Posts by Small Mind

Bangladesh cuts off Facebook

Ok, one more reply..

Hi TkH11

I was going to stop posting on this but felt the need to reply. I am not a polymath so don't know everything about everything that the human race has come upon, but I do know enough about physics that nothing indicates that there can't be a creator.

However, I completely understand your position that if something is not only yet to be proven but seems at odds with the current human understanding of the workings of this universe, then you're not going to accept it. No problem with that.

But you do acknowledge that we may never answer the ultimate questions about life, the universe and everything (although it's possible that even Douglas Adams comic account of it is as close to the truth as anything!). We may not have the intellect to achieve this, just like a dog would never be able to understand quantisation of energy levels. But a dog will never be able to understand religion either!

I think I am being found out here though - I mentioned that my faith is personal to me and I don't bang on about it. The main reason is that I think I am open minded and don't like the associated baggage that seems to come with all mainstream religions (e.g. the propensity to preach to others and feel smug or patronising about them going to hell etc.).

Let's all chill - the question of does god exist will never be answered satisfactorily depending on what answer one believes in.

I've been misunderstood but still get what you're saying

I think Fred #257 got my point better. I wasn't trying to inflame by saying that God is the creator of the universe - It's my belief and I fully know that there are very different views to this. I'm just not trying to ram it down people's throats because as I said my faith is a personal thing for me. I don't even ram it down my children's throats!

I love science and would love to be able to understand the real maths behind quantum physics and string theories. Alas I never will as my maths stopped at A-level level and life is too busy for me to spend the time needed (and perhaps, just perhaps, I would never get it as it's beyond my mental capability). Anyway my point is this - I read lots of popular science books from Hawkings to Penrose and Green, but none of these great books indicate to me that there can't be a creator of the universe. Indeed many of the great scientists and theorists of this era believe in God, but I like the fact that those that do don't bang on about it.

Ah but now I'm falling too easily in to the age old problem - we all start trying to justify our own positions, which is just what I don't want to do because my faith is something personal to me.

I still agree with the general point - I wish that people would use their faith to guide their own behaviours and actions (if they need it - because I can't say that one needs religion to tell them that killing is wrong). Instead so many people use religion to tell other people what to do (in oppressive and violent ways sometimes) and it goes back to my fundamental point that I don't agree with this and hence don't agree with this specific example of blocking Facebook.

I wasn't indoctrinated from the age of 5 by the way - my parents tried but I rebelled from an early age as I got in to science and the basic philosophy of not believing anything unless there is robust evidence. However as I get older, what I do see is (sorry for the cliche) that the more we find out, the less we know. This is a great thing to be honest - the human intellect's thirst for knowledge, invention and discovery will never diminish, but nor will the universe's unending depth of complexity and subtlety (or so it seems at the present time). It's almost like our minds were made perfectly for the universe we live in!

Cheers all for a good debate off the back of this censorship thing. No more posts from me on this topic - when it starts looking like the discussion is going down the route of proving or disproving God, I know we're heading in to a cul-de-sac!

I do understand..

Yes I understand and indeed respect your points. I guess I was trying to put across that I don't get worked up in terms of insisting I am right or insisting that others have to see things my way. Religion is a personal thing for me so you won't find me preaching to anyone.

I don't think I'm the only Muslim (replace with your own faith or ideology) who is like this and the reason for my original post is that I wanted to express that I feel it doesn't make sense to go and block websites.

My point about loving one's mother has been misunderstood as I didn't articulate it very well. The point is only this; that it does hurt when something or someone you feel deeply about is purposely targeted. My reaction to this hurt is one that I wish lots of other religious people would adopt - i.e. keep the faith and be sensible in the way you respond. There are others who wish the world would be more like this, but unfortunately this way of thinking which is naturally orientated towards mutual respect and being measured in reaction, is drowned out by those who choose to use violence or oppression to put their point forward (and it is these that the media highlight). Oh by the way, oppression works both ways.

I'll get my coat again - I wasn't looking to inflame and yet look how easy it is even when trying to be sensitive.

Doesn't make sense..

I'm a Muslim but I find all this censoring totally rubbish and self defeatist (not necessarily a view that many others hold, but I bet I'm not the only one). As other posters have pointed out, it brings a sense of ridicule to all Muslims not just those that decide they know what every other should be seeing and thinking.

Why I don't worry too much about this is that

a) If your faith in religion (Islam in this case) is strong, then

b) you believe there is an afterlife, then

c) you believe that souls will reap the rewards of leading a good life, or,

d) souls will face eternal punishment for 'being bad'

From a Muslim's point of view, 'being bad' includes I would suggest blaspheming the Prophet or any other parts of Islam.

So I don't see why I need to go and get all fundamentalist on people's a**es as there can't be any punishment that I meat out (from murder through to burning flags or blocking websites) that will compare to an eternity of punishment from God.

My basic point is that I don't think Islam (replace with the religion of your own persuasion) really needs 'protecting' - as this is the religion laid down by the creator of the universe, I hardly think God is defenceless and needs squidgy-bodied mortals to come to the rescue in a froth of fundamentalism, jihad or hyper-indignation.

But I can understand people being upset by others purposely maligning or ridiculing deeply held beliefs and feeling. In general there is no need to insult anyone, is there? So if I believe in God and an afterlife and you don't, surely we can agree to disagree and have sensible discussions (if people want that) about our faiths rather than throwing insults and seeking to hurt (physically and/or emotionally) each other. After all, I wouldn't insult your mother because I didn't like that you appeared to love her very much.

Ok, I'll get my coat now - back to my architecture modelling...

Contractors dodge ID cards axe

RE: Depends on the contract

Yes that's true, but I do get involved in contract reviews and most sensible companies are aware that unreasonable termination clauses (either side) are subject to challenge should the situation arise. This is costly and the outcome unknown - so there are less of these flying about.

In a reasonably complex programme, there will be third parties the prime supplier is contracting, and this requires some kind of back to back cover or else someone is going to get shafted. For example, if I sub contract with a hosting company for 5 years who then gives me a good discount for a long commitment, there will be often more than the pro-rata to pay up if I need to terminate before the natural expiry of the contract.

Thus even 'reasonable' termination clauses can still be quite expensive to get out of. However I do take your original point, just that I wasn't really talking about unreasonable clauses in the first place.

Never straightforward

Contracts have termination and exit clauses. IT and other services suppliers will make sure that if a contract is to be terminated early 'at convenience' (e.g. change of policy due to new government or whatever), they have sufficient cover to wind the operation down in a way which makes commercial sense.

Hence I do wonder about the real ability to save by cancelling or cutting projects - not saying this should not be done, but that it is contracts yet to be signed which have the greatest potential for savings, not so much existing ones which will have early termination and cancellation clauses.

Guy Kewney dies at 63

Very sad..

I remember Guy's writings from my earliest days of PCW. As a spotty teenager he provided me with my knowledge of the real world of computing. Great memories, and RIP Guy.