ToadMan

I have centOS 4 on my work machine... that is an adventure. We have some centOS 3 machines, ubuntu ("dapper drake" if I recall correctly, although some might even be "hoary hedgehog"), and my personal favorite solaris 10... I know it's not Linux, but close enough.

presale works for me ;)

That's what you all said last election... but I digress.

Truth is, I'm still trying to figure out where the hell the Lakeview Auditorium is.

Actually this isn't a sell out. It's called the programable web. It's the whole idea that we create the web. The facebook programmers can't possibly come up with all the functionality that people might want, but those people can. Do you have a problem with Google's API's? (http://www.programmableweb.com/apis). Most sites offer an API to allow mashups... Facebook just works internally.

Really 'ton. I'm totally calling you right now.

I don't think we're going to go back to the 'with a band' days any time soon... Quite frankly I like the acoustic stuff.

I can wholly accept the concept of a confluence of ideas and opinions. My main point was if we ARE going to have an argument about something then we need to employ stronger rhetoric. It is ineffective and useless to argue when you have no basis. An opinion is fine, but when you want to convince people that your opinion is correct, then back it up, or give it up.

Interesting... I don't think it is technically infeasible to take control of a phone in that manner, but Occam's razor dictates that it is not likely the solution

Alright, this is getting a little out of hand. In all honesty I'm not sure if I really like how any of this debate has gone... It however on par with the internet. Any opinion presented will be meet with vicious and relentless attack. That's not to say that it is not entirely unwarranted. I believe that people who are incorrect should be corrected. However another effect is also in play. People are rarely willing or able to actually examine each others debate and respond with intelligent discourse. All internet argument is inherently devoid of any kind of rigorous proof. I my self am guilty of spouting opinion as fact, with utter disregard to an kind of evidence. For those of you who have read published papers in reputable academic journals, you will note that no statement of major fact in such documents goes without a citation, or presentation of research. I'm not asking that people prepare essays on their beliefs, but the simple fact that: "An opinion not supported in fact, is a fallacy". You might all find it educational to do a quick google search of your assertions, before stating them. This comment is intended at all parties, so please don't think that anybody cannot learn something right now (including myself). On that note, you can either chose to have some kind of discussion, or continue flaming and the thread will be locked.

As an engineer I assert in rebuttal to all of those points that the design is as such since it can function no other way. In terms of it coming about: If we did compute the probability of all of these factors (which will be none-zero), and If you consider how vast the universe is, are there enough grains of sand on the beach to have one actually meet all the requirements. I don't really know. Further to that, can we really make any assertions about the foundations of the universe? We can explain how a great number of things work (H2O for example), but we can't really comment that authoritatively about their design. I think the biggest sticking point about the correctness of religion is not even the premise of accepting intelligent design. I think the really tough part is the level of detail that more religions assert that don't allow for the mapping of scientific knowledge onto religious views. That is, for example that on the whole most religions will not allow you to utilize creation as a metaphor of evolution, even though evolution can be more acutely scientifically proven. The parallels are quite natural and don't tamper with the basis of either depiction. But why are we talking about religion?

Me too, but I'm not that mean ;) You can get a wma player from microsoft, or Flip4Mac is a nice Quicktime way.

One of two things I suspect: I bad cut by the audio engineer, or sound leakage.

Bally's? I guess Harrah's and Paris are both in the same area... as well as Planet Hollywood (formally Aladdin)

I'm not sure what is going on here, but I;m very confused by your wording:

Err... because he bought the domain and pays the rent on the server?

I'm not sure it will actually... you can get a few wma players: http://www.versiontracker.com/php/qs.php?m...acosx&submit=Go

WOW. So I looked up a couple more facts (not that people some to respond to my posts) http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheet...onsequences.cfm This stands opposed to the assertion that people can learn from these kind of experiences. It appears in reality that they are no able to do so with out help.

Chant "Rico". Do it, it would be hilarious... (for the other people there)

I would tend to agree that there isn't any useful lesson to be learned from any of those events. Given the number of problems associated with psychological trauma (http://www.traumaresources.org/emotional_trauma_overview.htm) and that current treatments are based around 'dealing with' the memories, it stands to reason that lessening the impact of these memories would be positive. As described here, most people already have abstract fuzzy memory. This is covered in the article, base on the fact that traumatic events cause the brain to store memories more vividly. The whole point that they were getting at is that the memories would be normalized into context. I'm not a psyc major, but I would assert that this would make the memories easier to handle. None of us are really qualified to comment on it. We would all prefer to keep our memories. But consider an extreme cases, where this kind of treatment would have could be the difference between helping a person recover, and sentencing them to a life of mental disorder. Should we still be protecting the sanctity of memory in this case? What if the human cost of not using this technology is higher than the potential danger it presents? Like all drugs, it would need to be regulated, just as with most special purpose drugs.

I would love to... but I can't get dirt cheap flights on a dime... Anybody on the bored with cash flow, that is from Calgary could totally get in on it though. Westjet always has deals. ($99 if you fly down Tuesday, and $119 returning on the Saturday, but you have to find a hotel, so you might not make that much back on the savings)

mmmm. fun stuff.

It doesn't clear memory it normalizes is, makes it fuzzy and abstract. So really if you used it to what old movies, you would just confuse yourself.

Sweet I'm causing people to make up words. If you are really interested in that kind of stuff, it's all from an introductory stats class I am taking (well it's introductory honours but whatever)... there is probably way more fascinating things in upper levels of the subject... The company I work for also deals heavily in stats.

err... WOW. I have no comment yet... highly interesting though.