Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God


Recommended Posts

I guess you skipped this bit: "or checked his reasoning"

You're complaining that we thought he was smart even though he had a different opinion about god to us - and we still think him smart, perhaps slightly smarter because he now agrees with us?

At what point is this surprising? Generally you don't view people who start agreeing with you more to somehow have become dumber. It would be self-deprecation in an extreme. (Or someone who revels in ignorance, which doesn't apply to anyone here).

Sorry, but that is just hilarious. For 99.9% of cases, assuming you are at least in one of the main religions ... how was it you became that religion? Discover it and the entire system that comes with it by chance, or brought up in it by your parents? Hint: it's the latter.

OK, now you're just completely reversing what you said.

You said that the "basis" of religion is being told what to believe. Now you're saying that parents are the reason why people believe religion. That is most definitely not the same thing. Parents are not a religious entity or a representative in any way of religion, unless of course they are some sort of leader of a religious organization or sect (or however you want to phrase it). That is not what you meant with your first post, so please don't even imply that it is. Now you're saying that it's a person's surroundings that makes them religious, not an individual person. That is not "being told what to believe." Your argument is also flawed as someone has just as much chance to not believe religion when being presented it (or later reverse their stance). You choose what to believe, which is what I said from the beginning, so very nice to see that you casually skipped over that.

The fact that you even use the parents argument is rather amusing, as you never say that parents tell their children what to believe. You say that children are "brought up in it." That goes against your initial statement and reinforces my own statement to a T. You're presented with an option -- just like someone reading Hawking's theory is -- and you either believe or disbelieve it.

In your first and second quotations you directly contradict yourself. First you present the option that he changed his reasoning (which you don't honestly believe, judging from your second quotation response), then you say 'well of course I think he's smarter now that he agrees with me!' Thank you for proving my point. You're accepting what you want to accept, just like I'm sure people who believe in religion accepted that Hawking was right when he previously agreed with them.

OK, now you're just completely reversing what you said.

You said that the "basis" of religion is being told what to believe. Now you're saying that parents are the reason why people believe religion. That is most definitely not the same thing. Parents are not a religious entity or a representative in any way of religion, unless of course they are some sort of leader of a religious organization or sect (or however you want to phrase it). That is not what you meant with your first post, so please don't even imply that it is. Now you're saying that it's a person's surroundings that makes them religious, not an individual person. That is not "being told what to believe." Your argument is also flawed as someone has just as much chance to not believe religion when being presented it (or later reverse their stance). You choose what to believe, which is what I said from the beginning, so very nice to see that you casually skipped over that.

The fact that you even use the parents argument is rather amusing, as you never say that parents tell their children what to believe. You say that children are "brought up in it." That goes against your initial statement and reinforces my own statement to a T. You're presented with an option -- just like someone reading Hawking's theory is -- and you either believe or disbelieve it.

In your first and second quotations you directly contradict yourself. First you present the option that he changed his reasoning (which you don't honestly believe, judging from your second quotation response), then you say 'well of course I think he's smarter now that he agrees with me!' Thank you for proving my point. You're accepting what you want to accept, just like I'm sure people who believe in religion accepted that Hawking was right when he previously agreed with them.

You're utterly misinterpreting what I write.

"Being brought up in" something, is being told what to believe. I'm sorry if you semantically disagree, but this is what what I am putting across by that phrase. My parents did not say: so here's christianity, here's hinduism, here's islam, here's etc. .... now choose one! No, they essentially said "you are christian". (Fortunately, very weakly in my case, which meant I could much more freely later reconsider my position). Love the idea that "someone has just as much chance to not believe religion when being presented it" ... yeah, right. At five years of age, I don't think so. You also truly believe in Santa at that age. You would also see a lot more people switching religion opinion during their life (something exceedingly rare).

My quotes do not disagree. Someone can be smart, yet be wrong about some things. Because I accept what Hawking has to say on certain things does not mean I accept everything he says, or that not accepting everything he says is logically inconsistent.

You can't ignore Hawking's opinion.

Sure he's getting older but he is still the world's foremost physicist on such things.

I've read quite a bit into M-Theory and it's certainly an interesting theory; but I also recognise that at the end of the day there is no 'true' explanation for the creation of the

universe; be it through Divine Intervention or a bunch of particles banging and shaking together to cause a reaction.

I always took his 'mind of god' comment to be on par with Einsteins 'god does not play dice' musing - its metaphorical.

besides earth and our galaxy that we known of, no one knows how universe is created because we dont have the technology to find out or it is too complex.

just because we dont know how some unknown stuff are created, it doesnt mean it is always created by God....

science > god

You're utterly misinterpreting what I write.

"Being brought up in" something, is being told what to believe. I'm sorry if you semantically disagree, but this is what what I am putting across by that phrase. My parents did not say: so here's christianity, here's hinduism, here's islam, here's etc. .... now choose one! No, they essentially said "you are christian". (Fortunately, very weakly in my case, which meant I could much more freely later reconsider my position). Love the idea that "someone has just as much chance to not believe religion when being presented it" ... yeah, right. At five years of age, I don't think so. You also truly believe in Santa at that age. You would also see a lot more people switching religion opinion during their life (something exceedingly rare).

My quotes do not disagree. Someone can be smart, yet be wrong about some things. Because I accept what Hawking has to say on certain things does not mean I accept everything he says, or that not accepting everything he says is logically inconsistent.

I'm sorry, but I don't know any family that has ever said, "you're a Christian." Just like when families of a mixed religion -- Muslim, Jewish, Christian -- generally let the children decide what to believe, while simultaneously presenting multiple beliefs. I find it hard to believe that your parents said "you're a Christian" to you when you were young. Furthermore, you act as if it's a blessing your parents didn't force it upon you. As someone who lives in the South, the self-described "Bible Belt," I don't know of any family that has ever forcefully told their child what they are or are not. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are some parents that do that, but you're making sweeping statements here.

And, again, I still do not believe that's what you meant. You said religion is being told what to believe, you never said childhood. This isn't about semantics, this is about what you intended to mean. How on earth did you think anyone would be able to intuitively leap from 'religion is about being told what to believe' to mean 'children are told to believe religion by their parents'? I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. There's no way you could honestly expect me -- or anyone for that matter -- to see that's what you meant.

And I never said you accept everything Hawking said, as I agree that is not logical. But the argument 'he's smart, therefore what he says is true [or holds relevance]' doesn't hold water when he was smart before and believed in God, yet the same sentiment wasn't extended to him. I find this argument all the time -- Einstein said it, so it's right. Hawking said it, so it's right. I find it amusing that people are so invested in leading minds disproving or proving God, when it's something that can't be proven, I think even people who believe in God will admit that. When evidence that Einstein believed in God existed and was presented on Neowin, it was thoroughly shrugged off. Yet, when the inverse was true, the argument was 'the most intelligent man to ever lived didn't believe in God, so why does anyone?' The same sentiment is essentially being echoed in this topic.

Again, I just find it funny. It makes no sense to blindly follow something (religion) or someone (a leading scientist) like a sheep if you don't honestly believe it. If they agree with you, great. If they don't, though, does their opinion suddenly hold less value? No.

cant stop laughing. He cant be that cheap and sold out to entile his new book like this. The thing here is, that he should talk about physics and not about crap that common people want to hear. Whats next? Present his book on the Jeremy Kyle show?!. Give me a break.

If nothing existed, how could gravity have existed when there was nothing. It was either one or the other. The idea that there was nothing (which itself is difficult to fathom) and then suddenly something makes absolutely no sense. I'm surprised Hawkings would write something like that.

physical laws are not "things", gravitational force itself may not exists, but the physical laws that say "there will inevitably be gravitational force" are there. physical laws are concepts, just like "the idea of nothingness", and "the idea of something suddenly comes out of nothing", and "the idea of something always exists forever", those are ideas, concepts, not physical existences, not "things".

And science explains everything now?

Nope, not yet, of course, that's why theists and religions still exist. If science has explained everything already, there'd be no theists in this world already. or, if any theists still left despite the fact that science has already explained everything, sent to mental health care already.

But as science explains more and more things previously considered unexplainable and "divine", there will be less and less theists left, for example theism has far less influence and power now than in the Medieval Age, and the trend continues.

Asking for evidence to back up a faith... that's ridiculous. Believing in a deity is a faith, it doesn't need solid scientific proof to exist. Denying a lot of human beings their faith (of the existence of a deity) based on nothing is stupid. Much like people believing in love, if they sought evidence of that, they would pretty much stop loving and believing they're loved.

My point is: Human beings who believe in the existence of a deity are as right (or wrong, depending on where you come from) as the human being who claim there is no deity.

As a theist myself, I don't need evidence, I just believe and I will continue to believe until there's proof I was wrong. People like yourself who only believe in science, and rebut the existence of a deity NEED to provide evidence, because that is what science is about, hard evidence.

That's why agnostics are the only right people :laugh:

But then, if you are a theist, why do you even bother to ask people proof of the non-existence of God? As far as I understand, since to the Christians, the Christian God is all-powerful, which means He can also make up all those concrete evidences against His own existence and Man won't be able to tell at all. Yup, that means He can make up all those carbon-14 test results, all those archeology discoveries, and all those things scientists take as concrete proof of the non-existence of God. Last time I remember, when a die-hard creationist who firmly believes that the world is only six thousand years old is challenged with concrete evidences like fossils and rock layer formations, he just says things like "that's what God created to test mankind's faith", and "you can never see through trials of faith setup by God with science, you can just hold your belief".

So if you are truly a theist, not only you don't need any evidence or proof of God's existence, you shouldn't even try to ask atheists of evidence and proof of God's non-existence, since they are completely meaningless as those very evidences and proof can just as well be God's own design as trials of faith.

On the other hand, for logical thinking, generally speaking, if we can't find the proof and evidences of something's existence, then we usually don't accept that something's existence as a fact, even with the lack of evidence of its non-existence. Else we may as well believe in Russell's teapot. That means, without evidence or proof, believers of God's existence is just as (logically) right (or wrong) as believers of Russell's teapot, believers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and creationist believers of that the world was created in literally seven days and the universe is six thousand years old. The atheists, on the other hand, is somewhat more logically sound.

For the case of love and emotions, well, they are NOT logical, so of course they don't follow logical thinking. If you say faith is not logical thinking, then I can fully agree with you. But if you insist on logical thinking and says that theists are as logically sound as atheist, then you are clearly (logically) wrong.

What I don't understand is where the first atom came from?

The interaction of electrons, protons and neutrons make up an atom. The protons and the neutrons are made of quarks. And the neutrons are made of leptons.

"Both quarks and leptons are elementary particles, and are currently seen as being the fundamental constituents of matter.

(In particle physics, an elementary particle or fundamental particle is a particle not known to have substructure; that is, it is not known to be made up of smaller particles.)

These quarks and leptons interact through four fundamental forces: gravity, electromagnetism, weak interactions, and strong interactions."

(In physics, fundamental interactions (sometimes called interactive forces) are the ways that the simplest particles in the universe interact with one another. An interaction is fundamental when it cannot be described in terms of other interactions.)

How can something just exist? I don't understand this.

Think of a universe as a process. They come and go. There's nothing material which is static or constant. Everything changes its form all the time.

A universe is like a star which lightens up, grows, and then explodes...

I highly recommend that you watch the "made easy" series on youtube. I'd link it if the site wasn't banned at work :)

cant stop laughing. He cant be that cheap and sold out to entile his new book like this. The thing here is, that he should talk about physics and not about crap that common people want to hear. Whats next? Present his book on the Jeremy Kyle show?!. Give me a break.

Have you ever looked at his books ? do you know much about it ? Selling out what planet are you on this is a guy who had dedicated his life to science despite his condition and only recently quit being a lecturer at university after being there for around 30 YEAR.

What have you done ?

Go read the book a few times then come back and tell me he has sold out, your basing a book on a article published in the media.

cant stop laughing. He cant be that cheap and sold out to entile his new book like this. The thing here is, that he should talk about physics and not about crap that common people want to hear. Whats next? Present his book on the Jeremy Kyle show?!. Give me a break.

his books like A Brief History of Time and this are meant to be read by the common people. I bet he wrote (or authored, since he can't write) scientific papers too, which are full of equations and functions that you possibly can't understand in your entire lifetime.

this is called science popularization, and we should be grateful that the scientists are trying to explain what they are doing and what results they have got to us in languages we understand, instead of keeping to their elite circles and ignore us lowly mortals. :p

Stephen Hawking gave God quite a laugh. :laugh:

no, not God, but the Turtles, the infinite number of Turtles that sit on each other and support our universe. and it proves that Turtles can laugh. :laugh:

This article and Stephen Hawking's opinion can be seen in mathematics like this:

0 + 0 = 0

Useless.

not really. and the concept of 0 is not useless :pinch:

The answer is simple: from nothing spawns something.

define nothing

Ayepecks, I think we've mostly degenerated into arguing semantics, so it's getting confusing. :)

I do want to pick out this

I'm sorry, but I don't know any family that has ever said, "you're a Christian." Just like when families of a mixed religion -- Muslim, Jewish, Christian -- generally let the children decide what to believe, while simultaneously presenting multiple beliefs. I find it hard to believe that your parents said "you're a Christian" to you when you were young. Furthermore, you act as if it's a blessing your parents didn't force it upon you. As someone who lives in the South, the self-described "Bible Belt," I don't know of any family that has ever forcefully told their child what they are or are not. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are some parents that do that, but you're making sweeping statements here.

Mixed religion families are not common. Religions for the most part actually frown upon such things. Most kids grow up in single religion households, and no, seriously, they are brought up as the religion of that household. They aren't given a choice, especially not as a small child. Kids don't get to stay home from church.

I don't live in a religious area - Bristol, UK - yet the two people closest to me have very religious families, and both were (and are) forcefully told of 'the truth'. Fortunately, however, they are now able to make their own decision (even if their parents try and make them feel like terrible people). (Note, this not anecdotal evidence, just an example)

Anyway, we're straying off point - this is all I was trying to say: Religion tells people what to believe. Science shows people.

Which is off point of the original point: that Hawking previously thought god might have been required. We still thought him smart. Now he doesn't, and some of us think he may be a little bit smarter. He's not an all knowing divine scientific figure, he opinions don't define our lives. Some of us just think "hey, that's cool, he's come to a similar decision to us, from a different perspective, nice". Our belief (or non-belief) in god didn't rest upon his shoulders, or this specific topic.

The answer is simple: from nothing spawns something.

I don't think you understand how the big bang is believed to have happened.

cant stop laughing. He cant be that cheap and sold out to entile his new book like this. The thing here is, that he should talk about physics and not about crap that common people want to hear. Whats next? Present his book on the Jeremy Kyle show?!. Give me a break.

Man... you are definitely clueless..

I'm sorry, but I don't know any family that has ever said, "you're a Christian." Just like when families of a mixed religion -- Muslim, Jewish, Christian -- generally let the children decide what to believe, while simultaneously presenting multiple beliefs. I find it hard to believe that your parents said "you're a Christian" to you when you were young. Furthermore, you act as if it's a blessing your parents didn't force it upon you. As someone who lives in the South, the self-described "Bible Belt," I don't know of any family that has ever forcefully told their child what they are or are not. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are some parents that do that, but you're making sweeping statements here.

hmm... It's not that I don't believe you, but I highly doubt it, since those monotheism teachings usually say things like "believe Him or doomed to eternal suffering in hell", and if the parents are truly monotheist believers, don't they care if their kids are doomed to hell?

As far as I understand, unlike polytheism like Buddhism and Taoism where even if you are a non-believer, you just miss a chance to reach immortal and eternal happiness this time, but you still will reincarnate after you die and have more chances later, in monotheism like Christianity, there's no reincarnation and no second chance. Unless you are completely apathetic to your children, if I truly believe that my kid is facing a choice between eternal happiness in Heaven and eternal damnation in Hell, I'd try my best to help/lead/encourage my kid to choose the former.

It's kinda hard to imagine that, if you truly believes in Christianity and that not believing in Him leads to Hell, you'd still be all okay if your kid comes and tells you "hey mom/dad, I just decided that I don't want to believe in your Christian God, instead I want to be a Taoist and try to become an immortal god myself, even if that means I'm going to Hell in your belief".

define nothing

In this context it would be the absence of something.

I don't think you understand how the big bang is believed to have happened.

I don't believe the big bang was proven to be anything other than a stab in the dark.

I don't believe the big bang was proven to be anything other than a stab in the dark.

What? When I say you don't understand how the big bang was believed to have happened is because those are not assumptions based on pure thought. Those are assumptions based on scientific knowledge that is given by the study of the universe over the years. Believing it's a "stab in the dark" is the mentality of a person that believes there's a superior being just because they "feel it". That's where the difference between science and crayness resides. Scientific assumptions are based on proven stuff while religious assumptions are based on histories which nobody can prove happened.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that by Paul Hill Credit: Pixabay Last month, when Google decided to introduce daily and weekly caps for Gemini, it reignited an anxiety of mine, that you can’t really depend on service providers to maintain features forever, and it got me looking into free software (as in freedom) in other areas too. One app I quickly came across was KeePassXC on desktop and KeePassDX on Android as an alternative to password manager lock-in within the Chrome or Firefox ecosystems. I personally like to switch around with browsers, and using either password manager is inconvenient, so something like KeePassXC was interesting to me. The main issue with it now is syncing; I was not sure how to do that. After a bit of research, I came across Syncthing, a tool I was vaguely familiar with but had never used because it seemed complicated. However, I was completely wrong, and honestly, I think everyone should use it if they use multiple devices. It essentially lets you share folders peer to peer across all of your devices, no cloud services that you don’t control necessary! And it was fairly simple to set up, if not a bit clunky. Since setting it up, I’ve also started using Syncthing to back up other apps too, so don’t think it’s limited to just saving password databases. You can use it for pretty much anything you use Dropbox or Google Drive for. Before continuing to talk about those apps a bit more, let’s walk back a bit and talk about browser sync. Ever since the late 2000s and early 2010s, really, since we have been using smartphones, browser sync has been a necessity of life. I don’t know about you, but I have hundreds of passwords saved. For the most part, they’re all unique, so I don’t remember them and rely on software to manage them for me. Until recently, I’ve relied on password managers in Chrome and Firefox, but what I always found annoying was that it can be hard to transfer them between browsers. Sure, on Windows it is simple enough, but on Linux, exporting bookmarks has been temperamental. It works OK nowadays, but not too long ago, Chrome required you to enable exporting passwords in chrome://flags. The situation is even worse on mobile; there is no exporting or importing of passwords of any kind. You literally have to do it on a desktop, which is incredibly annoying in our mobile-first world. Sync also lets us take out bookmarks, history, tabs, and autofill data easily. To enable sync, it’s just a matter of signing into the browser once, and it handles the rest. It’s nice and easy. Obviously, all this has some issues, including those I’ve outlined above about it being hard to transfer data between browsers, but also things such as account suspension, lost account passwords, and other lock-in mechanisms, such as passkeys, being tied to a specific browser. On a sidenote, I have just removed all of my passkeys because they can make it harder to move browsers. I think the biggest threat to your synced passwords, especially if doing this with Google, is having your account suspended. I don’t ever expect mine to be suspended, but you do hear horror stories on Reddit where people lose access to their Google accounts. Imagine if you have hundreds of passwords, then suddenly lose access to them because Google froze your account, what would you do? So yes, it can be nice to use these syncing services for their convenience, but they also have risks. You may have seen me going on about free software quite a bit in my editorials. It’s essentially a concept championed by the Free Software Foundation. It’s software under particular licenses that grant you four freedoms: run the program for any purpose (0), study and change the source code (1), redistribute copies to others (2), and the freedom to distribute modified copies to others (3). For example, if there is an app I use and one day it gets abandoned by the developer, I can keep running it or even clone the software and continue developing it. Look at the myriad of cool services Google has run over the years before killing them. You can’t take the source code for those because they are proprietary, for the most part. Both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so I get the freedoms listed above. In my use case where I’m syncing a database full of my passwords, I also get proper ownership over my data, there is no losing access to the database due to a frozen account, I can access the code of the tools I’m using, and I can get support from real people online if I run into issues, rather than having to consult a vague help page from an opaque company. With the KeePassXC password manager, you create a .kdbx file, which is what will be synced between devices. KeePassXC has cross-platform apps and also has browser extensions so that the browser can fetch passwords from the database once it is unlocked. Meanwhile, Syncthing is a peer-to-peer file sync tool where you can select folders to sync between your devices. Just pop files in the folders you choose, and then they will be available across your other devices whenever they come online. Syncthing is resilient as it works over both LAN and the internet and only ever sends content between your devices, never to a third-party server somewhere else. By combining these two pieces of software, you can essentially replicate the browser sync functionality. I have had a weird, conflicting issue where a new file is appearing, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting my main password database, which is updating between devices just fine. If you want to get a setup similar to what I have, you will need to go here to download KeePassXC for your computer. Once you have that, you will need to download your passwords from your web browser to a CSV file. In Chrome, you can type chrome://password-manager/settings into the URL bar, and you should see an option to download your passwords under Export Passwords. This will give you the CSV file you need for importing into KeePassXC. If you use a different browser, just use a search engine and type “browser-name export passwords” and muddle along. In KeePassXC, you’ll want to press Import File from the home screen, select the CSV file, and create a new database from it. On one of the screens of the wizard, there will be a Title field with a drop-down selected to none. Change this to Title and continue. You’ll select a name for the database, the encryption level (the defaults are fine), and then you will pick a password. I would choose four unrelated words that are easy for you to remember, as you’ll be typing them fairly often to access your passwords. When you have all your passwords in your new database, you will want to set up the browser extension so that your browser can fetch passwords from KeePassXC. Rather than explain how to do that here, refer to KeePassXC’s guide on how to set it up properly. Once you’ve got that set up, you want to install KeePassDX on Android. You can grab it on the F-Droid store and the Google Play Store. For iPhone users, there are other .kdbx-supporting apps, but I haven’t tried any of them, so have a look around and use what suits you. Once you have that done, you will want to install Syncthing on your computer and find a third-party app for your mobile device. On Android, I use an app called BasicSync; there are also options for iOS, but again, I’ve not tried these. Once you’ve got SyncThing, you’ll want to set it up and connect all of your devices together and share a folder between your gadgets. PCWorld has a good tutorial on setting up a synchronized file between your devices using SyncThing. Once you’ve set it up, congrats, you’ll never have to touch that stuff again except for adding or removing devices. I’ll be honest, I didn’t particularly like setting up Syncthing. It didn’t take me a massive amount of time, but I think I had to check online because I found it a bit confusing. That said, I’ve had it running for several weeks now and never need to touch the Syncthing settings, so that’s very nice. I also mentioned a conflicting file. I’m not sure why this is appearing, but the main .kdbx file seems to be updating and syncing just fine. What’s nice is that both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so they won’t just vanish one day; you can take the code and fork the project or use a range of alternative implementations that others have made. It’s also nice that it works over LAN, so even if your ISP is having problems, your passwords will still sync. One area where you will want to be a bit more careful with this setup is if you only have one device. I am OK because I have a computer and two phones, all synced up. If you just have one device, you will probably want to store a backup of your .kdbx file somewhere else. Obviously, you’ll also want to remember your password really well, too. If you get locked out, it's game over. Overall, if you want to take back control of your computing from big tech, taking control of your passwords is an important part of this. You don’t need to immediately clear out your browser’s password manager; try running KeePassXC and the password manager concurrently for a while to see if you run into any problems. If you do try this out, let us know some other creative ways to use Syncthing. I haven’t really come up with a solution about what to do with my bookmarks, for example.
    • If the price was a dollar, someone would complain "Why isn't it free?" If it was free, someone would complain they weren't being paid to play it.
    • That lens of history will burn if you hold it at the right angle... Warn users too late: Shame, Microsoft! That extremely minor update to an obscure Control Panel widget required 2 years of warning. Warn users too early: Shame, Microsoft! We've got better things to do. Pipeline and process be damned, we'll just always be disappointed, eh?
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good by Usama Jawad I have been using Windows since the early 2000s, when I was around 10 years old or so. I vaguely remember playing around with Windows 98 and Windows 2000, but that may have been on school PCs which had old operating systems installed. My main OS on the home PC, and the one I recall spending most time with, was Windows XP. At that time, I used the home PC to create Word and PowerPoint documents for school, but a lot of the time, I simply used it to play games. My dad would bring game discs which we would try and install on the PC, sometimes unsuccessfully, and sometimes, we would rely on flash games in the browser, like Bubble Trouble on Miniclip. However, the problem with the latter approach was the internet speed. On a good day, our dial-up internet would offer us speeds of 56 kbps, but on most days, it was closer to 33 kbps. This did not facilitate online gaming as I would often have to wait minutes for a game to load or "draw" on the screen, and trying to download pirated games wasn't simple either. I remember getting tired of waiting for online games to load and just downloading simulator games from the Big Fish Games website instead, only to be disappointed after finding out that I was just being given access to trial versions of the title, and I needed to fork out money to pay for the full version. All of this is to say that it wasn't very easy to find entertainment options on the home PC when I was a kid, due to a number of reasons, mostly outside of my control. This situation pushed me towards a rather unconventional ally: Microsoft Paint. Whenever the internet wasn't working as good as I expected, I would simply spin up Paint and draw complete rubbish on the canvas. Of course, that wasn't always the intention, but it usually happened when I messed up drawing a straight line or something, and then I would give up on that particular piece and simply draw a random collection of objects. Microsoft Paint was extremely accessible and easy to use. Even if you weren't an artist, you could quickly understand the tools at your disposal and how to leverage them on a canvas. The absolute breadth on offer ensured that each painting was truly unique, as you could utilize various combinations of tools like the pencil, paint, spray paint, and more to truly personalize your creation. Since I wasn't particularly good at drawing both on digital screen or a physical screen, I remember that my main style of art would be to insert a bunch of randomly intersecting lines and then fill them with random colors through the paint can. I have trying to replicate that art style in the latest version of Paint below, and as you can see, it's truly Pablo Picasso-esque. The human imagination truly knows no bounds Microsoft Paint kept me occupied for hours and was my best friend when video games on the home PC were inaccessible for one reason or the other. There was no academic or professional reason for which I would need to use Paint, but I still loved using it in my personal time, even if what I created wasn't worth being shown to anyone. It was simply fun. Fast-forward to today, and the situation is mostly the same. Now that I am almost 29 years old, and I still have no reason to use Microsoft Paint in a professional capacity. In fact, I don't even use it in a personal capacity, except to dabble with it from time to time, just to see if core functionalities are still intact. And I'm happy to say that I think Microsoft Paint still offers the same accessibility and inviting experience that it did to me a couple of decades ago, even though its UX has been refreshed and it's been integrated with Copilot features. Interestingly, things could have been a lot different, had Microsoft had its way. Microsoft Paint was marked for deprecation with the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update in 2017, and even began displaying a product retirement alert, urging customers to shift to Paint 3D instead. Fortunately, after consumer backlash, Microsoft reversed course on this decision, and Paint continues to be a native app inside Windows installations that can also be updated quite frequently through the Microsoft Store. Instead, Paint 3D ended up on the chopping block, which is for the better, I think. I have intermittently played around with Microsoft's refreshed Paint experience in the past few years, and I do think it has received worthwhile upgrades. the UI and the UX has been modernized while retaining core functionality, and the app is still fairly easy to use. It doesn't meet any of my use-cases, but I've never really had any use-cases ever, as described previously. Of course, the elephant in the room is the Copilot integration. Personally, I believe that this is one place where Copilot does make sense, environmental concerns aside. I know that a lot of creatives use AI to generate images, and while some may be using professional alternatives, Paint still offers a decent casual experience, with the power of Copilot. Of course, you do need to have a valid Microsoft 365 Copilot license and available credits to use it, but even if you don't, you still get the big Copilot button in the toolbar, unfortunately. All in all, I am glad that Microsoft Paint continues to be a native feature in Windows 11, and a piece of software that has evolved to meet modern needs without cutting off its own roots. It's just an iconic piece of Windows history that was an essential part of my childhood, and while I don't use it anymore, I'm just glad it is still there.
    • 2TB WD_Black SN7100 PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD drops to its lowest price in over three months by Fiza Ali Amazon is currently offering the 2TB WD_Black SN7100 internal solid-state drive at its lowest price in over three months, so you may want to check it out, if you have been considering a storage upgrade, before the deal dries up (purchase link is toward the end of the article). Featuring a PCIe Gen 4.0 interface and M.2 2280 form factor, the SN7100 promises to deliver sequential read speeds of up to 7,250MB/s and sequential write speeds reaching 6,900MB/s, offering as much as a 35% improvement in performance compared with the previous generation. It also achieves random read speeds of 1,000,000 IOPS and random write speeds of 1,400,000 IOPS. The drive uses Western Digital’s TLC 3D NAND technology for reliable performance and is further supported by a five-year limited warranty. It also offers strong endurance, rated at up to 1,200TBW, making it suitable for demanding workloads such as gaming, content creation, and high-speed recording. Moreover, its DRAM-less architecture claims to improve power efficiency (the SSD relies on system memory for caching via HMB), while the WD_Black Dashboard software enables users to monitor drive health, install firmware updates, and activate Game Mode for potentially better performance. Finally, it operates within an operating temperature range of 0°C to 85°C, and can withstand storage temperatures from -40°C to 85°C. 2TB WD_Black SN7100 PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD: $242.96 (Amazon US) Check this deal out if you want a 4TB option. Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      514
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      87
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!