Nerd02

@Nerd02@lemmy.basedcount.com

Based Count head admin.

Some of the tools I’ve created:

I speak: 🇮🇹 🇬🇧 🇫🇷

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

anarchiversitario, to politica Italian
@anarchiversitario@poliversity.it avatar

Antifascisti in Barriera di Milano
@politica
Il presidente della VI circoscrizione Lomanto si è dovuto accontentare degli assessori comunali e regionali alla sicurezza Pentenero e Ricca. I capi della polizia, dell’esercito e il ministro dell’Interno, pure invitati con ampio anticipo, non si sono presentati al consiglio...

Vedi l'articolo

https://www.rivoluzioneanarchica.it/antifascisti-in-barriera-di-milano/

Nerd02,

Da qualche settimana il governo, per soddisfare le richieste della VI circoscrizione e dell’assessore regionale alle politiche sociali, ha deciso di destinare in Barriera una parte delle truppe destinate a Torino per l’operazione “strade sicure”. Il quartiere è stato pesantemente militarizzato, con controlli ossessivi in ogni angolo, per spingere un po’ più in là il babau di questa periferia: i pusher neri che stazionano agli angoli in attesa dei clienti.

Bene così, assolutamente necessario. Ho vissuto vicino a Barriera per qualche anno e trovo inaccettabile che in una città come Torino ci siano simili livelli di degrado.

E’ sufficiente? Assolutamente no, come suggerito dall’articolo devono avvenire anche dei cambiamenti sociali, quali accesso a cure mediche e dimore dignitose per tutti, ma la sicurezza rimane imprescindibile.

Nerd02,

That’s awesome. I’ll rewrite all of my instance’s bots to use that in the next months. I like how lightweight this appears to be.

Do you think it would be possible to host a bot on a servless platform, if the Lemmy instance uses Lemmy Webhook? It might be a bit slower due to cold starts, but I think it should be theoretically possible.

Nerd02,

My dad used to play red box D&D (which I believe was the first edition ever released). Still has some manuals, which I got the chance to read.

Not only it was encouraged to play humans, it was assumed! You didn’t get to pick a race, only a class. And while the classes of “elf” (think like 5e’s ranger) and “dwarf” (5e’s barbarian, sort of) were a thing, all of the other classes assumed for the player to be a human. You couldn’t play an elf wizard: you either are an elf OR a wizard. Wild stuff, compared to some of the crazy stuff we get to do in modern D&D.

Nerd02,

Not familiar, but from what I just read online it looks pretty similar yeah. I believe the idea behind DCC was recreating exactly that simpler old school fantasy.

Nerd02,

News outlet are being extremely vague about Orban’s motives, but it’s clear that no funds have been unfrozen. By the looks of it, it seems Hungary received no grants at all and just changed its mind out of the goodness of her heart, which is weird.

From DW

“From what we are hearing from our sources, they made it very clear to Viktor Orban that he is standing all alone in the EU, blocking this essential aid for Ukraine,” she said, adding that following the message it became clear Orban would finally say yes and so the EU leaders sat together to finalize the deal.

This makes me wonder if anything went on behind those closed doors. We know that yesterday Orban met with Meloni, who according to euronews

[Meloni] has fashioned herself as the most dexterous mediator between Budapest and Brussels. Meloni and Orbán held bilateral talks on Wednesday evening in anticipation of the high-stakes meeting.

All that’s left to hope is that Meloni and other EU leaders succesfully managed to scare off Hungary and that no backroom deals went on.

Nerd02,

Possible. I’d love it if they actually went through with the article 7 threats, but until then using said threat to have Orban sit down is the next best thing.

Nerd02,

Correct, but that review process won’t have any votes on it, meaning it also won’t be possible for Hungary (or anyone else) to veto it. Doesn’t seem like that great of an accomplishment on Hungary’s side.

Nerd02,

Quickly? By EU standards, I suppose, but this is the furthest thing from “quick” in the real world. We are about a month late compared to the UK and the USA.

but they can’t do the minimum decent thing and say “we condemn Israel’s atrocities” in the UN

The EU is a permanent observer in the UN and as such doesn’t have any voting rights. The common foreign policy is decided by the Council and requires unanimity so every member state has veto power. As such it’s practically impossible to come to a conclusive decision on divisive matters such as the current Gaza conflict.

Nerd02,

I can agree with that. Something that looked particularly bad was von der Leyen openly supporting Israel, in contrast with what had been decided by the rest of the EU institutions. Basically she took initiative and used her position to support her own agenda rather than the one agreed upon by the institution she was representing. (source, albeit soft paywalled)

A more direct approach in foreign policy is sorely needed for our continent, but I think we are still going to have to wait a few years before we can see it.

Nerd02,

I mainly write JS and not having a backtick on my keyboard annoys the fuck out of me. Other than that the Italian keyboard is alright, never had any other problems with it.

Nerd02,

What do you mean when you say: “christian apologists”? I’m afraid I am not understanding your question and that’s me speaking as a Christian.

Do you mean people defending Christian positions in thelogical debates? Or is it the name of some niche sect I am not aware of?

Nerd02,

Uh I see. I didn’t know any of those people, so I had to google that discussion between Alex O’Connor and Wiliam Lane Craig. Listened along for quite a bit and it was actually very interesting (so thank you, I’ll definitely finish listening to the whole thing later on).

From the way the used that “technique” I am guessing it isn’t really that much about Christianity but rather, as others have said, a way to connect to the other person. People often get understandably heated during theological debates (understandably so, our most important beliefs are being challenged), maybe calling the other person by their name is a way to try and remembering the human and forming a sort of emotive connection that could otherwise get lost during the discussion.

Why specifically Christians? I don’t have an answer to that one. I am guessing it might happen more frequently with religion talks rather than say politics, or other frequent topics of discussion, because religion tends to appeal more often to morality and thus emotions. Just a guess, though.

Nerd02,

Oh yeah. No doubt about that, you never stop learning. It applies to all aspects of life, not just religion.

Reading that links it looks like I actually did know what the discussion is about and just got confused. I googled “christian apologists” like OP called it, found no exact definitions and so I started wondering if maybe it was something I didn’t know about. Protestant denominations often have weird names and I keep finding out about new ones, maybe there was also a prot denomination called “apologists”. Guess not, though.

Nerd02, (edited )

I’m sorry that you felt the need to compare those who spread Christian doctrine with rape apologists and Nazis, but there are some things I don’t like about your comment. Chances are you are not interested in hearing them (at least judging from the wording you used), but someone else in this thread might be.

Yes, God is an absolute good. Yes, we cannot understand Him. Most “atrocities”, like you called them, come from men being given free will by God and drifting away from His teachings, thus doing stuff that isn’t good. God is good.

If a baby dies and is baptized they go straight to Heaven. If a baby dies and isn’t baptized we don’t actually know for sure what happens (it is never explained in the Bible), but by interpreting other aspects of Christian dogma we can hope and assume that they too would be saved. On this topic I recommend the following read, by the International Theological Commission

[There are] grounds for hope that unbaptised infants who die will be saved and enjoy the Beatific Vision. We emphasise that these are reasons for prayerful hope, rather than grounds for sure knowledge. There is much that simply has not been revealed to us.

If there are other “atrocities” that you can think of and you’d like to discuss, I’d be happy to.

EDIT: boy did this blow up. I’m sorry for the replies I have left unanswered but I don’t have the time or energy to give any more nuanced answers on the topic. I am also not an all knowing expert of Christian / Catholic theology, I am simply trying to spread some awareness and a different view, on a platform that is evidently mostly Atheistic. If you have further questions the Internet will likely have the answers you seek, expressed better than I could anyway. Cheers.

Nerd02,

That is spot on. Contrary to Protestant (and in particular Evangelical) belief, the Catholic Church teaches that there are four senses through which one can read Scripture: one is literal, while the other three are spiritual (allegorical, moral and anagogical) and can help us interpret Christ’s message and how we should or should not behave during our earhthly lives. This is the relevant section from the Catechism.

I am not familiar with Orthodox theology, but I would assume they would have a similar position on the topic.

Nerd02,

I literally quoted a source. Want more? This is the Cathechism of the Catholic Church on the topic of free will:

1730

1730 God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.”

1739

1739 Freedom and sin. Man’s freedom is limited and fallible. In fact, man failed. He freely sinned. By refusing God’s plan of love, he deceived himself and became a slave to sin. This first alienation engendered a multitude of others. From its outset, human history attests the wretchedness and oppression born of the human heart in consequence of the abuse of freedom.

If instead you were looking for philosophical evidence for God’s existance, I recommend reading Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways.

Nerd02,

Quite funny really

I know, right? Like I said it was mostly a semantics issue, I wasn’t sure what OP meant. When they kindly clarified their question I gave them my answer, coming from a different perspective from most of the commenters.
Then in you came, and started slandering my religion. Like you might have guessed it didn’t quite sit right with me. Assuming you are an Atheist, it’s like I came at you saying that “Atheists have no morals” or “Atheists are nothing but hedonists”. I don’t think you would have liked it. So I tried my best to provide sensible answers to your remarks. I guess that makes me too an apologist; I don’t really have a problem with that label.

Everything before your last sentence presupposes your personal interpretation of your god.

No, it is the interpretation of the Catholic Church, which is the church followed by most Christians on this planet.

I’m not looking for philosophical evidence […]

Alright, you do you then. It seems to me that you are trying to explain God through science, and I’m not sure whether that is possible. Science, from a Christian perspective, is the study of God’s creation. Inferring knowledge about the creator from His creation seems like an arduous task to me. I think using reasoning and philosophy would be a more reasonable option.

Clearly this is the Christian god of the Bible and definitely not any other god humans have believed in […]

One step at a time. Once we are both on the same page that a higher being exist and the universe and life aren’t just the product of mere coincidence we can discuss why I think the “Christian God”, like you called him, is the right interpretation. But first you would need to accept religion(s) in general.

Nerd02,

Ok so first off, thank you for typing out a well thought argument.

I posted a summed up version of the five ways, rather than the full text, and now I realize that probably was a mistake. I just wanted to make sure people would have read it, most would have ignored a wall of text. Instead, I will directly quote the full text in my answers here.

Here is a TL;DR, cause this will be long:

Thus beginning a long standing religious tradition of using scientific rhetoric where its helpful and attempting to shoehorn philosophy in where it contradicts or fails to uphold.

I don’t think he tried to use scientific rethoric at all, nor that any philosophical shoehorning has happened. Rather, it’s entirely philosophy. Doesn’t mean it’s perfect or necessarily correct, but we gotta call it the way it is. I also think you might be trying a bit too hard to interpret it as science, while that’s not really what the Summa was meant to be. Some of your conclusions were drawn from the summary I posted not being accurate (sorry about that, btw) and I adressed them by quoting the full text.

Starting from the fourth way:

Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But “more” and “less” are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

You correctly criticized his mistake in using fire as the source of maximum heat and mixing in scientifical evidence with philosophy, but the full text tells a more nuanced story.
Fire here is more of an example, rather than pure scientifical evidence. It’s also not the basis of the point he is adressing here. That would instead be more abstract (and wouldn’t you know it, philosophical) concepts like “good” and “true”. So while your discussion on splitting natural sciences and philosophy makes a lot of sense, I don’t think it applies here.

Onto the fifth way:

The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

In truth, I think this is the most beautiful of the five ways and the one that, to me,makes the most sense from a scientific perspective. I remained of the opinion that Aquinas wasn’t trying to bring in natural sciences into this one, but since you brought up “modern scientifical understanding” I will do my best to make some sense of it, according to modern science.

The message here is not as easy as water flowing because of gravity. It’s also not as easy as “what was before the Big Bang?”, because that would be, like you said, vulnerable to the “God of the gaps” counter argument.
Rather, starting from the universal constants such as the Boltzmann constant which regulates all of thermodinamycs; the speed of light in a vacuum, which regulates all existing radiation or the gravitational constant, which regulates how all matter and time interact; through science we get a very clear picture of how many pieces needed to fall into place for reality as we know it to come together, let alone life to be possible. According to this modern interpretation, the fifth way states that in order for the universe to exist as we know it, defined according to these specific constants, it must have happened through a higher being, a creator. Here, actually, is the only place where I see a possible mistake, because on a logical level he doesn’t prove definitively that the existence of God is the only solution to the problem, the hypothesis of a coincidence remains on the table. However I personally think, when put in this perspective, the religious hypothesis remains the more believable one.

On your last point, I don’t see how the fifth way would violate what he has established from the first way. The fifth claims that motion of inanimate objects happens naturally and repeatedly because of “some intelligent being […] [whom] we call God”. The first instead says that God was the first who put everything in motion, and that because of that things have been kept in motion ever since the universe began. I think these two point go hand in hand, rather than being opposed:
God first created the universe, by putting things in motion. God also defined the patters according to which things should have moved after his initial “push”. This makes perfect sense to me.

Nerd02,

I guess we could all see this one coming. IIRC all three nations had been suspended after their respective military coups, so it’s understandable that the dictators had little simpathy for ECOWAS

Nerd02,

Great idea, we really needed a more specific community. Usually any time I build something I post it to !fediverse , but the scope of that community is so broad it sometimes feels out of place. Plus, as an instance admin I feel it will probably be convenient having a single community to consult for all the extensions and integrations we might want to opt our instances in.

Nerd02,

Exciting stuff! In particual I really like how neatly organized the project roadmap is, with a quick glance at the project GitHub page I can tell what you guys are working on and how development is proceding.

Also, props for using a widely established language like Java. I know Rust has lots of advantages and is all in all an awesome language, but having to learn a new language just to be able to contribute and submit PRs to your favourite open source project kinda kills the hype (and takes away a bunch of time).

Nerd02,

I am really conflicted about this. On one hand I get that green policies are instrumental in stopping climate change before it’s too late. On the other I know some people who work in the automotive industry and they all agree that we shot ourselves in the foot with this regulation. We ended up being the only committed nation block (whatever) while anyone else (namely China, India and the USA) kept doing little or nothing, token contributions if any, but few long run plans like we did.

Surely there is lots of lobbying from the car industry behind this EPP decision, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was also the genuine intention of many voters. Our industry is already falling behind, being the only ones concerned with green policies isn’t helpful at all, it just allows everyone else to outcompete us.

Nerd02,

30+ year approach? Where is that coming from? The median construction time for a nuclear reactor is 89 months, or 7,5 years. And it’s not like we are only going to need it now either, our civilization is going to need reliable power sources for the foreseeable future, so why settle with alternatives that can only barely cover our needs now and need to be replaced with fossil fuels when not available, when a much cleaner option (that being nuclear) remains a possibility?

The wind always blows somewhere. Diversification of locations across a country or ideally across Europe minimizes reliability issues.

That somewhere will also need power, though. Not to mention, building interconnections across nations is an arduous task that requires time and financing on its own. According to the European Commission the current objective is reaching a 15% interconnection capacity by 2030 (meaning every member state should be able to export up to 15% of its capacity). And only 16 of 27 countries are on track with that objective. Sure, going forward with this will be great and very much necessary, but we cannot rely solely on interconnections, even when thinking 10 years from now.

Let’s take last night as an example: here are the electricity map data for Germany. At midnight, despite having an enormous renewable capacity installed, the wind was evidently pretty low and of course solar was of little use, so they still had to fire up their coal, gas and biomass generators.

https://lemmy.basedcount.com/pictrs/image/c842d731-2add-4556-9c3b-a66cb25d92ba.png

As this was going on, neighbouring Austria and Netherlands were doing great, with respectively 85% and 71% of their grids being powered by renewables, but unfortunately this wasn’t nearly enough for power hungry Germany.
In the meantime, France, despite only using 24% of renewables in its mix, managed to get the 4th lowest carbon intensity on our continent and the 7th worldwide, with a carbon intensity over 10 times better than that of Germany.

The rest can be covered by investment in storage technologies.

Some day, sure. But we need reliable and clean energy now, not in the distant future. So the first step is improving our grids today, then when the technology allows it we can phase out nuclear too, and move to a fully renewable grid. But that simply cannot happen right now.

Nerd02,

How is being more virtuous shooting ourselves in the foot, exactly?

Let me clarify. It’s great on an environmental standpoint, it’s quite terrible on an industrial and commercial one. If we are the only ones imposing climate regulation, businesses and industries will move abroad where it’s cheaper to operate. I’m not saying scrapping the green deal laws is a good thing, but I am saying that I can see the logic behind it. And it’s not because of the evil capitalism either, it’s a desperate attempt for European industry to stay relevant on the global stage.

deleted_by_author

    •
    Nerd02,

    Yes.

    Angry NPC wojak

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • anitta
  • ethstaker
  • DreamBathrooms
  • InstantRegret
  • magazineikmin
  • tester
  • khanakhh
  • everett
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • tacticalgear
  • kavyap
  • osvaldo12
  • JUstTest
  • mdbf
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ngwrru68w68
  • provamag3
  • Durango
  • rosin
  • cisconetworking
  • normalnudes
  • modclub
  • megavids
  • cubers
  • Leos
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •