Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | kashunstva's commentslogin

This has been happening forever but only on my bike trainer setup. I have a laptop and an external display mounted in front of my handlebars. The screen will reliably go blank when I remove my outer layer as I start to warm up. I tried grounding myself but that didn’t seem to help. I had just assumed static electricity due to the Lycra shorts rubbing against the saddle. Maybe the ferrites will work.

> “Charlie Kirk was someone who encouraged everyone to love others,” Bulso responded.

Except I recall him endorsing the stoning to death of gay people as “God’s perfect law.”


It was the textbook "reap what you sow" moment.

In the Netherlands we've learned that you don't have to respect people but you do have to tolerate them because the alternative is a never ending civil war. It comes with having a diverse society of various cultural and religious backgrounds.


I'm trans. Why do I need to tolerate someone who not only hates me, but would revel in watching me die?

You recall incorrectly, as he was using that example in the bible as to why you don't follow a literal interpretation.

The straightforward way to read a self-professed Christian—and biblical literalist—characterizing a chapter of the Bible as “affirm[ing] God’s perfect law” is as an endorsement of the laws in that chapter—in this case, condoning the stoning to death of non-celibate gay people.

It doesn't matter what is "straightforward", it matters what is true.

Kirk was being criticised by Ms. Rachel, who used a section of Leviticus ("love thy neighbour") to push back on Kirk's assertion of homosexuality as a sin. Kirk's response to Ms. Rachel was that merely a few sections later, the same Leviticus says that gays should be stoned to death.

That's a way for him to win an argument over the Bible's view on homosexuality, not a way for him to endorse the notion that gays should be stoned to death.

(And most importantly, literalists assert that that laws of Leviticus were repealed by Jesus, so even if he were a literalist Christian, the straightforward interpretation is that he does not endorse stoning gays, since Jesus repealed that law)


He's saying that instead of loving gays as your neighbour you should kill them

"You" should? Who is "you"? Just any guy on the street who decides someone else is wrong?

I am afraid that people toting this canard are seriously misinformed about the nature of Sacred Scripture, and Moses' role in leading the Israelites at that point in time.

For the Israelites, and the Jews living in Israel, Moses' law was the law of the land, the law ordained by God. It wasn't vigilante justice or extrajudicial killing. It wasn't no angry mob picking up rocks to stone someone they didn't like.

The stoning of guilty parties that was prescribed, was a state-level execution. It would be the same as any criminal who undergoes arrest, trial by peers, conviction and sentencing.

So if Kirk was saying that God's law prescribed some sentence for some offense, I hope that we can agree that Kirk wasn't encouraging gun-toting vigilantes to go out lynching people in the night without due process or without actual legislation.

Furthermore, we also need to consider the context of these citations in the course of a debate process. Kirk was not a deranged pastor shouting for violence from his bully pulpit. Indeed, many of the debates found him confronting students who were deranged or deluded in many ways, and Kirk would never shy away from meeting them where they were at.


We don't actually know what is true. We can only surmise from the content of his speech. Usually, when one is making assertions about one's own beliefs, one intends to be understood and so the most straightforward interpretation is likely to be the most accurate.

Or are you suggest that he was being deliberately obtuse and cryptic?


> Sunlight is a carcinogen

But sunlight is essential for the cutaneous conversion of 7-dehydrocholesterol to vitamin D3, whereas ethanol serves no essential purpose, irrespective of whether one enjoys it or not.

Personally I don’t consume ethanol; but I don’t care if others do or not so long as they stay off the roads and are not piloting my flight.

I will say that when I did consume ethanol even in small quantities, my sleep was much worse than it is at baseline; and that effect only worsened as I got older.


Ethanol is food— you also don't need carbs, but they do keep you alive. More importantly, it fairly central to cultural vitality. Not essential but it plays a highly functional role. Maybe could be replaced by religion or other drugs, but short of that, the world is less vibrant without it.

Did they just overtake the Wehrmacht for that honour?

> Although Trump threatened the ICJ

I’ve wondered, in the immediate aftermath of his recent genocidal threats, whether Mr. Trump was feeling left out of that club.


They point to Luhmann and his hundreds of academic papers. But I’ve asked two sociology professors about Luhmann and they had never heard of him.

Luhmann left behind 70,000 index cards, published over 70 books and ~400 papers, and his systems theory is still actively applied in sociology, legal theory, and organizational studies. He's required reading at German universities. Your sample size of n=2 is methodologically a little thin – which Luhmann himself would have appreciated, given that he had a particular fondness for pointing out systemic blind spots.

"Two professors hadn't heard of him" is a fascinating epistemological standard. Like me stating: I've also met two cardiologists who didn't know who Rudolf Virchow was. Guess he wasn't that productive either.


Fair enough, I missed the mark that I was intending. Possibly he remains better recognized in Germany than in North America; and it’s admittedly not my field. At the same time, more than once when I’ve posed the question about the utility of ZK, I’ve been pointed only to Luhmann. His academic productivity isn’t in dispute. And seemingly, for him, it was aided by the methodology that is promoted by ZK followers now. But it’s also an n=1 data point. I wonder if the ZK community has identified other productive and impactful academics who are devotees.

As for the last comment: having gone to medical school some decades ago and trained in cardiology, I’m familiar with Virchow. I would be surprised to encounter any physician who hadn’t any familiarity with him. But who knows?!


Yeah, I admit, Virchow was a low hanging fruit as a cynical comparison. I stumbled upon Luhmann in school. I always wished, I had a ZK. I never got around to being disciplined enough to build one.

I also was more of an Foucault guy at university. So I never really got into Luhmann. Albeit I originally studied literature and my uni was quite cultural studies heavy - this is why I read quite a lot from other disciplines back in the days.

I feel Luhmann might be a great poster child for deferred gratification. But that might just be the cynic speaking.


[flagged]


I don't think there's anything passive here - it's a very constructive and valid argument. Are we not here to have a discussion?

Most scientists are not very well known, even in their own discipline. Their fame is usually locally and temporary, limited to which ever bubble they were roaming. Luhmann was well known in Parts of Europe and South-american, and died ~30 years ago. Not unusual for someone today to never heard of him if they are living in other regions.

the zettelkasten of niklas luhmann is currently being digitized. you can browse it online. zettelkasten II is the more interesting one.

https://niklas-luhmann-archiv.de/bestand/zettelkasten/inhalt...


[Luhmann, back from the dead]: how has my work been received?

Sociology prof: "uhhhh. Well, the good news is that there are a ton of YouTube videos about you."


> hallucinate 10% of the time in charge of human lives

Out of curiosity, about a year ago I queried a few models about how to fly a particular instrument approach. It was an ILS approach using a DME arc transition. Other the basic concept of lateral and vertical guidance, most of the models got literally everything wrong. Wrong headings, wrong NAVAID frequencies. Wrong procedures. Maybe they’re better now in this domain, but they were confident in their claims of the ability to read an approach plate. But it was terrible.


Growing chillies easily becomes its own rabbit-hole. I grow between 30-40 different varieties, which, depending on where you live, can be an interesting and near year-long venture.

At least in studies that are about a decade old now, atheists are the most disliked religious minority group in the U.S. We’re regularly linked to major historical genocidal regimes, and consistently blamed for a host of social ills. So yes, given long enough, I would worry about being explicitly targeted by the current administration. But I hope their excesses do them in long before that happens.

More recently that doesn’t seem to be the case. Atheists are still largely disliked, but the most uniformly disliked are Mormons. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2023/03/15/americans-fe...

The 4 character 5x7 LED dot matrix displays are a thing of beauty. Are they the Broadcom device? The ones that are ridiculously pricey.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: