Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
No, Mod GP -1 inaccurate. Lotus 1-2-3 never ran on the Apple ][ family. It ran on the PC from the get-go. It was launched in 1983, not 1982.
I'll vouch for that since I'm over 40.
Pretty much, the quality of everything from the +5 posts to the troll posts used to be a lot higher a decade ago. Now, even the trolls lack imagination and much of the "insightful" posting is just parroting whatever group think is en vogue at the moment.
Someone who's nearly the millionth user, number 940851, shouldn't be commenting on the "good old days". (Neither should I, but I'm not doing that.
This will happen as likely as the Democrats actually passing a formal balanced budget. I wish American business was as much about the customer as it is about the bottom line. You know, you can do both.
I hate to get partisan, I didn't even vote all Democrat last election, but the only two Presidents with a post-war balanced budget (actually a surplus) were Bill Clinton and Lyndon Bains Johnson, both Democrats. Today's Republicans, on the other hand, have manged to convince everyone, essentially with corperatist propaganda, that the best way to balance the budget is to cut taxes on the wealthy (i.e. bring less money into the government), and not touch a dime of the Department of Defences' money (the majority of Federal government spending), and then somehow cutting the remaining welfare (less than 10% of the budget) without causing riots or starvation will somehow balance the budget rather than a sound fisical approach. They've been trotting out this "cut taxes on billionaires and it'll bring in more revenue" farce since the "Laffer curve" in the late 70s, using largely discredited models of supply-side economics dating back from the late 1920s. (In other words, the type of economics that leads to worldwide depressions.) Then people wonder why the government seems like it's going to fall like a house of cards financially, and take the rest of the country with it.
I'm not particularly happy with Obama either, mind you, he's quite incompetent at dealing with the mess that Congress hands him, a necessary part of the job of any President, and is really George W. Bush II (with different rhetoric to confuse the peoons) in terms of his actual policies. I should also note that I'm not a liberal or conservative, just someone who's responsible who's tired of seeing our elected officials act like spoiled children on the corporate and special interest doles.
(Whatever you do, don't buy Xbox Live from Microsoft directly, they not only charge you more, they make it very difficult to unsubscribe. It's better to get a prepaid card for this, so MS can't rip you off.
There's a reason that the police and Taxi & Limosine Commision conducts sting operations to make sure that drivers are following the law. The main ones being: you can't charge handicapped passengers more, you can't kick someone out for wanting to go to a hospital, you can't discriminate based on race, and you can't refuse service based on destination.
They need to do more of these sting operations, because I've been refused service countless times trying to get a cab from Manhattan to Brooklyn - even though I even live in a part of Brooklyn that's just across the river from Manhattan! On the other hand, I've never been refused service based on using a smartphone app to get a limo - I like the idea of taxis doing this, it means I won't almost always have to use car services to get to Brooklyn.
"Realistic" is, first and foremost, about being consistent with observable facts. Given that we have plenty of evidence of human settlements from before 5772 years ago - like, you know, numerous tools and even some buildings - as well as having a considerable fossil record that nicely outlines our evolution as a species - it sounds to me like " running around in our drawers for over 500,000 years" is a perfectly realistic claim.
I hate to cop-out, but reading a book on the subject of creation by an Orthodox Rabbi (some of whom, such as Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, are even accredited scientists.) might disabuse you of some of these notions.
So, simply put, the Jews know that the world was created in six literal days, and that all of humanity literally came from Adam and Eve?
Simply put, you're putting it too simply. That having been said, in a sense you're pretty close, yeah, as the commentaries don't actually deny the basic facts. That having been said, this isn't the only world that G-d created, in the Midrash, G-d "created and destroyed worlds". The Tiferes Yisroel on the Mishnah writes, that this explains phenomena such as dinosaur fossils. (He wrote this in the late 18th century CE, long before Darwin, incidentally.)
I'd actually posit that humanity beginning 5772 years ago is a lot more realistic than claiming that we were running around in our drawers for over 500,000 years (or a hundred times that of recorded history, to put it in perspective.) prior to discovering civilization with these big brains that are so obviously made for this.
True, but when it all comes down to it, one is still believing in a floating guy in space that made everything. It's a bit weird.
Actually, Orthodox Judaism insists that G-d is not corporal in any way, who, in the Maimonidean formulation, creates the universe via knowledge of himself. So, strictly speaking, belief in a floating guy in space is not what we believe in. The Rambam (Maimonidies) even brands any corporal attributes (except as scriptural allegory of course) a heresy, though the commentary of the Ra'avad disagrees about that.