Athanasius, I do agree with you, the reason that I didn't quite see it that way before is because I take this for granted. Meaning I automaticly assume (and rightfuly so) that an intelligent, healthy person will have no other choice but to see the "best" path. The path that is most beneficial is where everyone at the very least does their own thing and does not interfere with each other. Idealy they would also help each other acheive their goals. Acheiving your own goals in that enviroment is much less complicated than in an enviroment of competition. Yes, I do agree with you, but perhaps I don't have the reverence for it that you do, to me it simply is the best path to take for myself and those around me.
Blackhawk2 actualy bud, you make me sad... you are using the same God TAINTED argument used against many innovators. This one comes to mind as nearly identical to the one you just posed... "if men were meant to fly God would have given us wings". Needless to say despite what people like you said in the past, I guess we can fly even if God didn't give us wings or according to them did not intend us to. So what if you have a degree in programing? many respected scientists laughed at Einstein when he first discussed his theory of relativity. Many respeced scholars swore up and down that the world was flat. It's just good to human kind in general that people like you who in your vast knowledge deem something as impossible are proven wrong throught history.
Blackhawk2, boy oh boy, now I fully understand where you are coming from. Your one of those bible thumping, genesis swearing, evolution bashing, right wing religeous fundamentalists. Well according to people like you only God through the male and female can create life. Now you religeous zealots are getting your panties in a wad about genetic research in cloning. Why get your panties in a wad? I thought it was impossible according to you guys? So if it's impossible why stress over it? This is the ugly side of religeon, the side that surpresses discovery and knowledge why? because it seems to go against the all mighty decree of the church. Even though I believe in God and I consider myself a religeous person, I will never support the side of church, it does nothing but spread ignorance.
<<Blackhawk2, boy oh boy, now I fully understand where you are coming from>>
I fully disagree, you don't know me.
eia430,
Ever hear of being realistic. Einstein was realistic, as a physicist he knew you could not break certain rules.
BTW I don't belong to any religion, nor do I thump books
I fully disagree, you don't know me.
eia430,
Ever hear of being realistic. Einstein was realistic, as a physicist he knew you could not break certain rules.
BTW I don't belong to any religion, nor do I thump books
Blackhawk2, you said..
"There is something beyond the physical that can only be reproduced by the "life force->aka God". That life force is what makes decisions, there is no way we can reproduce that same "consciousness" in a "machine"."
How can you be a programer, a very logical thinking person and still spout out unfounded, untested opinion as some kind of solem fact? This sounds about as silly to me as someone saying "buildings are alive, they have a soul" You may hold the same opinion as me that there is a soul. But don't even think that you can begin to tell me what we can or can't do or where a soul resides without some solid factual evidence. This sounds as absurd as the idiot that swore to me that the grand canyon was carved out in one single day long flood. Never mind the evidence to the contrary, that idiot was blind to evidence that contradicted his all mighty opinion. And what evidence did he have that the grand canyon was formed in a day? the bible, what an idiot. Before I get flamed for my stance on the bible, I don't trust the bible to be 100% the work of God because of the simple fact that it's been through man's grubby little hands. I take some passages as God's work, some I quickly dissmiss as garbage.
"There is something beyond the physical that can only be reproduced by the "life force->aka God". That life force is what makes decisions, there is no way we can reproduce that same "consciousness" in a "machine"."
How can you be a programer, a very logical thinking person and still spout out unfounded, untested opinion as some kind of solem fact? This sounds about as silly to me as someone saying "buildings are alive, they have a soul" You may hold the same opinion as me that there is a soul. But don't even think that you can begin to tell me what we can or can't do or where a soul resides without some solid factual evidence. This sounds as absurd as the idiot that swore to me that the grand canyon was carved out in one single day long flood. Never mind the evidence to the contrary, that idiot was blind to evidence that contradicted his all mighty opinion. And what evidence did he have that the grand canyon was formed in a day? the bible, what an idiot. Before I get flamed for my stance on the bible, I don't trust the bible to be 100% the work of God because of the simple fact that it's been through man's grubby little hands. I take some passages as God's work, some I quickly dissmiss as garbage.
Since no definitive answer can be given to the original question, at least it's possible to postulate some other rules about threads like this:
1. no matter what the subject is, someone will bring God (or god, or a god) into discussion.
2. the subject of sex will also be raised.
3. between a third and half of the answers will be jokes.
4. someone will always get hurt and/or irritated by other(s).
5. some of the blame always lies on Attila, Bush, Clinton, Gates, Gandhi, Gore, Hitler, Mao, Mother Theresa, PETA, the Pope, Reagan, Stalin or whoever is last in the alphabet.
1. no matter what the subject is, someone will bring God (or god, or a god) into discussion.
2. the subject of sex will also be raised.
3. between a third and half of the answers will be jokes.
4. someone will always get hurt and/or irritated by other(s).
5. some of the blame always lies on Attila, Bush, Clinton, Gates, Gandhi, Gore, Hitler, Mao, Mother Theresa, PETA, the Pope, Reagan, Stalin or whoever is last in the alphabet.
Playitagainsam, I'm sure you are quite correct. I can vouch for the "someone always gets irritated by someone else" part of the equation. Maybe I should cut down on the caffene...
Maybe I should cut down on the caffene...<<...people like you who in your vast knowledge deem something as impossible are proven wrong throught history.>>
eia430 the above is what you said,
Now prove me wrong. You can't? Then STFU. My statements were my opinion. I'm not the one who went attacking other people and saying they were outright wrong. Yes I did challenge some ideas but I did it with some ideas of my own, I did not outright attack the person, I challenged the idea. I probably should have not said anything when you starting making personal attacks, but apparently I'm just as human as most people on this forum :disgust:
eia430 the above is what you said,
Now prove me wrong. You can't? Then STFU. My statements were my opinion. I'm not the one who went attacking other people and saying they were outright wrong. Yes I did challenge some ideas but I did it with some ideas of my own, I did not outright attack the person, I challenged the idea. I probably should have not said anything when you starting making personal attacks, but apparently I'm just as human as most people on this forum :disgust:
<<it is inevitable that you will be proved wrong>>
Advise on how not to attack people inadvertantly, re-phrase the above statement to say: "it is inevitable that your idea will be proved wrong. probably not now or 10 years but eventually."
Advise on how not to attack people inadvertantly, re-phrase the above statement to say: "it is inevitable that your idea will be proved wrong. probably not now or 10 years but eventually."
Blackhawk2 you are the one with the closed mind. I did not say "we can definately do it" I said "it was possible" which includes the reality that it MAY not be doable. You are the one with a definative concrete answer so the burden of proof lies on you. But beyond that it is simply the way you approach the problem. If there were more people like you and less people like Charles Linberg, or Albert Einstein and others that ignore nay sayers like you, the world would have been a whole different (worse) place. In a football game attitude in the team counts a lot. How successful would a team be if one member kept spouting "we can't beat them, it's impossible I tell you!!" I would much rather keep a frame of mind that it is possible and find out through experience that it is not. Rather than automaticly ASSUME that it is not and never really find out because I didn't even bother trying. Innovators, forward thinkers, people that push limits, those are the people that change this world for the better, not people like you. You are showing the ugly side of religeon, the side that spreads ignorance and surpresses knowledge. Was it right for me to immediately work against you? I think so. You decided to put your opinion out to be heard, don't start crying because another person did the same and it just so happens to dissagree with yours.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter