I believe Germany decided to go zero nuclear by 2022 after the quake in Japan.How's Germany doing with it's solar program? I'm pretty ignorant on the matter but aren't they trying to go almost completely solar by the middle of the century?
Didn't DOS get bought from some idiot who sold it to Gates for less than 2% of what he resold it to IBM?Correct. Microsoft was around longer than Windows has been around, starting as a very small company that produced, not even an OS, but a BASIC interpreter for Altair. It was Jobs and others that started with the GUI OS that has evolved into OS X, which they may or may not have stolen from Xerox.
When Gates sold DOS to IBM, he didn't actually own it yet. He sold it to IBM to use on their new home computer line (which they didn't think would be a big market) and then went to finalize the deal with the creator of DOS, buying it for only a few thousand dollars.Didn't DOS get bought from some idiot who sold it to Gates for less than 2% of what he resold it to IBM?
Although I wish not to complain about him, in his old age Bill Gates is repaying his debt by eradicating polio in India and hopefully if all goes to plan, reducing by half the number of new HIV infections by the end of next year.
Really? From my short time here, you seem to be the only one that does it. [DOUBLEPOST=1353197090][/DOUBLEPOST]Are you kidding? That game is practically the halforums official national pastime.
No no, I made a general statement. It wasn't specific towards you. It just seems to me a lot of far righties are all for killing the environment as cost efficiently as possible.Wow. Even the current congress and Obama administration with their trillion dollar per year deficit has nothing on your fiscal policy.
To be clear, "lets fund everyone that asks us for an energy grant" is a really, really bad idea.
Not sure how to approach the rest of your post. Telling me that I think alternative energy is weak and unmanly and that's why I oppose it rather than due to fiscal responsibility as I explained suggests that no matter what I say, you already have me binned and thus there's no point in trying to convince you otherwise.
In his defense, it was an extremely common thing at one point. I've done tons of FTFY post edits, just not as a snarky response.Really? From my short time here, you seem to be the only one that does it. [DOUBLEPOST=1353197090][/DOUBLEPOST]
Not even just that.When Gates sold DOS to IBM, he didn't actually own it yet. He sold it to IBM to use on their new home computer line (which they didn't think would be a big market) and then went to finalize the deal with the creator of DOS, buying it for only a few thousand dollars.
The real genius was that Gates didn't sell DOS for a flat rate. He negotiated that he would earn a small profit for each computer sold, which again IBM didn't think would ever turn out to be much.
TIL Bill Gates is Catholic.Although I wish not to complain about him, in his old age Bill Gates is repaying his debt by eradicating polio in India and hopefully if all goes to plan, reducing by half the number of new HIV infections by the end of next year.
Wrong. He was born one, but does not practice the religion, nor cares for it. Unless being born in a religion automatically makes you join up for it, but then if we take that logic, half of us are or will be probably Mormons, as they can convert any people into Mormonism post-death.TIL Bill Gates is Catholic.
I don't know what's more baffling: Your casual disregard for the multitude of faith-based organizations and people who do a ton of good, or your gross misunderstanding of theology.He is saving millions of lives for doing good itself, not being a selfish motherfucker trying to buy a piece of heaven.
On theology, shoving the Catholic tag on someone who not once in his life practiced it, nor has anything to do with it, is simply illogical, or a desperate grasp to say that a man who has done as much good the past 5 years as the entire Catholic church, without any of the evil that the church inflicts, is somehow Catholic just because he was baptized. (I myself was baptized, then converted into three other religions that I also no longer practice, and now simply believe in karma).I don't know what's more baffling: Your casual disregard for the multitude of faith-based organizations and people who do a ton of good, or your gross misunderstanding of theology.
Pity the church is too busy threatening priests with excommunication if they reveal child abuse to authorities and promising crusades against gay marriage to remember that.There is a famous story told in Chassidic literature that addresses this very question. The Master teaches the student that God created everything in the world to be appreciated, since everything is here to teach us a lesson.
One clever student asks “What lesson can we learn from atheists? Why did God create them?”
The Master responds “God created atheists to teach us the most important lesson of them all — the lesson of true compassion. You see, when an atheist performs and act of charity, visits someone who is sick, helps someone in need, and cares for the world, he is not doing so because of some religious teaching. He does not believe that god commanded him to perform this act. In fact, he does not believe in God at all, so his acts are based on an inner sense of morality. And look at the kindness he can bestow upon others simply because he feels it to be right.”
“This means,” the Master continued “that when someone reaches out to you for help, you should never say ‘I pray that God will help you.’ Instead for the moment, you should become an atheist, imagine that there is no God who can help, and say ‘I will help you.’”
Amen. There was a time the church ruled Europe, we call it the Dark Ages, or also "the only time a people evolved so little over such a long time"
On theology, shoving the Catholic tag on someone who not once in his life practiced it, nor has anything to do with it, is simply illogical, or a desperate grasp to say that a man who has done as much good the past 5 years as the entire Catholic church, without any of the evil that the church inflicts, is somehow Catholic just because he was baptized. (I myself was baptized, then converted into three other religions that I also no longer practice, and now simply believe in karma).
If Baptism = forever Catholic even when the person publicly denies follwoing that religion, then the Jews are Mormons, for they were post-posthumously Baptized in the Mormon way through a proxy. ;-)
Now, on the good?
Here is a story that I was told back when I was young, that explains the comparison better-
Oh absolutely. Giving out of fear would seem rather ignoble. Fortunately, the Bible happens to agree with you in this aspect of giving:If I were to threaten my children to throw them in a pit of fire, unless they'd give some money to the poor, could their giving to the poor be considered as noble as the act of another person who gave it just for the act of goodness?
Private acts of charity, considered virtuous only if not done for others to admire, are seen as a Christian duty.
Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' in front of others, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.—Matthew 6:1The outward and an inward giving of alms:
Here Jesus places the primary focus on the motives behind such acts, which should be love.
Rather, give as alms what is inside, and then everything will be clean for you!—Luke 11:41Giving of the rich versus the poor:
Here Jesus contrasts the giving of the rich and the poor
He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury. And He saw a poor widow putting in two small copper coins. And He said, 'Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all of them; for they all out of their surplus put into the offering; but she out of her poverty put in all that she had to live on.'—Luke 21:1-4Giving out of Love and not out of duty:
He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'—Matthew 25:45
That's people's fault.Hey, when religion stops telling science to fuck off and die, maybe it will be able to stay out of science threads.
Never said it wasn't.That's people's fault.
It's funny because the term itself comes from a bunch of religious folks... and the period in question was caused by the fall of Rome to the barbarians.Amen. There was a time the church ruled Europe, we call it the Dark Ages, or also "the only time a people evolved so little over such a long time"
Its not named because of religion, but ironically, it was the crusades that actually showed poor backwards Europe that there was such a thing called science, real medicine and philosophy, Europe started to rise again (helped also by what they saw in China.First of all, your definition of Dark Ages is absolutely incorrect. Dark Ages was referenced as thus only because of the scarcity of historical records from the time and the term Dark Ages itself is rarely used in academia because of the common perception that it carries a negative connotation and has nothing to do with the church or religion. Because of many recent discoveries, that particular time period has become more known to us, which why is now widely know as the "early middle-ages".
No problem with that. My wife's Catholic and my mother's a Muslim.What individual priests, the pope or whoever does is one thing, but I take issue with the rather broad paintbrush being used on certain ideas.
Even in the absence of religion you've discovered a way to judge people's character by assuming their motivation for any given action. Cool story bro.But Bill Gates is not a Catholic, thus his mission is nobler, than one that has religion behind it.
Gates began to appreciate the expectations others had of him when public opinion mounted suggesting that he could give more of his wealth to charity. Gates studied the work ofAndrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, and in 1994 sold some of his Microsoft stock to create the William H. Gates Foundation. In 2000, Gates and his wife combined three family foundations into one to create the charitable Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which is the largest transparently operated charitable foundation in the world.[74] The foundation allows benefactors access to information regarding how its money is being spent, unlike other major charitable organizations such as the Wellcome Trust.[75][76] The generosity and extensive philanthropy of David Rockefeller has been credited as a major influence. Gates and his father met with Rockefeller several times, and modeled their giving in part on the Rockefeller family's philanthropic focus, namely those global problems that are ignored by governments and other organizations.[77] As of 2007, Bill and Melinda Gates were the second-most generous philanthropists in America, having given over $28 billion to charity.[78] They plan to eventually give 95% of their wealth to charity.[79]
The foundation was at the same time criticized because it invests assets that it has not yet distributed with the exclusive goal of maximizing return on investment. As a result, its investments include companies that have been charged with worsening poverty in the same developing countries where the Foundation is attempting to relieve poverty. These include companies that pollute heavily, and pharmaceutical companies that do not sell into the developing world.[80] In response to press criticism, the foundation announced in 2007 a review of its investments, to assess social responsibility.[81] It subsequently canceled the review and stood by its policy of investing for maximum return, while using voting rights to influence company practices.[82] The Gates Millennium Scholars program has been criticized for its exclusion of Caucasian students.[83][84]
Gates's wife urged people to learn a lesson from the philanthropic efforts of the Salwen family, which had sold its home and given away half of its value, as detailed in The Power of Half.[85] Gates and his wife invited Joan Salwen to Seattle to speak about what the family had done, and on December 9, 2010, Gates, investor Warren Buffett, and Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook's CEO) signed a promise they called the "Gates-Buffet Giving Pledge", in which they promised to donate to charity at least half of their wealth over the course of time.[86][87][88]
Sources needed. Funny how everything has sources, but for the only part that agrees with your arguement, I'm actually registering in wikipedia to add this much needed -I don't think Gates was necessarily noble. Other rich people pretty much told him he needed to start giving to charity to keep the populous from turning on him.
From Wikipedia-
On "presuming" intentions, if you've gone to church once, you've been told you have to be good to go to heaven. I still would take the actions of someone who has not been told that some higher divinity would judge him every day.Even in the absence of religion you've discovered a way to judge people's character by assuming their motivation for any given action.
So here's the real Gates, a nerd who married a woman who was charitable who told him about some problems she had seen, and so he went and created a foundation to solve them.
The motivation of married men everywhere.So he didn't do it to make up for being bad, he did it because he likes having sex with his wife... ok, definitely not catholic...
Dark Ages suffered technologically because of catholic ruleLook, the entire argument that you need religion to create an oppressive dictatorial regime bla bla bla drunk rant based on some other thread....
P*ssy, the world's greatest motivation, even before money and religion existed.So he didn't do it to make up for being bad, he did it because he likes having sex with his wife... ok, definitely not catholic...