You could argue that things like TCP/IP worked because they were introduced when the technology was still very young. But social networking has been given a really good chance to mature and develop independently, and there is a difference between a tweet to the world and a Facebook "like." There is no visible…

Oh, so it's a teacup now? I guess my views are a bit more traditional.

No. Like I said, it is NEVER indicative, the same way that correlation is NEVER indicative of causation. There has to be something else, or you're just blaming the decline in pirate activity for global warming (or on).

I didn't say it had to be only one. If three such supernatural beings existed, or even ten million, it would still be true that a supernatural being exists. Saying that something exists does not imply that it is singular.

Looks like that would require a universal "social networking" standard. But social networks operate differently. How could a standard possibly be written to encompass the drastic differences between certain platforms, like Facebook and Twitter?

"Lack of testable evidence of something for which evidence has actively been sought, is generally indicative of it's lack of existence. Generally."

This is silly. The actual title includes the word "sloppy." The reason given for Looper's spot at #2 is, and I literally quote, "Too bad science shows backward time travel is impossible."

No they're not. It's expressing a certain level of desperation, as if the author was repeating it to himself in horror.

It's just ancient literature. Poems, songs, fables, myths, legends, court records, genealogies, etc. There's nothing inherently "wrong" with any of it, just how some people choose to interpret it.

There is arguably no evidence that such a supernatural being exists, and arguably no evidence that such a being does not exist. I'd say that taking up a firm position on one side is just as ridiculous as taking up the contrary side.

The kind of idiot that doesn't get involved in flame wars.

How would a decentralized social network even work? Who would provide the infrastructure?

What you're describing is silly. You don't pay to download Minecraft. You pay for a Minecraft account. You can't torrent an account.

Related.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is the only thing that stopped me from hurling my monitor across the room on account of the PORTRAIT VIDEO.

The only Macintosh I've ever seen in a movie "hacking setting" was in Independence Day, and it was used to DO the attack.

For the record, the person that did the effects for Tron did make a valiant attempt to keep the computer tech as authentic as possible (within the constraints of a movie like Tron), making sure that the way to "kill" the programs was with an actual unix process kill command typed at a shell.

Hang on... you're saying that this proposed ban is a BAD thing?

Like what Dawkins has said, if there was no evolutionary process involved at large in the origin of species, then taking the genetic evidence into account (mapping similarities across generations and noting the emergence and development of novel sequences), then whoever designed that DNA is the world's oldest troll.

I imagine that we would have no problem whatsoever in telling an ant anything we wanted to that it can normally understand. Taking this into context, I imagine that some god entity would have no problem conveying messages such as those told in ancient stories.