myslsl

joined 1 year ago
[–] myslsl@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

So you're saying that because a religion allows you to choose which of God's commandments, carefully passed down through every generation, you personally want to follow based on your gut feeling, can't be shamed?

No, that is not what I said.

Why should the ones who choose to deny parts of their religion be seen as representative of it over those who've chosen to uphold them?

I definitely answered this in my original comment.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Because if the majority of people following a particular religion reject a prior view as false or wrong, then arguably that view is no longer part of the religion.

Religions aren't crisp, unchanging, monolithic entities where everybody believes the same thing forever. If we're talking about judaism in the sense of the views and practices jewish people actually subscribe to, then that seems like we are referring to beliefs they actually hold in a mainstream/current sense, not beliefs they previous held but now reject?

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Operating System Concepts by Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne is a classic OS textbook. Andrew Tanenbaum has some OS books too. I really liked his OS Design and Implementation book but I'm pretty sure that one is super outdated by now. I have not read his newer one but it is called Modern Operating Systems iirc.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Given that music boxes are very very old it is plausible that beethoven could have made a remark sharing his opinion on this exact issue. I don't mean to agree/disagree with your point, I just find that kind of interesting.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You're getting downvoted but you are right. Stuff like this is a super cool example of exactly the type of thing you are talking about imo.

There's a lot of AI generated art that sucks. But that does not imply that in skilled hands an artist can't use those tools in creative/interesting ways.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Arguably a lot of these tools are designed specifically to reduce the effort a human has to put in to create the art they want to make too.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

If you have a fixed collection of processes to run on a single processor and unlimited time to schedule them in, you can always brute force all permutations of the processes and then pick whichever permutation maximizes and/or minimizes whatever property you like. The problem with this approach is that it has awful time complexity.

Edit: There's probably other subtle issues that can arise, like I/O interrupts and other weird events fwiw.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The joke is that I'm implying they want to fuck this version of jesus.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

There's definitely a bit of "forcing" these people want to do with this version of Jesus, they just don't want to admit it.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago
[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago
[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Why should the government support someone's bad eating habit when they don't support someone's alcohol habit, or cocaine habit?

I'm not a doctor at all, but for certain addictions, people can die from the withdrawls that occur if they just stop. I'd imagine in those cases rehab and treatment requires supporting the habit via the drug itself or a safer analog in order to keep the individual alive so that they are able to draw down and eventually quit whatever the source of their addiction is.

For example:

  1. Administering benzodiazepines to alcoholics.
  2. Administering methadone to opiate users.
view more: next ›