That sounds a lot like the basis of the cartesian circle, which I don't really mean. I'm referring to something that is fundamentally semantic i.e. God is these things on this paper here that we can't understand; but perhaps most people do not recognise as a semantic term and almost think of it as being a scientific observation. From my perspective this is the rational gap in religion - observe, celebrate and revere the greater unknown, but don't assign it a consciousness with motivations! That's just weird.

Like dark matter of the philosophical realm, yes. This is why religious leaders worth their salt have said that they await science to change how they think about their religion. The more we actually know about the world, the more accurate we can make our philosophies of the metaphysical.

We still get it here in the UK. It is so, so awful.

OK. I can totally accept this if this is the definition of feminism. Thank you for the response!

Now if they could just cancel the fuck out of Johnny Test I'd love them forever. What a pile of garbage.

A dear acquaintance then ;)

Phillip K Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is 210 pages long. I've never had a book that I find myself refer to in conversation so frequently. A great bit of sci fi!

That still doesn't sound like WWIII, more like the World Civil War I.

First, define WWIII. We live in a world with many, many nukes. I don't think we will see widespread war in the same way the two world wars happened; we're much more likely to see a war that comprises cultural, financial and idealogical war. Therefore the answer is "9/11". We're in the middle of it.

Nothing because I'm a badass.

I guess what I was trying to add is that it's like an object is still one piece, but it's component parts are not connected in a static visual sense, only in a behavioural sense. Oh, that's a much simpler explanation in itself... the particle is not visually together in one piece but it is behaviourally so.

moved

EDIT: replied to wrong comment, oops!

What level of detail? The functional or the technical?

I almost lost a friend trying to explain this to them. I usually turn to a pack of cards and the ace of spades. It's amazing the stubbornness of our minds!

what about "Tapzu - snapzu for mobile"?

Edit: if you take this name, can I count on you using the name "Snapper" to refer to users of snapzu? much obliged.

GIVE IN TO THE WAY OF THE SNAPPER!

Wow. This looks awesome. A browser built in javascript? That's insane. The possibilities are kind of endless...very cool! Let's give this a shot then...

Isn't opera now a chromium derivative anyway?

I just listened to the RHLSTP with bob mortimer and this really is improved off of the back of it. The door seems like so much more of a significant element now lol

Brew dog hardcore ipa - or if you're in the UK and in a tesco, Tesco's finest double IPA he thing rebranded and cheaper!