Comments

  • Quarterly Fundraiser 2
    How about setting up a bookshop where members can offer their books for sale and give a commission to the site? — John
    X-) I like it. What would you be selling?

    And I suppose we would have to take care of transport if our book gets sold? Or we'd all have to mail our books to jamal, and when they get sold he pays us and takes care of transport, but that would be a lot of work for him.
  • Suffering is change
    Or perhaps a good cookbook? — praxis
    Unfortunately for Peterson, I think that Sam Harris does have a point there. But then Peterson's "Christianity" isn't real Christianity to begin with - but rather an impostor. Peterson thinks God is an abstract hirearchy that is needed to keep society together - that is outright heretical, I don't understand how he can call himself a Christian... And he even says that people like Sam Harris pretend not to be believers, but actually act like believers :s I think Peterson is thoroughly confused on this issue, and he has lost the path because he doesn't adhere to Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. He even says that it doesn't really matter if Jesus existed or not... by all means Peterson is not a Christian.
  • Stoic Works
    I've thought along those lines as well. But to his credit Seneca along with Sextus Afranius Burrus generally ran the empire well during Nero's time as emperor, until Nero took full control after murdering his mother. Seneca seems to have made great efforts to control Nero and teach him morals. And, when he saw Nero no longer liked or trusted him, offered to retire from the imperial court and transfer all his assets to the emperor. He also by all accounts died very well when he was accused of conspiracy against Nero and Nero ordered him to take his own life or have it taken from him. He chose the first option. — Ciceronianus the White
    Why did he not outsmart Nero and take the Empire from his incapable hands?! :s Seneca sounds like he wasn't very savvy with regards to this... Instead he preferred to let the crazy one rule and terrorise his people.
  • Feature requests
    How about add a "Fave books" or some such just to make it a complete mess? — Michael
    >:O Favorite philosophy book would be an interesting one. Not sure what I'd put there...
  • Stoic Works
    A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, by William B. Irvine — Wayfarer
    Several people seem to be recommending this book on TPF and also old PF. I purchased it based on andrewk's recommendation at old PF and was thoroughly disappointed. You're much better off sticking with the actual stoic texts - Aurelius, Seneca and Epictetus. In addition, Nassim Taleb's books, especially Antifragile, aren't a bad addition at all :)
  • Stoic Works
    Seneca's main point is that we don't appreciate that we have short and finite lives and we are wasteful with the time we do have. We keeping saying next year or when the kids grow up or when I retire I'll work on my goals. We end giving away all our time, our greatest reassure, to others leaving no time for "lesuire". By that he doesn't mean relaxing or leisure pursuits but he means pursuit of virtue and search for Truth. In short, philosophy. — MysticMonist
    I have a big issue with Seneca's point, even though I respect Seneca and the rest of the Stoics and have greatly learned from them. Most of the time in our lives is "wasted" simply because it's not the right time to act. The Chinese have a military proverb which goes like - "the wise man spends his whole life sharpening the blade which he will only draw out one single time". Remember that - the sword will be drawn only one time, and that will make all the difference, and the difference will be very sudden. Until then it takes patience - LOTS of patience.

    This is something that many people who read Seneca today don't understand. We're pushed by our society to act. All the time you have to act. As if it was possible to do what you wanted to regardless of what day it happens to be today. This is utter arrogance and foolishness. Act at the wrong time and you will fail, and not only will you fail, but you may actually put your entire dreams in jeopardy. Seneca died because he acted at the wrong time. Because he tried not to "waste" his time. That's why he was killed. And yet, some want to follow him in his foolishness.

    If Seneca wasn't so impatient, he could've replaced that vermin Nero and ruled the Roman Empire righteously. He could've saved his people of a tyrant. But he failed. If only Seneca had had access to Chinese military wisdom.

    An apple tree bears fruit effortlessly when it is in season. It doesn't have to struggle. It comes most naturally. When it's time to act, you don't have to struggle. It comes most naturally. If you've ever been in a fight, you understand this. When it's really time to act, then you will act, there's no question about it. But if you try to act out of season, if you try to act when it's not your time yet - that will be like the apple tree trying to produce fruit out of season - futile, and even dangerous. When you're out of season, sharpen the sword.

    Lie low, live aimlessly like a peasant at the countryside. Take pleasure in the little merriments that life offers you now. There's nothing more to do in life - until & if you're finally called to act.
  • Getting Authentically Drunk
    I expect the prigs of TPF to tell the rest of us how contemptible they find such indulgence — jamalrob
    Well, if you already know what I will tell you, what's the point of me saying it? :s
  • Climate change and human activities
    First, it fails to mention that in the past, before mankind started to release vast amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere, the atmospheric CO2 concentration could act as a positive feedback to global surface warming or cooling. If orbital variations (e.g. Milankovitch cycles) would cause some amount of warming, for instance, then consequent warming of the oceans would trigger the release of even more CO2. But that is not what is mainly causing the CO2 increase now. — Pierre-Normand
    Okay but how can we know for certain that CO2 increase (which is undeniable) will cause warming? We notice a correlation so far between CO2 and temperature, in the long term. How do we know that this correlation indicates causation at the level of the entire earth? And if it does how do we know that the earth does not have some mechanisms to counter-act the warming effects? It seems to me that we're being quite arrogant to think we fully understand what the earth is capable to do.
  • Climate change and human activities
    I don't know, you guys will have to do better than this to convince me. Human reason generally tends to hubristically assume that it can know with certainty (and it devises clever formulas and mechanisms by which it quantifies that certainty)

    I do think there is "climate change" in the general sense of the term attributable to human activity - things like pollution of seas/oceans, etc. are quite clear. But I'm not convinced with the whole temperature rise stuff. And I'm certainly not convinced by the apocalyptic scenarios some people paint.

    So I voted "No" in the poll, even though I think there probably is some human caused climate change and we ought to be cautious, simply because I think we're overemphasising its effects and importance.

    Incidentally if you want to read a really scary article on climate change, have a read of this essay in NY Magazine. Not for the faint of heart, I warn you. — Wayfarer
    >:O Oh yeah, time to grab the pony! Incidentally, someone sent me this article about last week, and I couldn't understand what's so "great" about it. It's a journalist who already is pretty settled about his opinion trying to shove it down our throats and create sensationalism and fear.

    You can read for example this counter article from awhile back:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/11/does-co2-correlate-with-temperature-history-a-look-at-multiple-timescales-in-the-context-of-the-shakun-et-al-paper/
  • Jesus or Buddha
    Perhaps he is just talking about this life? — Beebert
    Well, salvation would be achieved in this life no?
  • Jesus or Buddha
    Sounds like hell is empty of souls, methinks. If God is love, then I wonder why he is said to keep a record of our wrongs throughout our lives in order to then judge which afterlife we go to. It appears as though God is, in fact, all forgiving, which is a quality I on't think Buddha can match, so Jesus > Buddha. — Heister Eggcart
    Then why does Jesus say that narrow is the path that leads to salvation and wide is the path the leads unto destruction? Why did he say that it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God? Why are there more mentions of hell in the New Testament, than in the Old Testament?
  • Jesus or Buddha
    ↪John
    X-)
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    Hey can someone please do my programming assignment for me — darthbarracuda
    That depends on (1) what is your programming assignment, (2) what programming language are we talking about, (3) how much are you paying? and (4) if that person is fine with the ethics of the situation. But in short - we need more details.

    Quite often I see people asking for something generally like that, and it's not helpful to anyone - I don't even know if I can help you based on the info you have provided for example.

    I'll pay you — darthbarracuda
    And another important question is how are you paying... because Paypal payments aren't very secure, there is no seller protection for digital goods (but there is buyers' protection though - very messed up). Many programmers aren't even aware of this lol.

    Hire a programmer, get the work done, and then go to your bank and file a chargeback aimed at Paypal :P - that's what a ruthless businessman would do >:O

    So programmers need to be careful with Paypal as a payment option.
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    ↪VagabondSpectre
    Yeah, that seems to work. Here was mine:

    public int makeChocolate(int small, int big, int goal) {
  if( small+5*big>=goal && goal%5<=small){
    if (5*big < goal) {
    return goal-5*big;
    }
    return goal%5;
  } else {
    return -1;
  }
}

    Though I will say that one of your conditions is redundant (below is the shorter version with that condition removed):
    public int makeChocolate(int small, int big, int goal) {
  int remainder = goal%5;

  if (goal > big*5+small || remainder > small) { 
    return -1;
  }
  if (big*5 < goal) {   
    return goal-big*5;
  }
  return remainder;
}
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    You need to perform the same number of checks either way, so there is no loss or gain either way except to keep it concise... — VagabondSpectre
    The way you've written them that's true, there is no loss or gain. But there might be a better way to do what you're trying to do there (and that would be the way you avoid using nested loops). Arrays for example are just one data structure that you can use to hold your values. Depending what you want/need to do with the values, arrays may not be the best way to store the data... (for example - why do you want to compare every datapoint from one to every datapoint from the other? Are you looking for something? What's the goal in that comparison?) There's also binary trees, hashmaps, treemaps, stacks and more... You may just need a different type of data structure for your project. So you'll either use a library that already has the data structure you need, or you have to create it yourself.
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    ↪VagabondSpectre
    Have a go at this one:
    http://codingbat.com/prob/p191363

    Solve it without any loops :P (your processing code should pretty much work fine for the purposes you need it inside the Java version there).
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    ↪VagabondSpectre
    But if you think about it, it makes sense. For each value of loopOne, the whole of loopTwo needs to be completed. That's a lot more calculations than having, say, two independent loops.

    Say I have two loops, each making n calculations, one inside the other. That would effectively be n2 calculations, because for each calculation in loopOne, there need to be n calculations in loopTwo. If I had two loops independently one after the other, then that would be 2n calculations. Generally if at all possible I tend to avoid loops (though this is rarely possible) - and I very much try to avoid nested loops where possible.
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with nested loops other than it carries the chance of iterating through index values which are redundant or need not be checked. If I stored each prime as I found it and used that data to rule out future testPrimes and indexes of the loop that checks it's factors, it could be made faster still. — VagabondSpectre
    Are you familiar with Big-O notations? Two loops inside each other would be O(n2) as opposed to O(n) for a single loop if I'm not mistaken. Again I never studied computer science - I took courses on it - but never studied it properly (I have a degree in Civil Engineering), these are just some things I've picked up with regards to algorithms. Big-O is used to classify the time efficiency of an algorithm.
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    Coda on Mac. — Michael
    Yeah Coda2 is my favourite on Mac. Atom is surprisingly good amongst the free ones though - better than the others I've tested.
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    Right now I'm building a thermodynamics simulator as a learning project — VagabondSpectre
    The one I did was similar - I looked into Brownian motion.

    Can you show me an example solution to that problem which does not use a nested loop? — VagabondSpectre
    I will think about it, haven't solved that one yet. But I did say:
    That should preferably be avoided. — Agustino
    Of course there are some situations where this wouldn't be feasible.
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    You mentioned web development, have you used P5.js ? — VagabondSpectre
    No never used it before! But I would imagine it's more useful for things like designing the front-end of games/applications rather than just website development. Looks pretty much like a Processing version for the web :P

    It's like processing but new and with CSS/DOM/HTML functionality so you can more easily structure page design. I use brackets for P5.js... — VagabondSpectre
    That's cool! I'm not very familiar with it, as you can see, haven't used it before.

    I would be very impressed if someone could get a solution in shorter code (although the run time is a bit high on this one)... — VagabondSpectre
    That's because you have two loops nested inside each other. That should preferably be avoided. I'm not a computer scientist so I don't understand the theory very precisely, but I do know that having loops nested increases run-time significantly.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    Oh, so maybe you're an unrepentant criminal. — Heister Eggcart
    I said I cannot know this with certainty. I may be one, but I don't think so. Low probability.

    Okay, good, which includes you too, (Y) — Heister Eggcart
    Absolutely! I don't know if I will be in Heaven. But I do hope I will be.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    You've already said that unrepentant criminals won't go to heaven which entails you having knowledge of such being a certainty. — Heister Eggcart
    Yes I do have such knowledge, but I do not have the knowledge of who actually is an unrepentant criminal. I cannot tell you this man or that man, etc. won't be in Heaven.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    Also, how do you know that unrepentant criminals won't be in heaven? — Heister Eggcart
    How could they be? Is it possible to be forgiven of your sins if you do not repent? The Bible and Christian tradition certainly doesn't indicate so.

    No, I thought that was you, considering the tenor of your posts yesterday. — Heister Eggcart
    X-) Don't confuse. I take logic to be valuable and useful, but in a limited way. Logic isn't an absolute for me. It's not an absolute judge. Logic, just like our other capacities, is also fallible. For example, the Trinity is contradictory, but I think the Trinity is right and logic wrong. I also gave you the quantum mechanics example.

    None of this follows at all because you have no knowledge of who does and does not go to heaven. Period. Only God does, which means that you are in no place to pass judgement on those whose fates you have no knowledge of. — Heister Eggcart
    I don't know which individual people will go to Heaven, I agree. But that's because I cannot know if an individual person fits the description of unrepentant criminal with 100% certainty. If I could know that about a particular person, then I could say if they're going to Heaven or not.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    unrepentant criminals, rapists, mass-murderers, torturers, child molesters — Agustino
  • Jesus or Buddha
    You said that you were certain that criminals weren't going to heaven. This is not a statement, but a specified judgement of all criminals — Heister Eggcart
    No, I actually said UNREPENTANT criminals are not going to Heaven. And yes, I hold by that statement. All unrepentant criminals will not be in Heaven.

    Furthermore, if you are so certain of who will and won't pass through the pearly gates, I'm sure you've decided for yourself that you are heaven-bound, for you aren't a criminal, amirite? — Heister Eggcart
    :s Have you left your logic in the drain? If I am not an unrepentant criminal, it wouldn't follow that I'm going to Heaven necessarily. If A is a B (an unrepentant criminal is a hell-destined sinful person), it doesn't follow that C (something other than a criminal) isn't a B (a hell destined sinful person).
  • Jesus or Buddha
    Stop playing dumb or I'll stop replying to you. — Heister Eggcart
    I'm not playing dumb, I'm getting you to see that I've actually judged no soul. I said a general statement. A general statement only becomes a judgement when applied to particulars, otherwise it's just a general statement. I did not suggest I can apply it to particulars, for I would not know what is in their hearts.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    The soul you think you can decide whether or not it goes to heaven or not. — Heister Eggcart
    And which one is that?
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    Btw for the web developers among you, which text editor do you use? Atom, Coda, Sublime, Textastic, Brackets or something else?
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    processing — VagabondSpectre
    I've used it before - it's really good for creating things that involve geometry and graphics (both 2D and 3D). I've made a professional software with it for a client - and I also made a physics simulator with it for fun lol.

    library of functions for javascript)... — VagabondSpectre
    Java* :P
  • The Buddha and God
    Buddhism and Buddha probably initially held the vantage point that there is no immobility called truth (the concept of impermanence which also exists in Daoism at about the same time) — Rich
    That's not true. Buddhism states that the five Skandhas (meaning this world) is anicca. Buddhism does not state that Nirvana is impermanent, or the Dharma is impermanent, or Buddha-nature is impermanent. These things, on the contrary, are absolutely permanent and unchanging.
  • The Buddha and God
    You make a 2 second google search, saw it on fake buddha quotes, didn't even read the page, and called it lies. — Wosret
    I have read the page, and it wasn't just that. I've studied Buddhism before, never heard of such a thing.

    Despite that the page said that it was in the darmapada, then just insinuated that it was fake because it didn;t sound right to them because Buddha was poisoned, which itself may not even be true. — Wosret
    The page did not say that it was in the Dhammapada. You are a very very big liar and you should be ashamed of yourself. You should read that page:

    The locus classicus for this particular version would seem to be Eknath Easwaran’s introduction to his translation of the Dhammapada
    Does it say it's from the Dhammapada?!! (N) No of course it doesn't, cause I read the damn Dhammapada and it's not there.

    first published in 1985

    Don't call me dishonest. We both know how frequently you lie. You think I don't know? Don't address me. — Wosret
    You probably cannot cite a single instance of me lying, and yet you call me a liar. You should look in the mirror.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    Judgement is judgement, and you're judging a soul into hell, which is not your place to do. — Heister Eggcart
    Which soul?
  • Jesus or Buddha
    There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you--who are you to judge your neighbor? — Heister Eggcart
    I haven't judged my neighbour, I've judged abstractly. If someone really is an unrepentant criminal of the kind I've described, they will be destined for hell. Of course, I cannot judge particular instances, only God would know their hearts.

    No, it's not. You don't know their internal state, only God does. Why don't you let him be the judge? — Thorongil
    I do, I haven't judged individual people. All I said is if someone were to be TRUTHFULLY described as an unrepentant criminal, then they will not go to Heaven.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    That's not for you to say. — Thorongil
    So you think they will be going to Heaven? :s That's impossible, if they are immoral and unrepentant that they will reach Heaven.
  • The Buddha and God
    Something is true no matter who said it, or where it is found. Something is false no matter who says it, or where it is found in my view. This is why I attempted to askew notions of just appealing to authority when I was challenged. — Wosret
    This is one of the biggest dishonest bullshits I've heard on these forums. Yes, you are correct that a statement is true or false regardless of who said it. However, I challenged you about the authenticity of that claim being made by Buddha - not whether it's true or not. I don't care about disputing whether it's true, I care if it's what the Buddhist religion teaches. So you are being intellectually dishonest if you claim that's what the religion teaches. If you only claim that statement is true, that's not a problem to me. But don't tell me that's what Buddhism is, cause that's bullshit.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    Good quoted. I like those views — Beebert
    Yes, but you have to understand that those views do not - absolutely do not - suggest that unrepentant criminals, rapists, mass-murderers, torturers, child molesters, etc. are going to heaven - they certainly are not.
  • Jesus or Buddha
    So only those who know about Christ and reject him anyway goes to hell? — Beebert
    It's hard to say, we're not given any kind of certain knowledge about who achieves salvation and who doesn't. There's a gentile for example talked about in Scripture called Cornelius, and he was called righteous and pleasing to God before he heard about Christ.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_Christian

    There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ but who are so strongly attracted by Him that they are His in a much deeper sense than they themselves understand. There are people in other religions who are being led by God's secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points
    — C.S. Lewis

    Anonymous Christianity means that a person lives in the grace of God and attains salvation outside of explicitly constituted Christianity — Let us say, a Buddhist monk — who, because he follows his conscience, attains salvation and lives in the grace of God; of him I must say that he is an anonymous Christian; if not, I would have to presuppose that there is a genuine path to salvation that really attains that goal, but that simply has nothing to do with Jesus Christ. But I cannot do that. And so, if I hold if everyone depends upon Jesus Christ for salvation, and if at the same time I hold that many live in the world who have not expressly recognized Jesus Christ, then there remains in my opinion nothing else but to take up this postulate of an anonymous Christianity.
    — Karl Rahner

    Nevertheless, God, who desires to call all peoples to himself in Christ and to communicate to them the fullness of his revelation and love, "does not fail to make himself present in many ways, not only to individuals, but also to entire peoples through their spiritual riches, of which their religions are the main and essential expression even when they contain ‘gaps, insufficiencies and errors'". Therefore, the sacred books of other religions, which in actual fact direct and nourish the existence of their followers, receive from the mystery of Christ the elements of goodness and grace which they contain.
    — Pope Benedict XVI

    If someone who lives in the midst of Christianity enters, with a knowledge of the true idea of God, the house of the true God, and prays, but prays in untruth, and if someone lives in an idolatrous land but prays with all passion of infinity, although his eyes are resting upon the image of an idol – where, then, is there more truth? The one prays in truth to God although he is worshipping an idol; the other prays in untruth to the true God and is therefore in truth worshipping an idol.
    — Kierkegaard
  • Fun Programming Quizzes
    ↪Michael
    Yah that was quite an easy one :P . Mine in JS:

    var total = 1000;
var sum = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < total; i++) {
  sum += checkDivisibility(i);
}
console.log(sum);

function checkDivisibility(num){
  if (num%5==0 || num%3==0) {
    return num;
  } else {
    return num=0;
  }
}

    Although, I remember I didn't get the right answer the first time, because I thought I had to include 1000 in the calculation (so I used 1001 as total). Then I was very puzzled why I'm not getting the right answer >:O
  • Jesus or Buddha
    BTW, since when did amount of members mean success? — Beebert
    That's certainly part of the criteria of success. If Christianity is true, and God communicates through Christianity, then presumably Christianity couldn't be a small religion followed by very few people, but would rather reach out to a large number of people, and that's exactly what we see today.

    Was the inquisition a success? — Beebert
    No, because it diminished the number of Christians, amongst other things.

    If I live a life alone in the Woods from the age of 0 to 40 and never injure Another man, and then I die at that age without believing in God and Christ, I am going to hell right? — Beebert
    I don't know, I'd tend to believe you're more likely to go to heaven to be honest.
Home » Agustino