But you are forgetting about Sin entering the world. Sin (and Satan) is who should be blamed for cancer, sickness, pain, abuse, suffering and so on. Sin is like the world's worst computer bug. The only way to fix this "bug" is to ask the extreme "programmer" for the fix. He offers a "fix" but it requires us to accept His fix for it, which is accepting that we cannot fix the bug ourselves and we need Him (Jesus) to come and do it for us.
Although God does care about our physical health and well being, He is ultimately much more concerned about our Spiritual well being. God is eternal. Our lives are going to end on this earth. Death was a product of man's choice in the garden of Eden. It pained Him that we made (and still make) the choices we do. It is like we keep downloading software with bugs all the time. God is willing to clean up our computer for us if we ask Him too but it would be better if we worked hard at keeping our software free of those "bugs." I pray that God will help me live a sinful life. I don't want to grieve Him, out of love for Him. Once we truly understand the nature of God our attitude towards Him changes and in response we want to do everything we can to please Him and keep our lives, with His help, as "bug" free as possible.
Arg, you violated the unspoken "no preaching" agreement. This exchange is over. |
|
|
|
The point was that evolution is based solely on mass and energy. Information is not even factored into the equation. However, information cannot come from just a big bang. This is not evident in our world. So the point is that there is a "non-material" element to information. The question then is "Where did information come from?" Our DNA has very complex information encoded in it. That shows a supremely intelligent entity put the code there. It would be like having a computer with an highly complex design in the software yet we just all think "Wow. It is great how that software just evolved from nowhere." Why is that not possible? Software on a computer is much less complex than our DNA.
Patterns occur naturally - no help required from a 'designer'. Many patterns occur in nature without the help of a designer – snowflakes, tornados, hurricanes, sand dunes, stalactites, rivers and ocean waves... DNA is a molecule with certain chemical properties that causes it to build proteins. It is no more special or magical than any other molecule. Simply by natural selection patters that reproduce often are more successful in well, reproducing. Over time this become more complex representing something similar to a "code". The analogy with the computer does (as said before) not work here as we did not start by having a full build computer with no software and nobody is claiming that. Edit: To late, but wow! also works on your next argument. |
|
|
|
Creationists mostly deserve kindness and understanding, not scorn.
Not anymore. Their blatant attempt to corrupt and twist science in order to re-package their delusion is unforgivable. It will be met head on with reason and logic. Did you not see my post directly above yours? There are laws that show that that information had to come from an intelligent source. Who is doing the "twisting" and "corrupting?" There is plenty of logic and reason to support intelligent design. If you are so sure of your position just give me an explanation of why you do not agree with my points above. Otherwise I will assume that you are not using your reason and logic to counter them. Actually you only make one point: 1) Since the DNA code of all life forms is clearly within the definition domain of information, we conclude there must be a Sender. all other points assume that point 1 is true and therefore don't stand on their own. Your conclusion that there must be a sender is also your premise. There must be a sender. And your other arguments proof the sender by a proof that is only possible when you already assume that there is a sender. TL.DR. The argument that there must be an intelligent sender for information to exist is just pulled out of thin air, with no proof that it is true or any arguments to back it up. Without this assumption the rest of the arguments are totally hollow. How does a robot work? If we take away the computer chip the robot is useless. We can look at the laws of nature and see that without information things will not function. Without DNA, all living creatures would not be able to do anything either. So this is a major point. There is information encoded in us. There had to be a sender of this information. Who that "Sender" is can be debatable, of course. As I am thinking about it, the last three points can stand on their own as well: 5) Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, and since information also originates from man, we conclude that man's nature must have a non-material component (Spirit) 6) Since information is non-material entity we conclude that the assumption "The universe is composed solely of mass and energy" is false. 7) Since biological information originates from an intelligent sender and all theories of chemical and biological evolution require that information must originate solely from mass and energy alone (no sender) we conclude all theories or concepts of chemical or biological evolution are false. Information is non-material. It is kind of like having a computer chip but with no information on it. Let's say we did evolve. It would be kind of like a computer evolving with a hard drive, but where would the software come from that runs the computer? The same could be said about our bodies. If our bodies evolved, where did the encoding of our DNA come from? As far as I can see evolution is based solely on mass and energy alone but information does not come out of mass and energy alone. 7. can't stand on it's own. 5. "and cannot originate from material quantities," assumption out of thin air. + "since information also originates from man" biological information (as you call it) doesn't originate from man --> false 6. Information requires mass and/or energy to exist. Without Mass and Energy there is no Information. This point is simply false. Also the analogy with Hardware and Software may be nice to simplify organic live. But they can't be ultimately used to describe it. That a robot has a chip with software in order to work that needs to be programmed by a programmer is a useless observation to determine if live is "programmed" The robot analogy reveals no clues about any sender. This is basically just the "Blind Watchmaker" Argument, which watches only the complete end outcome. Take away one part and the construction doesn't work any more. Take away one part and the construction doesn't work any more, therefore everything that doesn't work without all parts has to be constructed. But constructions simply are not live. But Rannasha has already answered better. |
|
|
|
Creationists mostly deserve kindness and understanding, not scorn.
Not anymore. Their blatant attempt to corrupt and twist science in order to re-package their delusion is unforgivable. It will be met head on with reason and logic. Did you not see my post directly above yours? There are laws that show that that information had to come from an intelligent source. Who is doing the "twisting" and "corrupting?" There is plenty of logic and reason to support intelligent design. If you are so sure of your position just give me an explanation of why you do not agree with my points above. Otherwise I will assume that you are not using your reason and logic to counter them. Actually you only make one point: 1) Since the DNA code of all life forms is clearly within the definition domain of information, we conclude there must be a Sender. all other points assume that point 1 is true and therefore don't stand on their own. Your conclusion that there must be a sender is also your premise. There must be a sender. And your other arguments proof the sender by a proof that is only possible when you already assume that there is a sender. TL.DR. The argument that there must be an intelligent sender for information to exist is just pulled out of thin air, with no proof that it is true or any arguments to back it up. Without this assumption the rest of the arguments are totally hollow. Why do you conclude, there must be an intelligent sender? |
|
|
|
Sorry to here that, but I honestly can't understand how someone can invest everything they have into something experimental like Bitcoin. Have you heard "Never Invest what you can't afford to loose" before? There is a reason why many Bitcoiners said that. I kept most of my Bitcoins in Mt.Gox, hoping to sell them off at a high price and then buy them again at a low price, buy low, sell high.
So trading is a zero sum game. You are aware that for everyone who wins at trading, there is someone who looses. You used your entire savings for trading, where you can loose all. Besides that. Do you have experience in trading. Do you know what you are doing or did you just trade, cause it's so "simple"? In that case you basically gambled with your savings. Next there was this wonderful ne currency given to you. One where you don't have to trust anyone else and the first thing you do is just trust it all to some company. (That's something I really can't understand. Why, why store you coins on an exchange, goes for everyone who didn't gamble, er trade there) Sorry, if you story is true at all, it seems to me like you went all in without having any clue what you where doing. If not for Gox you would probably lost you money somewhere else anyway, maybe the next casino. |
|
|
|
Furthermore please explain this. I am dying to know where these transitional half species fossils can be found.
What do you mean half-species? Are you really asking for a fish with legs or wings or something? That is what evolutionists allege happened. Really it shouldn't be that hard to find ONE fossil, considering they say the transition from fish to amphibians was over 100 million years+. Then I would also like to see the half reptile half mammal, since evolutionists also allege that reptiles became mammals over 100 million years. 100 million years of "evolution" should produce some fossil evidence, right?? Then I guess these mammals would have had to then move back into the oceans and become whales, since you do know whales are mammals right? Also how did these reptile/mammals just become warm blooded? I'm gonna take a wild guess and say you voted for obama too... No one claims evolution works like this. You know, 100 Million Years means Millions of Generations each barely noticeable different to the one before. There are no sudden cages like a reptile suddenly lays an egg and a bird hatches. I'm really shocked that this seems to be so hard to understand. You understand aging? No child goes to bed and wakes up as a full grown adult. Each day it's barely noticeable older than the day before. But you still believe in aging, do you? |
|
|
|
Daher meine Frage: würdet ihr eine potentielle Bezahloption mit Bitcoins bei Pizza.de genauso begeistert benutzen wie ich, oder hab ich mich da mit meiner Behauptung dem Support gegenüber etwas weit aus dem Fenster gelehnt?!
>Jein. Ich habe schon gefühlte 100 mal bei lieferservice.de bestellt und mit BTC bezahlt. Nutzt das also schon. Aber ich würde warscheinlich nicht zu pizza.de wechseln wenn die jetzt auch BTC akzeptieren. Es sein denn es hätte irgendeinen Vorteil für mich. |
|
|
|
few voters
so sad
I think it gets buried in spam sadly Yes, this place has become way to noisy. Especially for users that go by "Show unread posts since last visit." to browse the Forum (and don't have set Boards on Ignore). |
|
|
|
Und einen Staat gegen den Willen von 94% der Bevölkerung, egal welcher in meinen Augen verschobenen Ideologie die nun anhängen (Soviet Socialist Republic  ), aufrecht zu erkalten, kann ja von Systemen (Westen) die sich als demokratisch bezeichnen eigentlich wirklich nicht unterstützt werden.  Darum geht es doch über haupt nicht. Es geht um ein illegales Einfallen russischer Truppen in die Ukraine. Was mit der Krim später passiert ist offen. Wichtig ist dabei, dass keine Menschen zu schaden kommen und das wird immer unwahrscheinlich je mehr Soldaten der scheiß Putin schickt. Ja, ein Einmarsch Russischer Truppen in ein fremdes Staatsgebiet ist absolut nicht OK. Sorry, wenn mein Post da falsch rüber kam. |
|
|
|
Naja, zur Situation explizit in der Krim: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_sovereignty_referendum,_1991A referendum on sovereignty was held in Crimean Oblast on 20 January 1991.[1] Voters were asked whether they wanted to re-establish the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, which had been abolished in 1945. The proposal was approved by 94% of voters. Mal davon ausgehend, dass damals freies Wahlrecht herrschte und das Ergebnis nicht verfälscht wurde, wenn 94% der Bevölkerung einen unabhängigen Staat wollen, dann ist das eigentlich klar was hier passieren sollte. Allerdings bezweifle ich persönlich, dass das Putins Ziel ist  Ein lupenreiner Demokrat ist er ja wirklich nicht, das ihm der Willen der Bevölkerung auch nur im geringsten interessiert halt ich für unwahrscheinlich, trotzdem wär das wohl noch das beste, was aus dieser Situation entstehen könnte. (Souveräner Staat. Keine Russische Provinz) Und einen Staat gegen den Willen von 94% der Bevölkerung, egal welcher in meinen Augen verschobenen Ideologie die nun anhängen (Soviet Socialist Republic ), aufrecht zu erkalten, kann ja von Systemen (Westen) die sich als demokratisch bezeichnen eigentlich wirklich nicht unterstützt werden. |
|
|
|
Mt.Gox schuldet seinen Kunden siebenhundertfünfzigtausend Bitcoins. Die Bewertung, dass dies ca 400 Millionen USD entspricht bezieht sich aber nur auf den Kurs. Ein Käufer müsste die 750.000 Bitcoin *am Markt* einkaufen um seinen Verbindlichkeiten zu erfüllen.
Mit großem Glück bekommt man an *allen Märkten* vielleicht 30.000 Coins zusammen, wenn man diese komplett leerkauft. Was dann mit dem Kurs passiert, kann sich jeder Vorstellen. Die 750.000 Bitcoin sind am Markt nicht wiederzubeschaffen.
Das ist so die Sache mit staatlichen Zwangswährungen. Spätestens vor Gericht wirst du immer gezwungen sein, diese zu akzeptieren, egal ob es bei dem Streit um Schweinehälften, Feuerwerkskörper oder eben Bitcoins geht. Kein Gericht der Welt wird eine Rückerstattung in BTC beschließen, sondern immer in der jeweiligen Landeswährung. Wenn jemand Gox kaufen würde, hätten die Schuldner wohl keine andere Wahl als $, €, etc. zu akzeptieren. Die Anzahl der BTC die Gox verschuldet ist, ist egal. Selbst wenn Gox mehr BTC in den Büchern hätte als überhaupt existieren, währe für einen Käufer nur der Gegenwert in $ relevant. |
|
|
|
Eine mögliche Alternative wäre es, nicht Coins zu blacklisten sondern stattdessen eine whitelist zu führen. Ähnlich wie bei Bildern gäbe es eine Provenance - Eine Herkunftsbestätigung. Diese Bitcoins wurden inden letzten x Transaktionen nur von verifizierten Nutzern für legale Transaktionen verwendet. Das würde auch einige anstehende Probleme bei der Geldwäscheregulierung lösen.
Gelöst werden könnte das ganze z.B. durch eine (oder vermutlich mehrere) Trusted parties bei denen ein User sich (und seine Adressen) registriert und verifiziert und damit am Ende für eine Coin nachweisen kann das es eine ungebrochene verifizierte Kette von Besitzern gibt. Das zwingt einen ja noch lange nicht alle Coins so signieren zu lassen aber große Firmen werden im zeifelsfall lieber solche Coins annehmen als nicht signierte. Vor allem wenn diese signierten Coins verhindern, dass sie KYCV Regelungen für die transaktion anwenden müssen. Schliesslich sind die Coins im Zweifelsfall zurückverfolgbar.
Das ganze hätte den Vorteil, dass ich nicht ausversehen Coins wertlos mache die im Besitz von irgendwelchen Usern sind die nichts mit dem ursprünglichen verbrechen zu tun hatten und gleichzeitig verhindere, dass irgendein Räuber die Coins aus seinem letzten Raubzug verwendet um sich ein Auto zu kaufen.
Zusätzlich müssen diese (zertifizierenden) Stellen ja auch nicht staatlich sein sondern können ruhig dezentral organisiert sein. So lange sie sich an grundlegende Standards bei der Verifizierung halten ist es im grunde egal wer eine Coin als sauber zertifiziert.
Sehr gute Idee. Schuldig bis zum Beweis der Unschuld. Genau so sollte man bei allem vorgehen. [/Sarkasmus] |
|
|
|
This has been addressed numerous times. For small transactions it is a non-issue. Even before a transaction is confirmed, the network will reject an attempted double-spend.
I am not sure I agree "for small transactions it is non-issue". I think people are envisioning 200 people with the same coin in 200 starbucks and not 200 computers performing a dual DDoS of the blockchain with simultaneous transactions. If you can double spend thousands of small transactions simultaneously while doing a DDoS or DNS Man in the middle attack on the Blockchain this could be huge. As more online products take advantage of Bitcoin I could order 1000 different computer games simultaneously all with the same coin (DRM will use a blockchain / colorcoins/mastercoin concept to prevent piracy in the future). I could also make make 100 small conversions of same Bitcoin for different Litecoins in the future (Peer to peer crytpo to crypto currency exchanges will eventually be significant number of transactions). There are hundreds of examples where a well timed low value high volume transaction can occur on line. There is always the problem, that you need the receiver to know your false transaction first, before any of the other transactions. If you do 1000 transactions with the same coin, how will you make sure the receiver knows only about the 1 transaction he is supposed to know about and not the remaining 999. Archiving that would be very expensive. That's why it makes sense to wait on high value goods. |
|
|
|
I see that really as an issue if BTC get WIDE adoption... Am i missing something here?
Yes. Every Bitcoin node, that already knows about your 1. Transaction would immediately recognize every other transaction as double spend. So in order to do this you would have to make sure somehow, that the first shop knows about your first transaction, but every other shop doesn't. In order to make this possible, you would somehow need to separate each shop from the Bitcoin network and connect them to your Node only. That's hard, risky and very expensive. If all the shops use the same Payment provider, let's say BitPay, it's impossible. |
|
|
|
|
US ≠ World
I have never seen the currency symbol positioned before the numbers where I live. So instead of confusing everyone here, due to the outcome of some random poll, I think I will continue putting it after the numbers.
|
|
|
|
Als (fast) stiller Mitleser kann ich mich nur immer wieder darüber amüsieren, wie sich hier erwachsene Menschen zanken wie Kleinkinder.
(...)
Wer sagt das hier sämtliche Poster über 18 sind? Ein typisches Beispiel imo das es im Netz noch an Möglichkeiten mangelt Bereiche mit gutem Content vor massenweisem Einfall von schlechtem/kindergarten Content zu schützen. Was nicht zwangsläufig heisst das hier immer 1A content geliefert wurde.  Ich würde sagen, aufgrund der Aufmerksamkeit auf den Bitcoin in den vergangenen ~12 Monaten, hat dieses Forum einfach eine Art Eternal September Effekt. Sprich einfach einen größeren Zuwachs an neuen Users als die existierende Community Assimilieren kann. Die alte Netiquette hier ist damit zerstört und wir können nur langsam eine neue schaffen. Mit dem Alter der Personen hat das IMO nicht viel zu tun. |
|
|
|
|
Prices for GH/s know only one direction.
|
|
|
|
Möglicherweise hängt der Kursanstieg heute mit genau diesem Chat zusammen...Hoffnung statt Befreiungsschlag?
Ich lese aus dem IRC Log keine Hoffnung raus. Im Prinzip bestätigt Mark dort die Vermutung "alles ist weg". Ich denke für Kursentwicklung ist MtGox bis auf zukünftige Überaschungen erst mal erledigt. technically speaking it's not "lost" just yet, just temporarily unavailable Diesen Satz finde ich sehr seltsam! Wenn ich das richtig übersetzte heißt das: es ist jetzt nicht technisch verloren, es nur im Augenblick nicht verfügbar. Ja was den ist es fort oder nur nicht auffindbar? Ich erinnere mal hier ran: http://techcrunch.com/2013/05/16/mt-gox-dwolla-account-money-seizure/Wer weiß, wie viele Konten von Gox tatsächlich einfach eingefroren sind und welche Festplatten evtl. beschlagnahmt. Ich erinnere mich nicht irgendwo gelesen zu haben, dass eingefrorene Konten wieder freigegeben wurden. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
