Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:cause and/or those responsible (Score 1) 643

by marcello_dl (#47500635) Attached to: Russian Government Edits Wikipedia On Flight MH17

When a civil airliner went down near Ustica, the amount of disinformation and cover up was so extensive that western governments cannot claim they have always had higher standards. The moral responsibility of Italian, US, and possibly other EU countries towards the victims with regards to the truth is there no matter which theory you agree more with.

Comment: Re:now you lose even more money on bc (Score 1) 72

by marcello_dl (#47439201) Attached to: Finnish National TV Broadcaster Starts Sending Bitcoin Blockchain

I guess you didn't read with enough attention. Gold has intrinsic value because it does not depend on a system who says "that piece of paper is worth X". It is not the magic material that solves all problems, of course, but losing the conversion to gold is still LOSING no matter how you put it.

Comment: Re:Yet another proof creation doesn't work! (Score 1) 158

by marcello_dl (#47437863) Attached to: Hints of Life's Start Found In a Giant Virus

In absence of gravity, of course, you take two turtles, put one against the other. They will attract each other. Now put all other turtles on these two. Now it's turtles all the way down. So you typed all this when "turtles all the way down" is a completely acceptable answer to parent post.

A god created god ad infinitum, with optional looping, why not? because doesn't fit our infinitesimal brain? That's not a valid objection. A valid objection is that this requires the concept of creation to be valid in all iteration of such a model. But it's not a definitive objection, from our point of view we are unable to make one.

Comment: Re:Yet another proof creation doesn't work! (Score 1) 158

by marcello_dl (#47437821) Attached to: Hints of Life's Start Found In a Giant Virus

Compiler error line 1: "what/who", "created", are undefined concepts in the scope you are using them. You don't do that with code, why should you be able to do in philosophical reasonings?

First you define "creation" in the context of the domain of the hypothetical god (hint, you can't tell nothing about ANYTHING in it at all since you cannot experience it and if you could you couldn't prove you did not even to yourself).
Then you define "who" in the context of the domain of the hypothetical god, (hint above applies, plus, no space means "who" can't be identified, that is, told apart the rest).

Religions have it easy. "god told me that... " can mean that a concept, which is potentially incomprehensible in its own domain, gets translated in ours like...
As demigod of a 2d simulation I could say that a cube is like a square. Now it's up to the simulation to believe me or not, truth won't ever be reachable from the inside.

Comment: Re:Yet another proof creation doesn't work! (Score 1) 158

by marcello_dl (#47437747) Attached to: Hints of Life's Start Found In a Giant Virus

In general, you can't define anything outside your own level of existence and be sure it makes any sense.

Your objection depends on how our concept of creation behaves in our concept of time, makes no sense too.

But, if we abandon all hope to conclude anything strong, let's go one level of recursion deep: imagine a conway's game of life. what's time for one entity inside it? time is the succession of frames. That succession of frame is independent of our time. It does not matter that some time is needed to compute frames, because that's something that is completely irrelevant to the inside of the game.

Now, your question translated one level deeper in the context of conway's game of life is: how many frames it took to create the game itself? You see it doesn't make any sense. Of course in this context you say "but see, time is needed nonetheless". And I reply, yes, it's a feature of the game itself to resemble some of our concepts. It doesn't prove something like that is necessary in the hypothetical domain of a god that transcends time.

A method of solution is perfect if we can forsee from the start, and even prove, that following that method we shall attain our aim. -- Leibnitz

Working...