I think it’s pretty easy to understand: “I do not care to hear about it”. they never once said “it doesn’t bother me to hear about and this post proves that”
I commend your not even knowing what I’m talking about.
My curiosity got the better of me because of reading other people’s comments.
I’d google ‘gloxxon cancelled’ because I thought it was actually a legitimate news story but it turns out he was embroiled in a high school level fight with Dinglebingle the reaction channel over saying his child had a watermelon shaped head.
Someone is into OP or whoever is in gold, at least for now. Even if you don’t find it cool, flatter to keep conversation and interest. It could be genuine as in finding interest in anything your crush is into interesting, or be just practical.
Also, people are attractive/interesting when they speak about stuff they’re passionate about. Lots of people will listen to you blab on about something they know nothing about or care nothing about if you interest them in your delivery.
A developer is one that just codes. An engineer is one that mocks up their feature, leads meetings to explain what they are going to do and debates with others about the proposed implementation, codes it, tests it thoroughly, then answers any questions about what they made months later and diagnoses issues that QA found. Maybe you’re just a code monkey, but my job is a lot more.
Yeah I’m an SW engineer and my job is 30% coding max. Equal part is requirements engineering (so translate sys reqs to sw reqs, ensure traceability and such), static code analysis and dev tests plus 10% change management. The last part is the most interesting part as this includes analysis of feasabilty, risk and impact assessment as well as proposing/reviewing sys reqs for new or existing features. Glad I’m not a sys dev though as they don’t get to code at all.
The Bible says something about the earth and how it is good and the filament of the sky and something. The Bible that is, at least that’s what I read on the internet. Many fine people on the internet, the best people, but not me, I haven’t said it, but the best people probably. The best people say the earth may be - and I’m not saying it is but they are saying it - they say that the earth may be flat and that doesn’t take much text to cover I have heard.
Material things are way below what God planned for man.
Man (Body + Soul) was meant to be like God (NB God is not material) (in a good way).
The Bible is not meant to be a physics textbook.
Nevertheless, God owns everything. So things were talked about here and there...
The Bible also isn’t meant to be real. It’s a compendium of stories all put into one book, with tons of different writers. It’s akin to The Odyssey and shouldn’t be taken literally. Zeus didn’t come to Earth as a golden shower to impregnate Danae, and Jesus didn’t come back from the dead. They’re just fables.
In the Old Testament, you'll always see genealogies of key persons being discussed to Adam (the first man).
In the New Testament, the genealogy is from Jesus Christ to Adam (in Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts and by Paul I think).
Zeus and Diana (profligate) were humans. But pagans deify their rulers.
Let me make a second post...
The Bible is historical too:
When Moyses drowned the Egyptians (Old Testament which Jews held and kept sacred)
When Jesus, Mary & Joseph took refuge in Egypt (New Testament which Christians hold and keep sacred)
In the first example, we learn that Egyptians used chariots (even far back in the time of Moyses).
'Satan' is part of your name, so I guess you know who he was, and who he is now.
'Satan' is opposed to the coming of Christ (the reason for all those genealogies).
'Satan' would do everything to make people forget why Christ came.
'Satan' would make Christmas (we all have our birthdays) to seize. 'Satan' wants people to believe that Christ is like Zeus and Mary like Diana (profligate).
Disciplines or fields or occupations (Doctors, lawyers, pilots, engineers, photographers, cartographers etc.)
I love science. What do you want to talk about?
Is it not wonderful what we are able to accomplish with 0s and 1s (by the grace of God)?
You stated “this has been always true” to the statement that we have understanding that things are really complex and difficult to figure out. The answer to you was an example that there were times where we did not have such understanding.
If you squint a little, the 7 days of creation in Genesis are relativistic-ish. 1 day to separate light from darkness (photons at 1 microsecond after Big Bang), another to create the sky (opaque universe at 370k years), another to form dry land and create life (earth formed, 9.3 billion years, life at ~0.2by later), etc etc. Anyone with a physics degree able to say what fraction of light speed god must have been travelling to make this happen such that only days passed for them between these events?
They are literal days.
Our God is King of leading by example.
Also, man was made from the dust of the earth. It was fitting that earth be created before man (also very important for prideful man).
As He did, so we must do.
It is repeated constantly that we have 6 days to work, the 7th to be set apart.
Why?
Rabbinical scholars don't believe many things now:
Then, they believed the prophecy of Daniel and Herod even inquired from them (Herod did not want a rival king, so he ordered all new born infants to be killed. That was why Jesus, Mary and Joseph took refuge in Egypt). Rabbinical scholars of now don't believe in Jesus Christ, and what do you want God to do to them? Rabbinical scholars of now don't believe in Jesus Christ, and you expect me to believe rabbinical scholars?
Exodus 31:16,17
Let the children of Israel keep the Sabbath, and celebrate it in their generations. It is an everlasting covenant between me and the children of Israel, and a sign perpetual. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and in the seventh he ceased from work.
Genesis 2:7
Our Lord God therefore formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, & man became a living soul.
[My comment] Not because Adam was difficult to make.
Genesis 2:22
And our Lord God built the rib which he took of Adam into a woman, & brought her to Adam.
[My comment] Wo + man = woman.
They are literal days but also have mystical signification.
E.g. The sea (of our earth) can signify worldly people.
Rock can signify Christ.
The sun sometimes can signify Christ.
Stars, candles, salt can signify Christians.
Jerusalem can signify a place.
Babylon can signify a place.
Babylon can signify Antichrist.
All the examples above are different interpretations amongst 4 kinds of interpretation.
Literal (History is found here. Make sure they don't contradict. Make sure they are not exclusive).
Moral (you can derive many).
Mystical (etc.)
Anagogical (etc.)
Before an interpretation is declared to be held universally, theologians can argue.
A new modern rabbi can even say that 7 days is 2 days and we will begin to argue.
Now we have AI image generation. If something about God is difficult for you, you can think of modern inventions.
Theory of evolution by Darwin and others is surely rabbinically modern.
God chose to create man on the 6th day (days are equally marked), and rest on the seventh.
The sun marks the day for us.
The moon marks the season/month.
Stars mark the year.
All these are what helped us arrive at our Gregorian calendar.
If you want me to read your source, please post a link to the rabbinical scholars, because money is capable of damaging a long standing tradition.
If your point was that religions have oversimplified complex science to the point that people thought they fully grasped it, then I agree with you. Otherwise I have no idea what you are trying to say.
That’s a paraphrase of a famous Bertrand Russell quote. The original is as follows; “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”
There’s also the William Butler Yeats corollary; “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
And Aristotle was worshipped to the point where if people knew from personal experience that something he said was wrong, they’d assume their own experience was what was mistaken. And this despite him not having any connection to their religion at all.
One example is that they used to think that objects could only have one force acting on it at a time. This could be the “natural force”, which is what makes objects fall when you drop them, or forces resulting from an action being performed on it. As a result, projectiles would travel straight in the direction they were thrown until the natural force took over, at which point they would fall vertically. Somehow this was still popularly believed (by academics at least) well after the catapult had been invented and used in sieges for centuries. It was believed by people who could throw things and observe how they moved with their own eyes.
Actually, we know everything there is happening in solar system. What we don’t know requires energies or distances or times incomparable with human life.
We don’t know why space spawns. We don’t know why the sun’s corona is hotter than its surface. We don’t know why the sun spins faster around its equator than at its poles. We don’t know why shampoo makes strange squiggles when being poured out of its bottle. Just four things off the top of my head.
That’s the point. It’s not accurate that we always knew how complex these were. The more we learn, the more we learn how complex these things are. The example of spiritual explanations is the most reductive and frankly that is where our understanding started. This conversation has really devolved here in typical Lemmy fashion.
Many things were revealed to Moyses by God Himself.
St. Paul was wrapt to the third heaven.
Also in the book of Job, we see God speak in first person.
Also there are prophets.
You are marvelled at what we can do with matter. You little knowledge of what man can do with God.
In our modern day, we had the Dancing Sun of Fatima (Our Lady of Fatima).
Not really, OP’s image is somewhat misleading. The truth is that we’re constantly trying to improve our understanding of physics and some theories are not completely correct but they often provide a way for future scientists to dig deeper and figure it out. Then with new knowledge, new hypothesis can be suggested creating a gateway to deeper understanding of some concepts further down the timeline.
Not really. It’s all about models - we have for normal stuff, but it breaks apart in extreme situations
So clearly the model is fundamentally wrong… Which is pretty cool, because it means FTL travel, antigravity, or travel between dimensions could be possible
But we know now normal shit acts - we have models that work perfectly for 99% of all situations, and we’re probably not going to stop using them. We understand what happens when you throw an object, and it’s a basic equation up until like mock-2 or 3, where our models stop working and we have to switch them out completely
Can you build a model that works for both? Absolutely. It’ll be closer to the truth even. But it’ll be way more complicated for nearly all practical, human scale situations
At the end of the day, a model that describes reality exactly is almost useless… Without simplifications to ignore everything not relevant, just trying shit live would be easier than calculating the prediction
What I don’t understand is if the goal is to eventually be able to model everything perfectly, if we achieve that goal, doesn’t that just mean entropy is a lie?
Maybe it’s not a well thought out idea… But to me, if you can accurately model to predict everything down to the subatomic levels then where is the entropy?
I’m not sure how to answer exactly, so here’s a brain dump of my understanding of entropy
Entropy is basically the tendency of energy to equalize into a lower energy state, converting a portion of the difference into heat, a portion of which escapes into the universe. It’s a statistical thing - it’s a general tendency that becomes predictable at the huge number of particles involved in anything near the human scale. Like compressed air - every atom is moving at a certain speed in a random direction (we model this with temperature)
If you pop a balloon, the air rushes out because there’s more stuff to bounce off in the area of the balloon being popped, and less in the less dense surroundings. So, on average, the air bounces outwards, and the pressure (another model describing density + kinetic energy) equalizes.
Now, if you have liquid air that is being actively cooled, air molecules bouncing in are going to transfer energy into the liquid, and be captured. The liquid is also going to heat up a bit, and the hotter it is, the more molecules are going to fly out. We usually model this with temperature + pressure, but gravity plays a big role too.
So normally, entropy likes to average things out and prefers randomness - it applies to all sorts of things, like how potential chemical energy likes to be released into kinetic energy over time.
But then look at the Earth - we have pressure waves in the air constantly. We say that’s because energy is being added to the system via heat from the sun, and it can even create these systems that turn these pressure waves into vortexes that can make ice in a hot place
And then you look at stars - diffusion finally clicked for me after I sat in on a physics class explaining pulsars. They pulse out through this random diffusion, then pulse in due to gravity pulling them back in.
Then we can look even further - stars pour out energy through fusion, and scatter themselves far and wide, seeding the next generation of stars. We thought that was just the initial energy of the big bang converting to lower energy states, but then you have dark matter and energy that we invented to explain the gap in the models… Now we think maybe the laws of physics might be less universal than we thought, or maybe higher dimensions are interacting with the universe
Entropy is just another model - things generally transition to lower energy states, and convert their energy to heat… But there’s endless cycles that do the opposite. Entropy is a pretty compelling tendency in a closed system, but those don’t actually exist - it could be that there’re larger and larger cycles that oscillate between local entropy and the generation of local regions of higher energy
Entropy doesn’t disappear if we can nail it down the subatomic - it’s just statistical behavior of. It might disappear if we go the other direction - what if every black hole spawns a new universe? Can you just go down the rabbit hole infinitely, creating smaller and smaller energy differentials through new universes? Maybe if we get deeper into quantum mechanics we’ll find that infrared energy spontaneously transitions into hydrogen, which forms into new stars, keeping the cycle going forever
Entropy is a very useful model though, maybe it disappears over large enough scales, but ultimately it most certainly exists on a local level - complex, dynamic things will break down to form simpler things, and energy temporarily reverses this process, but in doing so a portion is converted to heat, and a differential is required to turn heat energy into something more complex like electricity or chemical energy
So practically, I’d say the answer to your question is no, entropy is a very useful model regardless of what more we might learn, but in a truer sense who knows? We don’t understand physics nearly as well as we think.
I think there’s a new wave of physics that will break a lot of our assumptions over the coming decades - we’re finding more and more gaps in our models, which is a very exciting thing
The trick is that the more closely you model things the more energy you need to expend to compute the model, and a computer can not perfectly model itself (it’s a data compression limit + zeno-like process overhead), so therefore you still increase unmodeled unknown entropy somewhere even if you have one closed system carefully controlled
Why do we need a preserving corpse box. By the time I die, I will be more micro plastics than man. I will not decay. I will be embalmed by plastic symbiosis.
By the time the next generation dies, this may be the only way to own Legos, with the company long since having gone over to a subscription service where your new lease on life is their only alternative to leasing Legos!
I’ve had this before, except I was drunk, and it was a kebab.
I really, really do not like kebabs… my friend convinced me to get one. This kebab was like it had been sent from the heavens, I was in shock, never had I experienced a kebab like this.
The next day, I messaged my friend asking where we had the kebab… neither of us could remember. I had a vague idea of what the door looked like, we searched every time we were in the city centre for many years, but in vain.
If your kids keep asking for every thing they see at every store, and you’re tired of telling them no most of the time, take them to the library and say YES YES YES YOU CAN HAVE EVERYTHING YOU WANT!!!
This is the one area where my mom really did great. Every week she’d rent 3-5 new books from the sci-fi section, I literally read 6 floor to ceiling shelves of books between 4-9th grade. I literally read or discarded every commonly released sci-fi book up to that point… It might’ve ruined my eyes, but it opened my mind
(not like she was a bad mom, she had lots of love but terrible advice…)
Like it’s hard to spot a bigot in the first place. It’s not antisemitic to conflate Israel and Jews until the equivocation is central to your thinking.
Conflating support for Palestinians as antisemitic or pro-Hamas is just bad-faith nonsense made up by people who don’t care about being coherent, but are too timid to just go ahead and use the slurs.
It was so insulting for him to come out and say he isn’t a fan of the source material. Was it too much to ask to find someone who’s passionate about Star Trek? I know they’re out there.
It is, or at least was, a strangely popular thing n Hollywood for people working on franchises to claim they knew nothing about them. A kind of “too cool for all this” vanity they were trying to project.
Exactly! If he was not a fan of any of the 60 years of source material perhaps he should’ve stepped aside and let someone who cares about Star Trek contribute to it
Imo, instead of asking why he didn’t step aside, I think the fault is on the studio executives for wanting to go in that direction in the first place. They clearly wanted a different direction to classic Trek, otherwise JJ wouldn’t have been their choice.
the guy who directed rogue one and the andor tv series isnt much of a fan of star wars, and those are two of the most acclaimed star wars projects since disney bought star wars
Although I do really like both of those and would probably put them at the top of the current generation of SW, they feel much less like SW properties and a lot more like they’re wearing a SW skin. Which, you know, is fine since it’s actually good and doesn’t destroy the property. Even if you don’t like Andor, they’re still making a ton of just regular Star Wars shit.
JJ basically derailed Trek for those of us that actually like the type of thing Trek was doing for nearly a decade. Basically took until SNW to get an actual Trek show.
Star Wars is samurai movies with a skin on it. The whole thing is borrowed, in space. So it’s okay to have stories like Andor, Rogue One and Mando, etc because they mesh well with the general design of the universe.
Lower Decks is as far as Star Trek as it can be, and yet it fits very well in the universe. Because it respects itself and respect the source material.
JJ never respected the source material and the universe.
Pretty much. SW is a very “hero’s journey” story. Somewhere else in this thread, I posted this:
And although I would say that Andor is proof you can do cool things with a Star Wars background, at its heart SW is a conceptually fairly simple. Young person with the help of wise wizard and plucky band must master his powers to face down the evil tyrant. Now, is that the OG trilogy? Prequels? Sequels? LoTR? The Matrix?
That, but in a space samurai/western backdrop. Andor not only respects the canon, it explores it. Sure, it’s not telling a hero’s journey tale, but it’s grabbing a piece of existing canon and enhancing it if anything.
This is where JJ I think fucked up with the Trek canon.
Well, fuck. This was the ONE social media site that I put my data on, and that was out of necessity (job hunting). I know it’s not the same, but this sort of feels like the Equifax breach.
If it's any consolation, LinkedIn is notoriously terrible at this, so your data was probably out there as early as 2016 and almost certainly after 2021, when they managed to get hit with similar breaches twice in the same year.
And we share real background information, very specific details. This could lead them to our friends and colleagues!
But I’m not sure it can be called social media, though, but if you are looking for social media platforms that can avoids data leaks, and don’t ask for your personal info when register, WireMin and Damus are both good choices.
Speaking of which, we should have a version of LinkedIn that is decentralized!
Now you shut your damn mouth, let’s just let Linked In die like it was always supposed to. It’s not some sort of positive networking platform, it’s just a platform that reinforces the old boys club, with some cringey posts from people who are trying to hard.
I stopped using LinkedIn several years ago when it was turning into some hideous social media thing rather than just a place to keep an updated cv. I took a look at it six or so months ago and Jesus Christ, what the fuck happened?
It appears to now just be filled with people desperately trying to convince other people that they’re an expert when in reality they’re just talking to themselves and no one’s really listening.
It’s so stupid, but definitely can be helpful professionally to maintain a profile there. Depends on your experience and what field you’re in, of course, but recruiters seem to use it a fair amount.
Definitely don’t use it for the garbage social media aspect (it’s like some weird crowd-sourced Chicken Soup for the Soul shit??) However, I’ve been convinced of its utility after getting a new job through a recruiter there without even looking. The process was sooo easy compared to applying for jobs the traditional way. Icing on the cake was that it came with a 50% raise and was for a position I would never have applied for on my own but I love it. Maybe it was lightning in a bottle, but I figure doesn’t hurt to keep up a page just in case another good opportunity comes along. If nothing else, the recruiters I hear from give me a sense of how hot the market is and what kind of jobs my profile is pinging me for in case I want to make tweaks.
For sure, there’s definitely utility to having one. I just got fed up with constantly getting pinged by recruiters that were clearly bots as well as all of the @ mentioning on said ‘chicken soup for the soul’ bullshit posts.
Its all HR people constantly job hunting by sharing the equivalent of those “hang in there” wall posters from the 90s and adding a paragraph about what it takes to make it in the workforce.
Ill make one of these bullshit posts now.
Suggested:
In school my old teacher Mr. Gerry would perform the elephant toothpaste experiment. This got me thinking. The glass beaker is like the job market and the chemicals mixed together is like your marketable skills that grow to fill the needs of the job market. In my 16 years as a human asset coordinator I’ve come across many difficulties that required shifts in how I approached the job market. Be like the elephants toothpaste and explode into the market beeeeyaaaaa
It still works as intended if you ignore all that and keep your head down. I get a fair amount of relevant offers and I got rather nice jobs through it over the last 15 years.
I don’t follow, stamping every function with : any lets you merge the branch and deploy it… trying to properly type everything extends the initial migration time likely to a level where management just says no.
Use a combination of allowJs and ts-ignore, do progressive enhancement, and convert your codebase file by file. Adding any everywhere literally turns off type checking altogether codebase wide, including type inference. It also means a huge PR that’s both just noise that needs to be fixed later, and messes with your git history (good luck getting anything useful out of blame or bisect now).
Just getting a green build doesn’t mean things are okay. You’re worse off than before doing that.
I disagree that you’re worse off (the core of my comment was that even a shitty migration encourages better practices)… but I wasn’t super familiar with TS hinting - using ts-ignore would be preferable.
Personally, I mostly work in PHP and we use a similar system. Strict typing is default off so we’ve slowly propagated declare(strict_types=1); to enable compile and runtime checking on a per file basis.
using any is actually much worse than using TS, because you’re basically telling the compiler “don’t help me here”… at least with JS the IDE is gonna help you… :/
lemmy.world
Top