Thorham

And that's exactly why the 'before' question is valid and saying that 'before' doesn't make sense an assumption. If you know this yourself, why argue against it?

Still doesn't mean it's doable in 150 years. Then there's also the problem that while you try to construct a theory of everything, you may discover new things which then have to fit in the theory as well. This can make 150 years a little on the short side. Don't underestimate the complexity of reality.

That doesn't prove that before the big bang makes no sense. How do you prove that anyway?

It's a perfectly valid question. What you're talking about is just an assumption. Yes, but is what we see the whole universe or just a small part of it? And if it is a small part, how small?

I don't think that's strange. How does that work, otherwise? 'Lets go and understand EVERYTHING in 150 years.' Yeah, right.

What a rubbish excuse

To run inefficient bloatware. Doesn't apply to all software, of course (some task are inherently heavy).

While writing code for that is annoying, it will still be faster. The regex engine has to do extra work that a native implementation of the regex doesn't have to do. Whether or not it's useful to write a native version is a different matter.

Regex compiler

Not if the expression is fixed. When you have to do a large number of matches using the same expression, a native implementation of that expression will be faster.

Just some short sighted nonsense written by someone who can't see one milimeter farther than their nose is long.

There is if the universe is finite. It's just that this center is of no significance, and the galaxy we're in could be in the center by pure chance.

Try Threes instead of the stupid rip-off 2048. Here's a free one: http://threesjs.com/

Forget what I said, it's just some angry, off-topic rambling.

An existence of enlightenment. I certainly hope so. To leave biology behind completely by developing something that's superior to biology in every way. Yes, I know that it's not going to happen any time soon (if at all). I still like to think that it's possible somehow (possible as in the workings of the universe not making it impossible).

All I'm saying is that I find it psycho to enjoy killing, that killing animals isn't very nice, nature is savage and nasty, and that humans need to develop beyond nature somehow. What's wrong with that?

Male bovine excrement and you know it.

I'm NOT going to answer this nonsense seriously Like I said, I can judge whatever I want. Vantage point is irrelevant.

Ultimately it must, yes. One day we're going to have to leave nature behind and move on. That's just your opinion and I don't agree. For now nature is bigger than us, yes. One day we will know enough to leave it behind, and then we will be beyond nature. A day that almost can't come too soon. I can make any judgement about anything Wow, you're equating animal suffering and death to killing bacteria. How bright!

That's because I don't know. I only know there's something wrong with the way things work now.

I'm squeamish because I think nature is savage and nasty? Oh lord Nature IS savage and nasty. Go survive in it for a while and you'll find that out rather quickly. Perhaps it's the luxuries of technology that have blinded you to this fact. I don't eat meat

I don't hate myself (no, not even a little bit). How did I even imply that? I never made that argument If anything, humans should develop beyond nature. Nature isn't something I'm particularly fond of because it's savage and nasty. We can do better than that. Sadly not, but I don't think I'd have a problem with becoming one.

Indeed I somehow doubt that. I certainly feel no need to kill animals. It's savage. Nature on this planet is WRONG. The way this world works is WRONG, and the sooner we develop out of this mess, the better.

Of course I'm part of the problem. All of humanity is. We have a long road ahead of us. We must develop mentally for our own sake as well as the rest of the world's.