The bible and religion is not only illogical its repulsive. As the video points out, the says that everyone that works on Sundays should be put to death. Does this sound good? Does this sound logical? IT SOUNDS SICK.
for six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does work on the Sabbath day must be put to death. -Exodus 31:15
This means that most of the world should be put to death. Does this sound logical?
Anyone who blasphemes the Lord must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. -Lev 24:16
This sounds barbaric.
If your hand or your foot causes you sin, cut it off and throw it away. -Matthew 18:7-9
This sounds absolutely retarded. Only idiots would do this. If you want to amputate yourself you need to seek medical help.
The law of the Lord is perfect. -Psalm 19:7
This law does not sound perfect it sounds disgusting!
It sounds kind of exciting, but seeing that I receive a 5 dollar allowance per week ;-) , it does not seem very feasible!
And for the $20k courses: you could either have an awesome computer, or some idea of how to make a ton of money.... your call.
but than I my computer could double as a uber server! Than I could host a website and get rich! (yeah I know I could have some one else host my website and save 22k but whatever ;-)
Look at the illogic of that idea; if you believe (as I do) that God gave you the intelligence you posess, then why would you believe he doesn't want you to use it?
Because apparently he wants me to believe in absolute nonsense. That does not sound intelligent to me.
Do you believe that the majority of the world is going to go to hell?
What proof exists that hell exists? (Besides of course the infallible bible :-p)
Personally it does not sound that interesting or hard to me (I know I am wrong, but I have never traded) My dad trades short term options in his spare time, but he has lost like $8,000! Even after paying a shocking $14,000 for a option intensive training course! ($22,000! I could buy a super sweet linux box for that much money.....)
I do not believe in other deities because they are false; by your statement, you claim that my Lord is false as well. To me, all that states is that you refuse to test his word, and I sorrow for you over that.
Yes, sheep need shepards. I presume that, from the emphasis you placed on that, you would consider yourself to be a goat instead.
Do you know how arrogant, dogmatic, stupid, and misled you sound?
The Dark Ages are called so because it was a time when the church ruled.
Yes. If you are an atheist, then you will go to hell, and from there to the lake of fire. There is only one escape from that fate, and that is through the salvation offered by Jesus Christ. Without that, you have no hope.
This Jesus Christ guy does not seem very compassionate. Isn't the devil supposed to do awful things? This Jesus Christ guy seems to be a lot more sadistic, cruel, twisted, insane, and evil things than the devil.
Should I fear hell, a hell that I do not believe exists. Should I seek the salvation of my heart, only to condemn my brain to hell?
Gods are fragile things, they can be killed with a whiff of science and a dose of common sense. Our contemporaries will look back on this age and wonder why we practiced barbarity.
If free will does not exist, then you cannot posess it. If …
We are all destined for something. Nothing is random. Free will does not exist, only the illusion of it (still thats good enough for me ;-)
People "burn in hell" because they simply choose to take that path. (I'm not talking about people who've never heard of God...)
Do you actually think I am going to hell because I am an atheist?
I contend that you and I are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all other gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
ONLY SHEEP NEED SHEPHERDS.
The way it was explained to me (vaguely) was that the cat was either dead or alive, it couldn't be both. It had to be one or the other with no in between.
That cat is existing in multiple states simultaneous. Lets go back to the double slit experiment. One photon goes through two slits. This, is Newtonian physics, is completely impossible and at first scientists thought they did the experiment wrong. But every time the double slit experiment is executed, there are always the same results. This means that we have proven that the photon actually simultaneously exists at multiple places at once. The photon, at the exact same time, exists at two places. By the same token, the cat simultaneously is dead and alive.
Schroedinger's cat is actually not dead and alive at the same time. You cannot know whether the cat is dead or alive without killing the cat at which point you know it's dead. That's the paradox (if it is one), that observation always influences that what's being observed.
um...actually it is. Take for example the double slit experiment. One photon goes through two holes. Its existing at two places at one, two states at once. But once the photon is measured, one photon instantly is destroyed. In this way, we can say that because we have not measured the photon, it exists in two states simultaneously. Schroedinger's cat, by the same token, is both alive and dead at the same time. But once it is measured, one state instantly gets destroyed.
but predestination is exactly what the world is. As far as I know, everything takes place in this universe. Therefore the universe is a closed system. You can predict anything in a closed system.
On my linux box, I have America's Army, UT2004, tremulous, sauerbraten, acton cubers, and nexiuz. On wine I am running Warcraft III and WoW. I heard you can run battlefield 2142 and battlefield 2 with wine.
Currently I do not believe randomness exists. (this of course might change!) How can TRUE randomness exist? A role of a dice is controlled by physics, a random function in a language is usually seeded by time, a random number chosen by a person usually is the median of the extremes. Without true randomness everything, in theory, follows laws, unbreakable laws. If everything follows unbreakable laws, everything, in theory, can be calculated. A pool table is a simple system, the mind, much more complex. But as long as everything is a system, that is a logical system were everything follows laws, everything can be computed.
Lets make the following postulate: the population of a species is inversely related to the probability of them dying out. More units=a less of a chance of extinction. This of course has obvious flaws, the most notable being extinction from over population. But considering that all of the worlds population can fit in the state of Texas and live at a lower people per sq mile ratio than NY city, this is not likely (why is it that I have the compulsion to hit C-x C-s whenever I finish a sentence ;-). So we can safely say that if we reproduce at our current rate, we face a pretty good chance of not going extinct anytime in the near future. We can also say that with an increased population, the rate of innovation and technological advances increases at a faster rate. So assuming that …
No its easy to control an environment. Take a pool table. A person could with a reasonable degree of accuracy could predict the movement of the balls. This of course is a simple system. The universe is much more complex. If we had computers that were more powerful, it would possible to calculate a small system. In fact simulation theory, the theory that we are most certainly a simulation, says just that. It is quite possible to simulate a system.
For example lets say I wanted to simulate the universe. All I would do to make it possible would be to leave out parts of unknown reality. So lets say I created a a couple thousand organisms on earth. It might be billions of years before they evolve into reasonably intelligent beings.(humans being a notable example, except for some obvious exceptions cough cough george bush cough) Therefore most of the world would not need to be simulated. The moon would not need to be created until people first saw it! In this way a post-species species (that is, transcended the physiology of there species) would be able to simulate everything with a reletively weak and cheap computer. Therefore it is easy to simulate the universe! (give us some time though)
What you say is basically Newtonian physics. Everything can be explained and everything calculated. But quantum physics says exactly the opposite. Take for example schrödinger's cat. The cat is both dead and alive at the same time!
Hello, I am doing a homework assignment and need a bit of help. I have to overload the prefix ++, postfix ++ operator, and the = operator for a circle class. Heres the code I have so far:
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
class Circle
{
public:
Circle();
Circle(int n);
Circle( const Circle &rhs);
~Circle();
Circle operator=(const Circle &rhs);
Circle operator++();
Circle operator++(int n);
int getRadius() const {return *mRadius;}
void setRadius(int n) {*mRadius=n;}
private:
int *mRadius;
};
Circle::Circle()
{
mRadius=new int(5);
}
Circle::Circle(int n)
{
mRadius=new int(n);
}
Circle::Circle(const Circle &rhs)
{
mRadius=new int;
*mRadius=rhs.getRadius();
}
Circle Circle::operator++()//some type of problem
{
*mRadius++;
Circle rhs(*mRadius);
return rhs;
}
Circle Circle::operator=(const Circle &rhs)
{
if(this==&rhs)
return *this;
*mRadius=rhs.getRadius();
return rhs;
}
Circle::~Circle()
{
delete mRadius;
}
int main()
{
Circle circ1;
Circle circ2(8);
circ1=circ2;
++circ1;
cout<<circ1.getRadius()<<"\n";
return 0;
}
So As my comment points out, the ++ operator is not working. It compiles fine but returns this error:
waters, and every day when I learn something makes me think how much of an effort must have been made by the non-credit seeking but knowledge minded silent army of programmers all over the world, wo get nothing in return but give away so much to the delight of the open source fans and users
actually most open source projects the developers are actually paid. Development on the linux kernel is mostly done by novell, redhat, ibm, etc.
I tried to give guy who develops wifi-radar a bug fix, but he never responded.
Come on, I mean there has to be some difference between C and Python. But think of it this way, I would rather write a small text based RPG game in Python in one week and have 95% performance than spend 3 weeks writing it in C and have 100% performance benefits
Yeah in that example I would use python too.(unless I was programming the RPG to improve my c/c++ skills) But even so performance matters! For example: I do some programming for the ARM (at least I think it is) based gp2x, and performace is the only thing that matters.
Well, thanks. Any suggestion about some must-know or must-do or must-learn before starting python?
I know this may seem odd but some programmers just do not respect python, ruby, perl, and even java to some extent. They see "c/c++" as the hardcore programming language and anything other language short of assembly and maybe lisp noobish.
it was pretty cool. Sandman was sooo lame, the green goblin (isn't he supposed to be called the "hobgoblin"....) did not look like a goblin or a hobgoblin. Spiderman was cool until he gave up his black stuff, venom was pretty lame.
pong, tetris (a bit harder), cheap graphical rpg (the only problem is the sprites you have to somehow acquire), bridge, blackjack, pool (a bit harder), etc.
its kind of nice. With big projects compiling can take a while. But with python your ready to go! But alas, like all scripting languages is not what you would call a "high performance langauge." At least its portable ;-)
