diaphragmwp
@diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.de
moved from us instance
- Comment on I don't think I'm being taken seriously I think we need to start a class action suit 2 days ago:
Read like a pre-AI chatbot to me.
- Comment on Anon borrows a pen 2 days ago:
Believe it or not, inceldom
- Comment on A real, 100% unedited promotional picture from Kohler toilets 2 days ago:
It is pretty funny to me that Photoshop® has made people completely forget that things like paint.net and the gimp exist, instead categorizing all content by brand names.
- Comment on Don't Call Me. Ever. 2 days ago:
Fuck cell phones and cell towers, unironically. Fundamentally incompatible with both software freedom and privacy.
- Comment on No worries, companies of 3d printers will find out how to scam their customers soon too 1 week ago:
imgflip?
- Comment on No worries, companies of 3d printers will find out how to scam their customers soon too 1 week ago:
Check moderation history! Repost bot.
Ding ding ding ding ding ding
- Comment on Not at all 1 week ago:
Too bad, can’t speak after wish 1
- Comment on This Is Why I Sit Down To Pee Pee 1 week ago:
You think someone will follow a youtube link in the context of peeing on the queen’s face?
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
23:19
Which book?
1 Samuel 15:29
27As Samuel turned to leave, Saul caught hold of the hem of his robe, and it tore. 28Samuel said to him, “The Lord has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today and has given it to one of your neighbors - to one better than you. 29He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a human being, that he should change his mind.”
He won’t change His mind in that regard, yes. If interpreted differently, it would be contradicting itself pretty much immediately. Jonah 3:10:
When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.
does he have a dick n balls?
The real answer is that we don’t know exactly. Forgot which branches, but He is often depicted as a father in various ways, including as Maria’s partner who gave birth to Jesus. Which implies that yes, He does have a dick n balls. Although no actual fucking is described, it’s just poof and pregnant.
- Comment on I clicked through ALL of them and left without posting. 1 week ago:
I pressed the burger menu and “user moderation history”.
All I have to comment is: literally 1984
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
40,000 denominations that all think the others have it wrong
Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
Matthew 18:18. New living translation to the rescue again:
I tell you the truth, whatever you forbid on earth will be forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven.
assume the first was just filler
The Bible is really easy to interpret when you just ignore the stuff you don’t like.
Okay, if you interpret the first as something else (like until you don’t see heaven and earth so you died, or something else entirely), the other point still stands. I just claimed “another way to think of it”, meaning alternative.
If you believe God is unchanging (…) God (and therefore Jesus) condoned rape
Again, multiple ways to go here. I actually personally agree with both here.
Simple one, lots of lines from the book initially quoted follow the structure of “sin - punishment”, which implies marrying the victim was meant to be punishment which was then weaponized by the evil.
Now on the extent of God’s immutability: He can’t age, and is always omni[potent/present/scient] sure, but He made humans in his own image, and humans change all the time. Everything not specified otherwise is equal between humans and God. He is usually depicted having arms and legs since humans have those and it was not specified that He doesn’t. And I, as one of the creations in His image, would consider myself quite “changed” compared to last year or even 3 or so months ago. Don’t see how God couldn’t change his opinion on the matter, even despite the modern social construct for “person” often including opinions.
- Comment on Literally nobody 1 week ago:
For it will be like
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
Oh come on, we could be debating here all day, that’s why there are multiple branches of Christianity in the first place.
Also, correct, not a single stroke of a letter “passed”. We were just looking at translations of these strokes of letters. Doesn’t mean all of them are still in effect.
Another way to think of it. There are two time conditions specified, “until heaven and earth pass away” and “until all is accomplished”. One could assume the first was just filler, and second refers to when Jesus finishes teaching everyone.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
It says “fullfill”. “I came here not to abolish” quite literally meant that the old testament were to still be considered part of the Christian bible and kept for reference. It’s a bit difficult for me to define “fullfill”, although the “New Living Translation” is in my opinion more clear on it with “accomplish their purpose”. “Purpose” refers to the one described in Jeremiah 31:31-34.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
I beg your pardon, did I say something negative or was there another reason for such an offer?
- Comment on I clicked through ALL of them and left without posting. 1 week ago:
Which was?
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
He exists all the time, ahead of time. I am sure he would not be micromanaging each meat bag in the simulation harder than Jeff Bezos micromanages his piss breaks. Regardless, as per my other reply, the quote doesn’t count as all standards have been overruled by the new testament. Before you ask why there are new/old testaments despite “existing all the time”, I say he just fast forwarded then saw what happened and pushed the Jesus update to fix it.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
Well, people can reasonably believe it is an argument either against the bible or for what is said in the quote.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
Correct. However, old testament. Therefore, your argument is invalid.
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 57 comments
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
yup thx
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
Fuck you for making people load g**gle tho
- Comment on Gameplay mechanics were also a lot better with more replayability. 2 weeks ago:
- Comment on Hey looky! I'm on a list a just learned about three minutes ago! 2 weeks ago:
See, actually, since there are technically multiple lists (this is the large one) and all of them are in files, it would be more correct to say “in the files”.
- Comment on Should I just abandon this online identity and start over? 2 weeks ago:
It’s… already partially unintentionally true. One name for IRC and forums (plus stuff prompted by said forums), one for a browser game or two, and this one for everything else. Although are you suggesting I should literally use a random nickname generator for each service? What if I want to cross reference something across them? Also, would imagine multitasking being one hell of a pain. I mean, I can spawn multiple Tor Browser instances and stuff, but then have to make sure I am doing the intended thing in each one. I am a bit of a “social chameleon” and I am already struggling with just using only the correct inside jokes with someone…
- Comment on Should I just abandon this online identity and start over? 2 weeks ago:
Men, I can talk shit about Putin all I want, everyone knows I’m Ukrainian anyway.
Although good point. I am not sure what meaning to derive from that. This specific nickname I am using right now was followed by a partial burn and partial renaming of accounts since I wasn’t this paranoid (or more like aware) back then. Would this “meh, they can still find you” mean “don’t bother” or…?
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 6 comments
- Comment on YouTube money for charities 2 weeks ago:
Even if not for everything else mentioned here, I see TVs with the official YouTube client stuck at “Are you still watching?” in public from time to time, so there’s that.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
Only partially user-centric decisions because the @someRandomOEM.com and @redhat.com people will send drivers with no documentation to go with it due to NDAs. Also only partially user-centric decisions because if someone is backed by a company, their solution will be pushed faster.
People on free software adjacent forums (probably originated on linux {.} org {.} ru?) thought of a standard unit of measurement for how much pedantic force a person is able to apply. It is called “1 Poettering”, named after Lennart “Harry” Poettering. Values greater than 1 have not been observed; it is often assumed to be the highest constant similar to the speed of light. Here’s a table from (my very subjective) consensus:
- Lennart “Harry” Poettering - 1 (the system deez nuts guy)
- Mark “Shuttlecock” Shuttleworth - .9 (the Canonical guy)
- Hans Reiser - .7 (ReiserFS)
- Richard Stallman - .6 (GNU)
- Linus Torvalds - .5 (Linux)
- Theo De Raadt - .2 (OpenBSD)
Maintainers of random projects that everyone takes for given are <=.1 until they riot when it becomes .6 temporarily.
- Comment on How many people have driven right into that wall 3 weeks ago:
I am NOT claiming Teslas don’t suck, I am claiming Mark Rober sucks. The AI in the car could still perform shit if it wasn’t a content farm, those aren’t mutually exclusive. Though that one guy must not be wrong since he worked at NASA or something. Sounds like the guy who worked at Blizzard Entertainment for 7 years…
Turn your gold into piss
I know a guy who knows a guy who has a better offer.
Turn your piss into gold
