really know how to construct a straw man. Every human innately knows what suffering is, just like we know what heat or cold are, or what the color red is. Life, in the general ( universe-wide ) sense, is another issue altogether.

You fully know that I meant destruction in the progressive sense ( I accidentally omitted the "ongoing" ) and "full scale" in the "by every means possible" sense. ( go check a dictionary if you don't agree ) Now you are just slinging mud.

Thanks for launching the first ad hominem attack and handing the argument to me. You must be getting desperate.

Feel free not to contribute to the cause of eliminating human *suffering* and disease by the advancement of biological science, and eventually, that of the Earth's ecosystem as well.

jdb2