Skip Navigation

Lumidaub

@ Lumidaub @feddit.org

Posts
1
Comments
1173
Joined
2 yr. ago

she/her, A(u?)DHD, German, sometimes draws nonsense. Likes Doctor Who a normal amount.

#fckafd #fckcdu #fckmrz

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • What is unclear to you about my comment?

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • Even Catholic teaching says that sex is vital for partner bonding beyond procreation.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • You don't know that and it hasn't been shown.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • I honestly don't know what could make me believe in a claim as extraordinary as "the god as described by the Christian Bible (or any other religion's scripture) exists" but from all I know about this supposed entity, this god would know what would convince me and would have no issue making it absolutely obvious and inevitable to me.

    Parlour tricks like having blood grow on hosts is not it.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • A "camera team" is not science.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • No. If you can prove that's what happened, you've proven that it has happened. You haven't shown that it was caused by a deity. The fact that humans have proclaimed this object to be "the Body of Christ" is not proof.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • It has not been shown that a host grew tissue, it has been shown that somebody had a sample of human tissue.

    You may not have seen my added second paragraph (apologies for editing that in): even if a host grew human tissue, that's highly unusual but not proof of a deity.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • It hasn't been shown that that's what happened though. What has been shown is that someone had a sample of something.

    And even if a thing grew human tissue, that's proof of that thing growing human tissue. It takes a LOT more to prove a deity exists.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • Fair. I wanted to point out that we all experience some influence of religion(s) in our daily lives and thus have opinions. I suppose I could've worded that less ambiguous.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • "Someone brought a sample of something" is not science.

  • Are there any communities where people have real intellectually honest discusions?

    Jump

  • Someone would have to enforce that. Which means they'd have to lay down specific rules to determine what's honest and real and serious. I wouldn't want to be the one to do any of that, especially not without a group of other mods to share the inevitable blame.

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • True, that's what I said, no?

  • Removed Locked

    why is lemmy so anticatholic?

    Jump

  • I haven't seen any hate specifically towards the Catholic Church (I was raised Catholic, I think I'd notice). Lemmy is majority atheist and we live in countries whose cultures are at the very least heavily influenced by religions so there's no love for theists.

    What you MAY be seeing is people reacting to the rampant child abuse done by Catholic clergy that is regularly reported on and never really addressed.

  • Did you have your Weight and Height recorded in school?

    Jump

  • I remember a number of various medical tests done in primary, like weight and height but also a dental check or a check for colour blindness. I also remember that discussion around backpacks being too heavy but I think that was after I had those tests? Anyway, I assume they were done primarily to screen for developmental issues or parental neglect which would explain why for most people nothing ever came off it.

  • Using AI for image transcripts, yay or nay?

    Jump

  • Yep, same, it's a bit of a weakness of the Fediverse imho.

  • Using AI for image transcripts, yay or nay?

    Jump

  • That's a good point but wouldn't it be preferable to have one AI run one time instead of several of them doing the work again and again?

    (Assuming that we're even okay with AI generated descriptions in the first place which I'm not for reasons I've laid out in my other comments but I'm talking hypothetically)

  • Using AI for image transcripts, yay or nay?

    Jump

  • "@Lumidaub" is a reference to me. The system added that because they were, technically, replying to my comment here.

  • Using AI for image transcripts, yay or nay?

    Jump

  • I know what you're saying but I truly think for most people it's simply that they're overthinking it. They think every single thing needs to be in the description, with references explained and sourced and whatnot. That does sound exhausting. And I have written a handful of descriptions like that for pictures where I thought the details were interesting enough to justify the effort. But really, a simple "The thirteenth Doctor and Rose Tyler embracing and deeply kissing" is already very sufficient in most cases (add "standing on an asteroid in front of a field of glittering stars - digital colour painting" if you have the spoons). So imho it's better to educate them and encourage short, concise descriptions than to give in to the slop.

  • Using AI for image transcripts, yay or nay?

    Jump

  • I mean, if you put any image online that hasn't been protected/poisoned in some way, you have to (unfortunately) assume it's in some AI's training data anyway. If the tradeoff for a useful description (! See my other comments about the lack of usefulness) is that an image is also fed into one more training corpus, that would be worth a thought, imho. If the image is protected/poisoned, I'd indeed encourage this whole hypothetical process, just to further sabotage the data.