beatgammit

I am Christian and I believe in the possibility of life on other planets. I believe that God could have created other civilizations much like our own to live out their own existences. If we somehow meet these other peoples, I believe that we can learn much about them. I also support what you guys said about not disproving the bible; that isn't science's goal, science just tries to find out the most it can about the world.That being said, I think this is an interesting find, but something that we cannot really capitalize on in our present condition, as our science hasn't progress far enough to make any real use of this finding. I think it is a great find in that it supports the idea of life somewhere else in the universe. Hopefully we can find habitable planets closer to our own galaxy that we can have a chance to explore. Often times, science fiction makes aliens seem scary and destructive, but I believe that if we find some other life in the universe, they will be similar in motive to us, just trying to find out as much as possible. Hopefully we can approach this the same way.

Exaggeration: I would want to rip their face off of their skull. I do not think that anybody has any excuse to cheat. I would be forgiving of the person who has cheated (I am very religious and believe in second chances). I would be willing to take them back if they truly felt remorse for what they have done. Them cheating would definitely put romance on hold until trust is built back. All in all, cheating is a very bad thing and is not kosher (pardon the expression) at all in any case. Go through the proper channels (divorce if married or break-up if dating) if you want separation.

I'm Christian (Mormon/LDS) and I believe wholly in my religion. My religion holds that human life is very important to one's salvation. We believe that the same ideas/passions will exist in the after-life as in this life, so if one is not in the frame of mind to accept our gospel, then they will not accept it in the here-after (but they WILL have an opportunity to do so). We also believe that certain ordinances must be performed, such as baptism, conferring of the Holy Ghost, conferring of priesthood, and many others (many are performed in our temples such as marriages). We believe that all religions are good and attempt to guide people back to Christ, but we also believe that we are the restored Church of Christ, the same Church as in Christ's day. As such, we believe that we are the "correct" Church, meaning we have everything restored. This is not saying that all other churches are wrong, just they they do not have the fulness of the truth as we believe that we have. I respect everyone's religion, and so does our Church. We believe that we have the truth of the gospel.If you have any questions regarding my religion (I know you probably don't know much about Mormons), feel free to ask, I will not be offended and will try to give as concise a response as possible.

My friend told me that we have more murders in Washington DC (our beloved Capitol) than deaths in Iraq over the course of the Iraq war. We need to focus our energies more at home on crime control than worry about the war over in Iraq. I support the War in Iraq, regardless of the casualty cost. The casualty cost is minimal when compared to any other war that we've been involved in (Vietnam, WWII, Civil, even the War of 1812).

Paranoid: LowSchizoid: ModerateSchizotypal: LowAntisocial: LowBorderline: LowHistrionic: LowNarcissistic: LowAvoidant: LowDependent: LowObsessive-Compulsive: LowThis test is not good at all. Most of the questions are poorly worded and most of the answers lean toward a "yes" answer.

I don't believe in a past life. I believe that this is the only "mortal" existence that we have, and after we have proven ourselves, we are set in our eternal rest. I DO believe in a premortal life (one where we are all spirits and lived with God) which we left to get our bodies. I voted YES because in eternity I want to remember all of the good times that I have had on this earth.

Gambling is an addiction like any other. Gamers convince themselves that they can beat the odds (through a "system"), but without cheating, there is absolutely no way to beat the house. Overall, the house ALWAYS wins, or else the casinos/horse betting places/etc would go out of business. To stop betting, one must convince himself/herself that betting is not a good pursuit and that he/she cannot win the money back. They must avoid any type of betting and rely on friends to keep them honest. There are many support groups to help in this pursuit. Over time, all honest betters lose. It is a statistical truth. If you play long enough, you will lose, that's how casinos make money.

I am not a Catholic (LDS in fact), but I have a pretty good understanding of what it means to be Catholic. My main argument against the Catholic church is the claim to priesthood. I believe that the priesthood (God's power given to man) is necessary for a church to be "correct" as Christ's original church in the New Testament had the priesthood. Catholics claim to have the priesthood, by providence of a bishop who received it and then started a church, but I do not believe that they do in fact have the priesthood. None of the Protestants claim to have a direct line to the priesthood, claiming a "priesthood of all believers" but the Catholics do claim this line. As a Mormon, every priesthood holder can trace his priesthood back to Joseph Smith, and from there to John the Baptist (for the "lesser"/Aaronic/Levitical priesthood) or Peter, James and John (for the "greater"/Melchizidek priesthood). While our claim rests on the assumption that Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet, the Catholic church's claim rests on some bishop that claims to have gotten the priesthood bestowed on him. The Catholic church claims that this chain has been unbroken, but the Catholic church has been reorganized so many times that this is improbable.

My understanding of Christian is any religion who accepts Jesus Christ as their personal savior. Each Christian religion does not believe exactly the same thing, but they must believe the Bible to be the word of God. Catholics ARE Christian in this respect. Catholics do not adhere to mainstream Christian, but they are still technically Christian.

I DO believe that this is a problem. I am Christian (Mormon actually) and I have read the Bible completely (Old Testament and New Testament) plus our Book of Mormon and many other religious texts. Old Testament: I did not find the Old Testament to be all that valuable in everyday life. Most of the important stuff comes from Deuteronomy, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Daniel, and Malachi. Deuteronomy has most of the principles of the early Jewish faith (it also contains a copy of the 10 commandments) and also has a similar warning as Revelation has (Revelation 22:19). Ecclesiastes contains many important teachings. I think Solomon wrote this book, but I am not sure. Isaiah contains many revelations that pertain to the second coming. While it is often confusing, once understood, this book is very important. Daniel also has some important revelations. Malachi has one very important revelation found in Mal. 4:5-6 ("turn the hearts of the children to the fathers, and the hearts of the fathers to their children" or something like that). New Testament: The Four Standard works are great, I love the Acts, Hebrews is one of my favorites, and Revelation is VERY important. James 1:5 (if any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God) is very important to my religion. Revelation talks about the second coming in great detail. Hebrews is a good account of Paul? unto the Hebrews and gives a great argument for the Christ.

This may not be true. I took a CS class on processors, gates, etc and my teacher said that the more you overclock, the larger chance you have of data collision. This usually does not have that big of an effect, but if you drastically overclock it, like you suggest, you run a very large risk of messing up data signals. Lots of Overclocking -> lots of data signal collision lots of data signal collision -> messed up computations messed up computations -> computer lock-up or even data corruption (that's no good) This architecture sounds too good to be true, so I would have to assume that they are doing something else to keep the processing power up with the lower power intake (overclocking anyone?).

There are programs that copy a CD directly from one to the other without bothering what the data on the CD says, so I would look at some of those solutions. I did a quick search and came up with this. According to the site I got it from, this does basically the same thing as Ghost does. I hope this helps!!

According to the Javadoc for ArrayList, the Array list runs in amortized constant time, not constant time. This means that it is almost constant time, but not quite. I do not know the mechanics of it, but it is probably very similar to how a List works. The best part of an ArrayList is random access, which is faster than a List. A List is faster if elements are taken from the beginning or the end of the list. Both List and ArrayList have constant time adding of elements (just make the end pointer point to a new object and update references), but ArrayList does some extra stuff to make it have random access. An ArrayList could potentially create additional "overflow" arrays to hold data past its capacity, and then leave an address to that location at the end of the last array, or some other means of expanding capacity without copying the entire array. I am not sure of the specifics. Sorry for the crappy answer, and it probably didn't answer your question, but that is basically what I know for sure.

I love Ubuntu. I've been using it for a little bit now and have been very happy. I have run into some problems, but that's just me being a dufus and trying to mess with stuff that I have no idea what it does (screwed up my $PATH for a little while). Basically, here's my top three:1. Ubuntu2. Fedora3. Red HatNext time you make a list, please put in Ubuntu as its gaining in popularity VERY quickly (even Google is using it as part of its Goobuntu project).

I would have to go with Linux, as Linux is free, quite stable (depending on the distro), has increasing amounts of available software, and can network easily with most other OS's. Linux can read Windows' hard-drive partitions, but not visa versa (I've had some trouble with that). Linux is very customizable, allowing the user to choose different desktop environments (not just themes like in Windows, but a completely different look and feel). The one set-back is that it is not widely accepted or funded. Windows already has a captive audience that is not often willing to try something new. I know many happy Linux users that have tried many different versions of Linux and that swear by their particular flavor.With Ubuntu (what I use now), Linux is MUCH more accessible to the average user, allowing the advanced user to customize it while allowing the basic user to merely use it.It all chalks up to preference: whether you like a guaranteed solution that everyone uses, or whether you'd like to branch out a little and try something that you may like even more. I've branched out, and I have enjoyed the results.

Oh, now I understand what you are saying. I still think that it would not work because you would have to bring a lot of gas on board to make it effective. All of this gas is lost matter (well, lost to us). The ship would need to be massive to hold enough gas to make this even feasible. I think our better bet would be to use nuclear power and just throw the waste into space somewhere. Nuclear power uses very little (respectively) matter to make an immense amount of electricity. Good thinking though, it was a creative concept.

I voted against. First off, don't crucify (sorry for the imagery) me for my beliefs. I am very religious and I believe that every fetus has a spirit and, thus, each fetus is a person. If we have to sacrifice potential people to save the existing ones, this is morally reprehensible to me. I was watching House the other night, and a mother had the choice of sacrificing her unborn fetus (around 20 weeks old or so) to save her life or dying with the fetus (having a VERY slim chance of saving the fetus). The mother chose the latter, even though she had nearly no chance to live. Also, what diseases could stem-cells potentially cure?? If it could cure AIDS, what are we doing? We are permitting premarital sex and sodomy, both of which are morally reprehensible to me. Sure, there are innocent people with AIDS that we could save, but at what risk?? Should we risk the morals that found our society for a few children that have been dealt a nasty hand in life?? What about Darwinism, the strongest surviving? This may sound harsh, but it is meant to be an exaggeration. I believe that we should attempt to find cures to AIDS and cancer, but not through taking the lives of unborn children. If we cure AIDS and cancer, there will just be another big problem that will hit us. Will we turn to murder if we find that will help??

I think this was an awesome idea for an April Fool's joke; you got to love Google's sense of humor. This is probably part of one of those Friday projects that got shot down by some common-sense thinking individual. What WOULD be cool, though, is if Google offered to send your emails to your fax machine every day or offered to send an email, with a price, to a bunch of people in hard copy (basically doing the printing and packaging as a service).

I will have to echo the popular concensus on this one: 1000 is DEFINITELY enough to get any search you want. Limiting the search results forces people to make better queries. If the user is forced to make better queries, they find what they are looking for faster and easier, thus increasing the chance that they will search on Google again. The limit forces the user to stop and think, "Is my query REALLY what I'm looking for?" More relevant results depend on better searches. Most of the time, what I am looking for is within the first 5 results and I hardly ever have to go beyond the first page. If I go beyond the first page, I ask myself that same question, "Is this REALLY what I'm looking for?" I refine my search and get what I'm looking for, plus several more VERY relevant results.

I would just look at the HTML of the page and find the picture (by finding text around it or the caption). Then I just type in the path into my address bar and I'm good to go.

This is AMAZING!! This is a really cool idea. The only stipulation I can think of is running out of energy. Since this gun is energy dependent, it must constantly be hooked up to an electricity source, which is not always possible. Also, the weapon would have to be quite large to allow for the spinning that would have to take place. I would be really interested to find out why it could not jam. If this works as it says it works, I can definitely see this as being used for mounted attacks (atop humvees, tanks, etc) and security (prison, embassy, police precinct). We will definitely have to wait to see what comes of this DREAD.

From what I understand, viruses are not alive because they cannot reproduce on their own. They need to "infest" a cell to take advantage of its reproductive abilities. A virus is merely biological matter that acts as "instructions" to cells to aid in reproduction. If these instructions cause harm, then they cause disease; if they don't, then they are benign. Viruses are that awkward inbetween of living and inanimate; they have characteristics of a living thing, but they are not living. They are definitely of a higher order than, say, a rock. Bacteria, on the other hand, ARE living, as they reproduce on their own and attack other organisms. Viruses only attach to other cells in order to "reproduce" inside of them, or more fundamentally, make copies of themselves. Viruses don't move of their own accord, they must be passed by something else, like blood, spit, or contact.

Personally, I believe in creation, but I also believe in evolution. I believe that all animals evolve to fit changing needs. Many of my friends do not believe in evolution, so I like to hear about new proof, or at least quite conclusive evidence, for evolutionary theory.Evolution takes a long, long time to occur, as it involves nature "choosing" traits; those animals who are better adapted to their environment will survive to reproduce, passing on genes to future generations. If these snakes were placed into an all left-swirl environment, the ones who were better adapted to that environment would survive to reproduce, those who did not might not survive. Over a couple generations, leanings toward the left-aligned teeth would begin to be noticed.This is very interesting, thank you for sharing.

Recursion is a beast. I hated recursion until I fully understood it, which is what I will try to do for you in this tutorial. To make the "medicine go down", I will use the example of a directory tree (common ground for all). Recursion is fundamentally a method calling itself. This may seem pointless and prone to infinite loops, but it is actually the best, and sometime "only", way of solving a problem. Any problem can be solved without recursion, but some of these can only be solved by "faking" recursion with stacks. Well, what is recursion and how do we use it?? Defining Recursion All recursive methods must have a base case. This base case is the point at which recursion will end. Without a base case, the recursive method will devolve into an infinite loop, and nobody wants that. The base case should be checked first, and then the regular case. To use recursion, you must define the structure in which you are recursing in terms of itself. Let's look at directory trees to get a grasp of this abstract concept: Each folder has children. To get through a directory tree, we must pick a child at each level. This child has children, and each of its children have children until you get to a folder with only files. Say you want to copy a file from somewhere down the tree to the place in which you started. You start at the top, presumably C:\ or My Documents, and go through each level following a path to get to your specified file. At each level, you pick a child and open it. You continue in this until you get to your file of choice. Upon finding this choice, you bring a copy up each level of the path until you get to the top of the tree, where you deposit the file in question. This is recursion in its most elemental state. Recursion can be used in many different pursuits- linked lists (very common), trees (Binary Search Trees, directory trees), XML files (using XPath), sorting, etc. Now that we know what it is and what it can be used for, how do we implement it? Using Recursion In this section, I will walk you through how to create a recursive directory listing, displaying all folders. This program will not be complete, but it will set up the structure for such a listing. Basically, you will have to come up with how you want it displayed; I will show how to visit every folder in a directory tree. First, we must define folder: a folder consists of files and child folders. Wow, this is just begging for a recursive program. Now that we have a working definition, we must make a base case. Our base case for this program will be a folder that has no child folders. Here's our code so far (written in Java): public void printTree(Folder folder){ if(folder.numFolders() == 0){ folder.print(); return; else{ // do something important }}Now we need to make it do something. For that, we will add in code that will do the following: Print the current Folder- this will include any files that are in the folder Print the folder's children- call printTree() with each child folder public void printTree(Folder folder){ if(folder.numFolders() == 0){ folder.print(); return; }else{ // do something important folder.print(); for(int i = 0; i < folder.numFolders(); i++{ folder.getChild(i).print(); } }} Ending Thoughts Recursion is a very powerful tool for dealing with structured information effectively. Recursion should not be used when it can be avoided because it is a memory hog- each recursive call puts another item onto the system runtime stack. Having too many recursive calls will noticeably slow performance of your program. Recursion will almost always be more computationally intensive than a non-recursive solution, but the simpleness of the code often makes up for this time delay. I have used recursion in many solutions including: searching for items in a tree, sorting algorithms, linked lists and others. The key thing to keep in mind is to "trust the recursion". This means to think about the current step and the next step and trust that it will work correctly. Make sure to test any recursive code, as, like any other programming topic, any small mistake can cause huge problems down the line. Good luck!!

I don't understand what exactly you are trying to do, but it seems that you are just maintaining folders of code that the user could edit. If you want to create more than 2 directories, this is pretty simple with recursion. Just recurse through the directories until you find the file you want (or until you display all of the folders/files). If you already have the code for the editor, just add in recursion to get the data from all of the directories. There is plenty of information on the internet if you are confused about recursion.