Re: why the registry not a good idea
Because it get f#&ked up so easily.
1347 publicly visible posts • joined 26 Jun 2014
Definitely look at Squid for caching and http filtering. With a combination of block list and exception list you can make a web filtration system that gets up on its hind legs and walks. Once in another lifetime I had Squid blocking ads and porn for the company network, except for the owner's PC - just blocked ads for him (no way I was gonna tell the guy that signs my paychecks that he can't get his jollies).
"Hush now and don't bring the bible into this. It's not like Christian's actually read that anyway."
Yeah, no fair bringing the original source documents in! Especially considering that they say very little about homosexuality and say A Lot against greed and lack of charity to the disenfranchised (widows and orphans).
"Oh hang on... That's pretty much the definition of English!"
They'll probably insist on making it the form of English we speak on the left side of the Atlantic so as not to show favoritism.
Icon: how the Brits and Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys will react.
@Eddy Ito #2
I will have to concede your second point. As for points 1 and 3, the AC only asserted that *something* is "out there". That "something" (if it exists) could be very different than anything anyone has ever called "god".
Point 4. The AC was pointing out that science, useful as it is for expanding human knowledge, has limits. Therefore, something that scientifically would be considered hearsay or anecdote, might be quite acceptable as proof in other fields of endeavor - the scientific method is not terribly useful in the field of history as history does not lend itself to experimentation, for example. It is also not nearly as useful as elbow pads and helmets in the field of roller derby, but that _is_ a different subject...
@Eddy Ito
A few problems with your argument:
1. You do not produce any evidence either. Naughty, naughty.
2. AC's entire post seemed to be more about a different way of thinking about all the scientific discoveries we have made over the years than about any particular bits of "evidence". AC may be right, or wrong, or completely looney but you may have to consider that you might have misread the whole thing.
3. As AC made no mention of any specific deity, pointing this out does not weaken AC's argument or strengthen yours. It's almost as though you're reading something into AC's post.
4. Your parting shot about hearsay and anecdote actually is congruent with AC's final paragraph regarding the limitations of science.
I suppose I'll get downvoted but I was not impressed with the low caliber of your argument.