Boogie_Man

Pro tip for everyone else: start counting with your thumb.

For some reason I don't quite understand, my pinky and ring fingers don't operate well independently of one another. This is an issue when counting on my fingers (or attempting a boy scout salute), so I've started counting 1,2,3 from the thumb, 4 with the thumb down and all four fingers up, and 5, of course, with all digits extended.

(I could start counting at my pinky, but that just makes me look totally nuts)

Edit: If you read the article the comment I replied to posted, it includes thumb first counting as one of the cultural differences people experience when visiting Germany - in addition to the "Germanic Stare" they specifically mention in their comment. Consider actually reading before assuming I'm just typing nonsense - unless responding to titles and comments without reviewing the content they contain is a cultural difference I need a guide to get used to when visiting Hacker News.

I'd have to be a real psycho to use AI to pretend to have read books. Reading is probably one the most important parts of my existence, and yet I don't do it nearly enough.

I do experience the same phenomenon where I feel other people haven't actually read books. The book I've experienced this with the most is Infinite Jest. It's twofold in that people both misunderstand basic pieces of the story ("what ethnicity is Hal (arguably the book's protagonist)?" is a common mechanism by which I determine people didn't read or didn't understand the novel), and that I've never ever once online or in person seen commentary about the central "thing" the book is doing, although it's blisteringly glaringly obvious and I'm afraid everyone else just knows it and it's too obvious to state rather than being something only I noticed.

So... Anyone ever actually read IJ?

Spoilers:

My understanding is that the central thrust is that consciousness as we know it which separates us from all other animals may not be the deciding factor in advanced vs simple cognition and a state to which evolution and development is geared as we've always assumed, but rather an evolutionary aberration that doesn't necessarily exist in other advanced life forms and may cease to exist in humanity eventually.

At first I felt a bit depressed and devalued, but then recognized that even if it was true, it made consciousness and my conscious experience even more valuable than if it were a foregone conclusion, and added that much more importance to art and religion.

I'm certified dumb as a box of rocks 19 Wonderlic and I was able to follow most of it without issue or pause. It's possible that it's a bell curve and I'm too dumb to realize I was missing things. Hard to say.

This may be well known, but I'm posting it because I didn't know: "very-hard" science fiction in this context means extremely plausible science fiction, as opposed to extremely speculative science fiction. The author explains how these fantastic things exist in a way which is realistic.

Originally, I thought it meant "very hard to understand" i.e. very technically complicated

1. Query the server for the URL

2. Use JavaScript to publish it to the webpage in an iframe

3. ????

4. Profit

You know our boy Neil isn't paying for shit lmao he's a real one

I agree that your statement about religion not informing political views is true of many people. I would argue that the "standard" positions of both major parties in America have components which seriously contradict standard Christian teachings. If one wanted to find a party that more accurately reflected Christian positions they'd have to do something like vote for the American Solidary Party, which is arguably completely ineffective (I still did it).

The Eastern Churches do allow their priests to have sexual relations with their wives after ordination.

This is an overgeneralization. By the fourth century it became standard to forbid marriage because was believed that previously permitted marriage was only for individuals who remained celibate within the marriage.

I find this to be unlikely.

This position also ignores the East, as we tend to do, although I will admit they understood themselves to be changing convention when permitting it.

I am not Catholic and priests should be permitted to marry.

The zeitgeist is inaccurate. Sexual abuse and subsequent cover ups were a massive problem that has largely been addressed, but the numbers of offenders are proportionally lower than those in public schools. From wikipedia:

"Hofstra University researcher Charol Shakeshaft, the author of a 2002 report on sexual offenses in schools, said sexual violence is much more prevalent in schools than in the Church.[315] Ernie Allen, former president of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, stated: "we don't see the Catholic Church as a hotbed of this [sexual abuse and pedophilia] or as a place that has a bigger problem [with this issue] than anyone else."[316]"

Your statement which I responded to was "find a catholic priest who doesn’t share that responsibility". If you pick a random one, odds are they don't.

There are several important American bishops who have made serious strides to protect children. This is an ignorant statement.

The prevailing wisdom has been proven wrong on this occasion. He is very much a continuation of Francis's school of thought in spite of the "fat Pope thin Pope" wisdom, and he is an American who has been elected Pope, which was almost unthinkable because of America's economic, political, and mass media domination of the western world. Very unexpected

The prevailing wisdom has been proven wrong on this occasion. He is very much a continuation of Francis's school of thought in spite of the "fat Pope thing Pope" wisdom, and he is an American who has been elected Pope, which was almost unthinkable because of America's economic, political, and mass media domination of the western world.

Very unexpected

I sincerely hope this is the explanation and I will be frustrated if this information is not presented as a percentage of the increase as part of the report. If it fully explains the increase, even better.

If they come out with a list of twenty adjustments they're going to make based on the study (things like but not necessary including: banning certain fire retardents, attempt to reduce break/tire pollution, adjusting the timing of (but not eliminating) the vaccine schedule, banning specific food additives, reducing/modifying specific pesticide use) I will believe this is a legitimate and well intentioned effort from someone who is orientationally correct but frequently epistemologically incorrect. If it's just "eliminate all vaccines" then I'll be very disappointed.

The third reich response a lot of other commenters are having is interesting. I'm no expert and have not investigated autism, but if the messaging in response to RFK JR is "yeah he says 1 in 36 kids have autism now but actually that's fine and how it always has been and actually autism is good and he's actually Eichmann" you're going to drive a lot of people right to every unsubstantiated thing he says.

Nearby Amana Iowa hosts a yearly Bratwurst festival at which you can learn about the history of an attempt at a utopian society and watch dachshunds race while very very drunk

Note this is currently not possible without the use of In vitro fertilization

No matches higher than .7something and no mutual matches let's go boys I'm a special unique snowflake

Far be it from me to criticize Cambridge University, but it's an absurd way to test "susceptibility to fake news". They present a series of headlines independent of any context and ask if they're legitimate or not. This completely eliminates the actual metric for susceptibility to fake news, which is the inclination and ability to conduct research from reputable sources. This test is measuring if people's existing biases align with reality, and, to some extent, their ability to guess. Garbage.

I once had the realization that a riff from Metallica's "The Four Horseman" was the same as that from Tom Petty's "Last Dance With Mary Jane" except, as I learned several years after the realization, it is actually the riff from "Sweet Home Alabama" which was introduced in a session as a joke by the guitarist to make fun of the drummer for having narrow musical knowledge. He was correct in his assumption that the drummer wouldn't recognize it, and it was included in the final version of the song.

The story: https://youtube.com/shorts/nY6CPOtN47w?si=K_9EKvKGbgnuGKSg

The riffs: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2V6HbSkAD5g&pp=ygUgZm91ciBob3J...

Me trying to sequence ppls genomes in my basement doesn't seem so bad now.

I may be misunderstanding, but they were adding bits to support the doctrine of the Trinity quite a bit after the first generation of Christians had passed away.

The section of Mathew is understood by mainstream Christianity as a "double prophecy" concerning both the destruction of the second temple and the eventual second coming of Christ. I can understand someone seeing this as moving goalposts until I consider that it could've been quietly deleted to avoid embarrassment if it wasn't intended this way.

Christians have a wide range of views on eschatology, but the mainstream position for a while has been amillennial, which are not the people who get freaked out about locusts and red cows and whatnot.

Nor shall we ever be

I think Tim Allen's character from Home Improvement was unique in that he was a father who frequently made comedic mistakes, but that they resulted from over ambition or carelessness rather than standard stupidity, and his "pig headed machismo" was often a bit of an act rather than who the character really "was" as evidenced by his ability to be thoughtful and sensitive after he learned lessons.

I spent a good half hour "talking" to 4 mini about why Picard never had a family and the nature of the crew as his family despite the professional distance required. It really praised me when I said the holodeck scene where Data is playing King Henry walking amongst his men and I felt pretty smart and then realized I'd not actually garnered the admiration of anyone or anything.

Could've learned to use DD in the time it took to make this post.

Web browsers need to remain incapable of... formatting my disks

Somebody give the number on the van a call and post results

The idea that David and Johnathan were having homosexual relations is a fairly recent one and (ironically) is to some extent reflective of the "nohomo bro" culture we currently inhabit. It deserves to be classed along with "Sherlock and Watson" and "Batman and Robin" relationship theories wherein the evidence is "dude look at this that's gay".

Male-Male homosexual relations are expressly forbidden in Pauline Christianity and it is not necessary to utilize Levitical law or Sodom to make this argument. Right wrong or indifferent, this is the case.

Please do not use this information to behave hatefully