A couple days ago, on March, 21. I was watching Lost and then this news item came up! I though it was pretty funny, so I asked a friend to record it, and here it is. Basically, some black lady cop pushes this skateboarding kid into some bushes.
Counter-Strike: Source Bug/Hack - View full radar while still alive
8/29/2006 20:27
I was playing CS, and then got a bit of lag at the end of a round, and that's how I found this hack! This bug allows you to see the location of enemy players while your are still alive. Follow this link for instructions and screenshots: http://blog.yukonho.com/article.php?id=5067 Reply/Read (0) Comments
Tutorials: Doing some stuff in OpenGL and GLUT /C++
7/20/2006 1:2
I just added three new tutorials that are all related by the fact that they have to do with positioning stuff in OpenGL/GLUT. Here they are.
Morals: What are the effects of the choices we make?
6/5/2006 13:33
What are morals?
It seems to me that the best way to define morals is as choices which benefit, instead of harm, society and the individual. Anything harmful is "bad" or "evil", while anything beneficial is "good". This seems simple, however, complications arise when we try to distinguish whether an action will be harmful or not. For instance: many people claim that when certain things are done privately, such as drugs, fornication, or suicide, no one else is aware of these actions and no one else is harmed. Is this true?
Mathematicians studying chaos theory have found that systems can be affected in unpredictably large ways by seemingly insignificant actions. A popular example is the "butterfly effect": "If a butterfly flaps its wings in America it can cause a hurricane in Japan." Systems such as weather, economics, and the environment can be affected in massive ways by tiny actions.
The psychological system of human society is much more complex than any of these. It is impossible to predict the effect that an action will have on the rest of society. Actions, which may appear to be nothing but good, may have massive, devastating effects.
Consider the very first sin committed by a human. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were told not to eat fruit from the forbidden tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. If they did, they were told that they would die. Since they had no notion of death, this warning was meaningless to them. They knew that eating the fruit would give then knowledge and power. Obviously, eating the fruit seemed to be the better choice. Adam and Eve had no way of knowing the consequences of their actions other than a verbal warning from God.
This reflects our position today. Humans cannot predict the consequences of our actions and we are therefore unfit to create a complete and accurate code of ethics. God, however, does have this ability. He knows how our actions will affect others and ourselves. This is what makes the moral laws presented in the Bible relevant to modern society.
Reply/Read (1) Comments
Logic Challenge
6/4/2006 23:19
Here's some quick instructions: basically each level is like a circut. The blue boxes are chips and operators. You can send a current through any 'wire' connected to one of the black circles at the bottom. The green wires simply pass under the black wires and the green circles are where they connect. The output you get represents the 'current' passing through the red circles. The chips that are named with an 'L' represent a previouse level. To win you must get pass a current through the yellow dot.
For years, evolution has been accepted by countless individuals as a proven scientific fact. It has been taught, without challenge, in almost every public school and university. In everything from fictional literature to television and movies, evolution is said to be the fact of life. However, most people have absolutely no idea how evolution is supposed to work or what evidence is supposed to support it. The truth is, there is no evidence supporting evolution, instead, there are large amounts of evidence disproving this baseless theory.
Fossil Evidence There is NO clear fossil evidence supporting evolution. No transitional (mid-evolution) fossils have ever been found. Existing fossils do not in anyway indicate that organisms progressed from basic to more advanced over time. If evolution was a fact, there would be fossil evidence all over the planet.
DNA Similarities Evidence based on comparing DNA actually refutes evolution. A study took place at Michigan University in which the DNA of two reptiles and a bird was tested. According to evolution the reptiles would have the most similar sequence. However, the two reptiles were the least alike, and one of them was more like the bird. The DNA of alike organisms can be very different. The DNA of two species of frogs is as different as that of the bat and the blue whale. Also, if evolution were true then less complex organisms should have less complex DNA structures, however, while humans have 23 chromosomes, the goldfish has 47, the simple garden snail has 27, and the rosebush has 56.
There are NO transitional organisms in the world around us. No beneficial mutation has ever been found. All mutations have been harmful or ineffective. The creation of a new species has never taken place. If evolution was a fact we would be able to see evidence all around us.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that entropy will always increase. This law of entropy has been found not only to be applicable to chemical reactions but to every other type of system in science. Since evolution is increasing in complexity and organization it goes directly against the law of entropy. Mutations always increase entropy and therefore cannot lead to more complex organisms.
Mutations cannot make changes in large jumps. According to evolution, organisms become advantaged over an extremely long period of time of many small completely random mutations. For example, evolutionists say that the giraffe evolved from a horse like animal because it is able to reach tree leaves. The change would begin with a small, very rare, mutation making the neck a tiny bit taller. Then this animal would have to be able to survive and reproduce well enough to increase the chances of a subsequent mutation, a couple thousand generations later, making the neck just a tiny bit longer. This animal would then have to thrive for a few more thousand generations until another completely random mutation adds another centimeter of height to it’s neck. Keep in mind that these transitional animals would have absolutely no natural advantage over the other animals, until, after millions of generations, they are able to reach the tree leaves. The question is, what suddenly causes the transitional animals to die out? If they were so successful that they could reproduce and survive for millions of years without a single advantage, wouldn’t they continue to live to this day? This is just one example out of the billions of species that evolutionist claim to have evolved into different species. But no transition animals are ever found; in the entire planet, every species is perfect and flawless.
One of the major problems with evolution is the time it takes. Evolution is much too slow to have taken place during the time frame that scientist give it. According to evolutionist every mammal evolved from the first basic mammal (a opossum-like animal) in only 65 million years. Some scientist guess that it would take 100,000 years for evolution to produce a small change. That leaves only 650 changes for the opossum to become a whale or any other mammal, including humans. Another example is in the evolution of the human brain. Evolutionist believe that the human brain increased by 50 billion neurons in only the last 2 million years. Assuming that there were 200,000 generations during this time, it would mean that on average each generation had 250,000 new neurons. This is major evidence against evolution because obviously current generations aren’t gaining anymore neurons.
Why does God allow humans to suffer? The philosophical answer.
6/4/2006 22:19
Why does God allow us to suffer? First, let's establish that suffering is our body’s natural reaction to conditions that threaten our existence. Without these reactions we would have no motivation to prevent such conditions or attempt to remedy them. The real question then becomes, "Why does God allow threatening conditions to exist?"
What is more natural, existence or non-existence? Consider that the number of things in the universe that exist is finite, while the number of things that do not exist is infinite. Clearly, it is much more natural for something not to exist. Also, consider that the fourth law of thermodynamics states that there is a natural force which pressures systems to increase in entropy. Therefore, anything which exists in a state with less than total entropy is being pressured to cease to exist in its current state. In order to maintain its low entropy, the system must then contain some way of resisting the natural forces that try to destroy it.
In conclusion, existence and suffering are inseparable. This does not answer the question above.
I was playing CS, and then got a bit of lag at the end of a round, and that's how I found this hack! This bug allows you to see the location of enemy players while your are still alive. Follow this link for instructions and screenshots: