Comment Re:If that's how they respond... (Score 1) 1224
Where's a violent gun-toting islam-hating extremist when you need one?
Last I heard, shooting moose in Alaska...
Where's a violent gun-toting islam-hating extremist when you need one?
Last I heard, shooting moose in Alaska...
...sort of.
This just reminds me of the time popular UK show Top Gear tried to make a space shuttle out of a Reliant Robin.
The partnership will see Telehouse West save up to 1,110 tonnes of CO2 emissions per annum and provide up to nine megawatts of power for the local neighbourhood. The energy savings will equate to boiling 3,000 kettles continuously. The disposal of waste heat from cooling systems is one of the most significant sustainability issues associated with data storage. This will be the first time a heat export strategy has been introduced in the UK for this type of data centre facility.
In fact, I seem to recall a discussion about this on here a couple of months ago about yet another project doing the same thing. The consensus was that whilst there was a lot of air pumped out, it wasn't exactly hot & it wasn't useful for much more than good PR for the host - far better efficiencies could have been made, spending the money elsewhere. (This statement brought to you by Slashdot whispers of an oriental nature.)
Link - http://www.uvnc.com/addons/singleclick.html
Simply configure it through the supplied flat-file & package it into a single binary via the tools provided. No need to install - they just click on the binary & it starts up a VNC server, making a reverse connection to the listening client on your end.
I've already got it setup with various family members & have it pointed to one of my servers, which I can then tunnel the connection through wherever I am.
If you're also using the uVNC client, you can use things like File Transfer.
AFAIK, it supports all versions of Windows - I've got it on XP & Vista systems.
It is literally impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God. See Russell's Teapot
Yeahbut, Russell never claimed his teapot created the universe, had affairs with virgins & cast devastating floods upon the Earth.
Indeed, an idle God who doesn't tamper with the physical universe is infallible, but a redundant God is not the one theists ascribe to.
They forced you to choose between 'natural process' and 'guided by a supreme being' as exclusive opposites. How about if you believe (as most religious people do) that natural processes are guided by a supreme being. The nature and tone of the question will cause most to choose the supreme being option, when they probably are thinking 'both'.
You're fudging definitions here, but if you believe the process is guided by a supreme being, then [i]that's[/i] your answer. Your dispute is over the method & period of time the creation story happened, but you still argue it happened.
God set up the rules and conditions so that what he wanted to happen would happen. Sort of a 15+ billion year bank shot. To me, that is _much_ more impressive than "Wham, here's everything".
Likewise. I find it impressive & think myself tremndously lucky that our existence & the world around us even came to be, given the odds. But this is an inevitable conundrum.
Picture a man tied to a chair in a room, with a gun pointed to his head. Out of a hundred rounds, one is blank.
After numerous men have been shot & replaced, one of them gets the blank. Now with him knowing the odds & yet still being alive, he will undoubtedly question whether [i]any[/i] of the rounds were live.
It's logical to be astounded & question the tiny odds we came to existence, but I don't think attributing it to some infallible entity answers any questions.
Using God as the answer to "how was the universe created?" & then exempting him from the same requirement to be created doesn't quite follow through, does it?
Line rental is £11.50 a month, from what I remember. If you're paying more than that, you have unnecessary extra options on the line.
That's supposedly the basic service, I think they're just overcharging me. I really should get around to kicking them about it...
But really, never made a call? If I have to pay the line rental fee anyway to get internet access, I'd much rather use it for calls as well than pay ~10p per minute or more on the mobile, or even worse pay £15 a month or so for a mobile contract with free minutes. Evening/weekend calls on landlines are typically free now.
There hasn't even been a phone connected to the line.
As I need a mobile anyway, it's far easier just to use the free minutes I have. That & I have free VoIP through work.
It's been about 8 years now, since we last made a call using our landline.
Unfortunately, there is (was?) a restricted cable infrastructure in the UK, so most of us are forced to pay BT ~£15/25 line rental per month, just to get DSL.
If I had the option, I'd consider hooking the lines up to the speakers I have dotted around the house, to synchronise them with the amp in the main room. Has anyone tried this?
I can't speak to emacs...
RTFM.
C-x M-c M-speak
So in contrast, a corporation that has 10,000 people behind it may only be reflecting the owners wishes which could be as little as one person of just a couple hundred of people while it appears to be larger. With a church, you can find another church to go to so similar representation of 10,000 is likely to reflect a lot more people in the community then a corporation.
And here I thought people interpreted their religion relative to that of their personal beliefs?
How many supposed Catholics do you know, who condone the use of condoms? Or others in any number of religious denominations, who have intercourse before marriage?
The oligarchy you allow to represent yourselves, are likely to be far more hard-line (read, extremist?) than the rest of their supposed 'congregation'.
Hardly the 'voice of the people'.
At least shareholders get some form of democracy.
You've fallen into the classic apologists trap.
The simple existence of a god (as opposed to their supposed actions) is unfalsifiable.
An agnostic is someone who believes there is equal weight to each argument & simply hasn't chosen which to support.
I agree with the general sentiment that Trademarks are a simple method of quality control.
It helps verify the trusted developer - If I hear about a new fancy application & fancy giving it a go, I want to know I'm not unknowingly using some adulterated version which would provide undesired results.
As for many distributors strict control over their trademarks: they have no choice.
They have to prove an effort has been made to protect it, else they risk losing it as a generic term.
"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe
