Pope Leo XIV warns AI could threaten workers as industrial revolution did in the 1800s.
See full article...
See full article...
Amen. It is always best to read the entire statement:Except that isn't what that chapter is saying. This is just as annoying as the fundies who use out of context quotes to justify shit.
I’ve come to the conclusion that avowed evangelical atheists usually base their sermons on the premise that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Personally, I’m not that convinced of my own omniscience, and try and act on the basis a person’s relationship with his or her higher power is their own damn business.I'm an atheist* and generally against religion, but given the state of the world I'll take a spark of hope where I can. Unfortunately we are not anymore in a world where expressing progressive ideas is considered good PR so when corporations and politicians are taking the knee, speaking up for compassion and minorities' rights is a brave act, especially when doing the opposite can net you more power. I wish it weren't so and I wouldn't have to congratulate the pope for what is basic human decency but here we are and I think we need to close ranks on common values.
* Funny enough I used to be a big atheist when I was a teenager, and at some point I asked myself "wait I actually don't know that much. People are dedicating their lives to religion. Maybe I'm missing something. I should read the Bible for myself.". Since I am very thorough I started by researching what is the Bible in the first place and this question alone made me an even bigger atheist. Actually reading it was just confirmation.
It should be noted that it isn't just the Catholic Church, but also the Orthodox Churches that claim Apostolic Succession.
I've long come to the conclusion that one is never going to sway the religious into giving it up, nor should they have to. If they want to believe what they want to believe, that's fine with me.I’ve come to the conclusion that avowed evangelical atheists usually base their sermons on the premise that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Personally, I’m not that convinced of my own omniscience, and try and act on the basis a person’s relationship with his or her higher power is their own damn business.
And when necessary, politely encourage them to conduct themselves towards mine thusly, also.
Thus the pope's analogy to the industrial revolution. While mechanization was a boon during the IR, it was an epic shit show for a generation while society adjusted to its ramifications. The dovetail of AI with robotics will be a wet dream for the replacement of all sorts of manual labor. The positive side might be assigning dangerous tasks to those robots. But what is dangerous and where is there efficiency? Adding robots 'just because' isn't a viable roadmap. I see legislation needed to decide which occupations can be replaced. I don't need or want a robotic waiter/waitress or checkout person. Flawed as they may be at times, there is a human side that needs to remain in our society and lives.Huh. I didn't know popes chose their own names.
It's a pretty reasonable concern, unfortunately.
In a healthy and functional society any technology which reduced or eliminated work would be viewed as a good thing.
Instead, the majority of people seem to think it's going to have a negative impact on the world overall.
IMHO, it's not even the technology itself, it's the fact that we're essentially inept at responding to it. I don't even think "AI" is the main culprit here. It's the fact that we've gotten very good at automating away human labor without giving the humans performing that labor anything to fall back on, which has been a collective choice on our part. It's just an absolutely brutal state of affairs for anyone caught up in it and it doesn't need to be.
And funny, one of those evangelical atheists just tried to gotcha me on this thread about proof of the guidance/communion of the holy spirit. Evangelicals are annoying no matter their stripesI’ve come to the conclusion that avowed evangelical atheists usually base their sermons on the premise that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Personally, I’m not that convinced of my own omniscience, and try and act on the basis a person’s relationship with his or her higher power is their own damn business.
And when necessary, politely encourage them to conduct themselves towards mine thusly, also.
I've actually read that the average citizens of Constantinople actually cheered on the sacking as they viewed the elites of the city and the orthodox powers to be corrupt and decadent etc. Some things never changeThe Copts, Syriacs and the Armenian churches also claim apostolic succession. All of which are deeply interesting. Coptic culture retains a direct link to the ancient Egyptians, though the Coptic language has been largely supplanted by Arabic outside of liturgical uses. The Syriacs include Assyrians, descendants of the ancient Assyrian Empire, who have persisted through all the subsequent wars and transitions of Mesopotamia. Armenia was the first state to adopt Christianity, ahead of the Romans.
The Catholic-Orthodox schism was the last schism of the Apostolic churches, and had very little to do with theological differences. It was a long simmering dispute between Rome and Constantinople over who had jurisdiction over what area. That was manageable until the 4th Crusade in 1204 sacked Constantinople. The crusaders were largely lead by Venice and had actually been excommunicated by the pope, but leadership hid that from the rank and file. Still, they burned the Queen of Cities, the last city of antiquity untouched by looters, and parted out the heart of the Roman Empire as fiefdoms.
The Orthodox never forgave the Latins for that. Understandable, not only was their churches and city desecrated, but it lead directly to the eventual conquest of the Roman Empire by the Ottomans and the 500 year subjugation of the Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians and others.
The last 3 popes all apologized for the 4th crusade. I expect Leo to as well.
Oh cut the anti-religious crap. Would you snark the same snark over any other organization that had a similar scandal and has worked to prevent it from happening again like the Scouts?It won't stop. It will just get hidden better.
You interpret it to mean what suits you. Sometimes it's a metaphor. Other times it's the truth (sic). Generally though it's phantasmagorical bollocks that has made people try to discover, invent, interpret, evidence for its 'truth' for millennia. With no success to speak of that I've ever seen. Go figure...
They'll give you $40 if you let them make an AI crimebot with your iris prints. Think about tomorrow's job prospects and the fact that with $40 you could have fries and a drink with your burger if you're dumb enough to not hodl your RubeCoin.It always amazes me the logic AI companies use to justify their product...
AI company: "With AI, you won't have to work as much or as hard!"
Labor: "Great! I'll still get money to live with right?"
AI company: "Well, we'll get money."
I've actually read that the average citizens of Constantinople actually cheered on the sacking as they viewed the elites of the city and the orthodox powers to be corrupt and decadent etc. Some things never change
Oh cut the anti-religious crap. Would you snark the same snark over any other organization that had a similar scandal and has worked to prevent it from happening again like the Scouts?
I’ve come to the conclusion that avowed evangelical atheists usually base their sermons on the premise that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Personally, I’m not that convinced of my own omniscience, and try and act on the basis a person’s relationship with his or her higher power is their own damn business.
And when necessary, politely encourage them to conduct themselves towards mine thusly, also.
Reframing others positions allows you to win every argument without making a sensible point.
Atheism is merely being unconvinced a God exists, you have the burden of proof, so stop trying to move the goalposts and demonstrate why God exists.
Kind of hard to do when the Catholic Church uses its immense influence and wealth to lobby to restrict birth control and abortion rights for my daughters.
We interpret everything within our own dogmas.Popular Bible scholar Dan McClellan likes to say we interpret the Bible within our own dogmas.
The bolded seems to be in contradiction.Reframing others positions allows you to win every argument without making a sensible point.
Atheism is merely being unconvinced a God exists, you have the burden of proof, so stop trying to move the goalposts and demonstrate why God exists.
Kind of hard to do when the Catholic Church uses its immense influence and wealth to lobby to restrict birth control and abortion rights for my daughters.
Also, as voters Catholics in general tend to favor both abortion and birth control. So on the balance of things the Catholic Church really isn't tipping things hugely. The last I saw it is at least 60% of catholics....says an avowed evangelical atheist to someone not trying to convince you of anything. Thank you for making my point in your own words.
My daughters, also, but the Catholic Church isn't the biggest player in that field...
Do you happen to notice that your approach is falling flat with a community largely consisting of skeptics?
Is John Paul II still pope where you're living? To our knowledge those practices under JPII aren't happening anymore, and would get people defrocked and reported to the authorities today once found out.Prevent it happening? By shipping pedo priests from one parish to another?
Endemic Catholic influence keeps their offenders from real investigation and prosecution. In Phoenix a bishop ran over a man while driving drunk, and got probation.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna4610708
From the article it sounds like the bishop wasn't even drunk driving. The guy he hit was drunk, though. The crime for which the bishop was convicted was leaving the scene of an accident.Is John Paul II still pope where you're living? To our knowledge those practices under JPII aren't happening anymore, and would get people defrocked and reported to the authorities today once found out.
What in the world investigation has to be done into a drunk driving accident? This sounds pretty in line with normal sentencing guidelines. Usually, the big penalties don't start applying until you've got multiple offenses under the belt. Especially if he didn't contest the charges and showed remorse.
From my understanding, probation like this often had probations on behavior, such as not drinking or going to bars, which are intended to protect the public.
Do you have evidence that the church interfered with this? Beyond the fact that it would be correct to say the former Bishop, because it sounds a lot like he was fired from his position of leadership.
Oh, I didn't think to check if the OP was misrepresenting what the charges were for. In that case, the sentence seems very reasonable. 1,000 hours of community service, losing your license, and 4 years of probation seems very reasonable for that.From the article it sounds like the bishop wasn't even drunk driving. The guy he hit was drunk, though. The crime for which the bishop was convicted was leaving the scene of an accident.
I'm not even sure what the point is supposed to be, true or otherwise. People drink, people drive drunk, and that includes priests. Priests are people, subject to the same whims and faults as anyone else, and a single example of a transgression just doesn't seem to highlight anything at all about the church. The priest fucked up and deserves the same consideration and punishment anyone would receive, I just don't see how this somehow besmirches the church in any particular way.From the article it sounds like the bishop wasn't even drunk driving. The guy he hit was drunk, though. The crime for which the bishop was convicted was leaving the scene of an accident.
It's pretty cringe that someone thinks the ars comments is the target audience to convert away from religion....says an avowed evangelical atheist to someone not trying to convince you of anything. Thank you for making my point in your own words.
My daughters, also, but the Catholic Church isn't the biggest player in that field...
Do you happen to notice that your approach is falling flat with a community largely consisting of skeptics?
I don't actually understand this. Are you suggesting that the Ars community are largely theist or atheist?is the target audience to convert away from religion.
Ha!Zippy, while I appreciate the aesthetics of that bottle, I think you missed an opportunity by using Frangelico and not Malort.
Speaking for myself, I prefer to make decisions on logic and fact, and preaching via holier-than-thou emotional appeals absent either fact or logic to a choir with mostly people pursuing a similar methodology is time not well spent for anyone involved.I don't actually understand this. Are you suggesting that the Ars community are largely theist or atheist?
Benjamin Franklin... "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."Ha!
From Wikipedia:
John Hodgman said Jeppson's Malört "tastes like pencil shavings and heartbreak."
...Jason Sudeikis' character riffs that Malört is like swallowing a burnt condom filled with gasoline.
Joseph Atkinson...compared it to "taking a bite out of a grapefruit and then drinking a shot of gasoline."
Thanks for introducing me to a contender to Jägermeister for the vilest tasting substance on earth.
Have you tried putting a dollop of it in hot chocolate and topping it with whipped cream?The direction this conversation has taken frustrates me. Why? Because I know that God exists. I have definitive proof; I've tasted the divinely delicious, soul-soothing, heavenly euphoric ambrosia that only an omnipotent and omnibenevolent deity could create.
And you could know God, too, if only you would have a taste of this, served in a warmed snifter:
View attachment 109589
If these guys want to go around threatening people with hell for not worshiping their god, they don't really deserve the respect they demand.People need to lighten up a little, recognize humor for what it is. This wasn't in bad taste so even on a purely social level I don't think this was abject in and of itself, so I don't think you should have to excuse yourself. Religion doesn't deserve the silk gloves its treated with. [Insert flavor of religion] certainly doesn't treat other religions or non-religion with the same kind of deference and respect that it demands for itself, so have at it.
I invite anyone that thinks otherwise to read and listen to Sam Harris, Daniel Dennet, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and many others.
Nothing should be beyond criticism, even (maybe especially) religion. Not doing so does everyone and religion a disservice, in my opinion.
I'm an exvangelical. Believe me, I'm well aware. While both Catholic and Protestant traditions have a few examples of genuinely good people, I think, they also are both rife with abuses, power seeking, wealth seeking. Hence my proposition that the Church, whether Cathholic (and we can split that further into whether Roman or Eastern/Greek), or Protestant, have never been particularly strong moral compasses in the world.
Yeah it's going to take some getting used to for sureI can't get around the novelty of hearing the Pope speak and it coming out sounding like my buddy's whole family from Barrington.
From the article it sounds like the bishop wasn't even drunk driving. The guy he hit was drunk, though. The crime for which the bishop was convicted was leaving the scene of an accident.
Because my view is different to yours it's crap? You sound very much like your orange turd of a leader!Oh cut the anti-religious crap. Would you snark the same snark over any other organization that had a similar scandal and has worked to prevent it from happening again like the Scouts?
I voted for Harris, and for Biden, and for Clinton, so next time think before you snarkBecause my view is different to yours it's crap? You sound very much like your orange turd of a leader!