An HN user time-transported in from 15 years ago would find it incomprehensible that there there are only two sceptical responses (both flag killed) on a post about a message from the supreme leader of a nearly 1.5 billion strong religion. Times have truly changed.
Times have changed in a lot of dimensions. To name 2: 1) we have an AI thing now, and 2) the pope is American and more trustworthy than all of our current top politicians of both parties.
It's not like people are longing for times of papal authority, they're just looking for anyone at all with common sense.
15 years ago it was Pope Benedict, who was a pretty different figure. I can speak only for myself, but I would have had more cynicism about him than I would for Francis or Leo.
Please don't post grandiose conspiracy theories like this on HN. All kinds of criticism of AI is posted all the time on HN. Comments are downvoted or flagged if users disagree with them or if they break the guidelines. If you see anything that's flagged unfairly, you can vouch for it or email us (hn@ycombinator.com) to point it out.
I’m not going to be contented until I can get Ja’s take on if LLMs even have the slightest potential to be an engine behind artificial general intelligence. Or that they definitely won’t be but the ideas that will come from layering and transformers will be vital for example.
> Transubstantiation means the change of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the Body of Christ and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of his Blood. This change is brought about in the eucharistic prayer through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the Holy Spirit. However, the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the “eucharistic species”, remain unaltered.
But I'd say any Catholic who believes in the Eucharist would admit, yeah, it's a bit of an odd thing, especially by today's standards, to consume the blood of a sacrificed animal.
Presidents through out American history has believed various forms of genocide and slavery were applicable practices to modern problems; hell the current president thinks variously incredulous things.
So you know, you might want to adjust your measuring stick before you critique people.
Both things can be true at the same time, so shutting down the critique (possibly because it is critiquing something you like??) just because another critique can be made is not a good counter argument
> Transubstantiation means the change of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the Body of Christ and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of his Blood. This change is brought about in the eucharistic prayer through the efficacy of the word of Christ and by the action of the Holy Spirit. However, the outward characteristics of bread and wine, that is the “eucharistic species”, remain unaltered.
Edit: It's a catholic thing, and it's very silly (other denominations say its symbolic)
Lets not forget the hideous acts that this church has commited against young men and children in america. This would the last place I'd accept leadership advise from.
This message is not focused on u.s or its presidents. Its focused on leadership world wide.
The people best suited to give advice on how AI should be used, distributed, and controlled are probably those disconnected from the profit structure of AI.
Both American presidents and Abrahamic faiths have, historically, justified slavery and genocide (and often by the same pretense.)
And the current President's ridiculous beliefs are just as ridiculous as believing in transubstantiation. Believing angels manifest on Earth and intercede in human affairs is no more rational believing that aliens are manifesting on Earth but are really demons, which Catholic VP JD Vance believes. The former is just more culturally accepted, and thus given the weight of dignity, but both are valid as far as a naive and literalist interpretation of the Bible is concerned, because demons exist in the Bible, but not aliens.
Either way, as much as the Pope is a silly man in a silly hat looking like a fucking wizard who is required to believe in supernatural nonsense while leading a corrupt den of pedophiles, he's also absolutely and objectively correct on this specific topic and it's clear he's put far more researched thought into his opinions on AI than 99% of people on HN. Hell, he even apologized for the Church's historical support of slavery, and many people here won't even concede that slavery was ever a problem.
The only significance here with history is we don't repeat it. There is no reason ever concede anything. Its akin to dwelling on indians introducing americans to tobacco. No group of people in the future should be judge on peoples beliefs or indiscretions. There is no connection.
More to the point, "it" is not the fact of his election but the fact of his policy decisions, which are ongoing. Of course the world is still talking about that.
And that is why he is talked about - because he is massively damaging powerful presence. And yes people who voted for him looked forwards to have fun watching the damage.
Trump was always attention sucking drama queen. So yes, voting for him is a vote to have Trump in news worldwide.
> Presidents through out American history has believed various forms of genocide and slavery were applicable practices to modern problems; hell the current president thinks variously incredulous things.
And we shouldn't criticize them? Is that the point?
Yes and people who use it for dominating industries and markets out of pure greed have the potential displace and disenfranchise large swaths of the population. The possibility to tier society into people with full access to AI and people with severely limited access binding them with significant permanent disadvantages.
You don't have to agree with everything to Pope stands for to understand the potential dark paths AI could lead humanity to.
I'll listen to him when he has materially acknowledged the horrors the Church did and continues to do and dismantles the institutions responsible for those horrors.
In my way of life, the idea that people follow and care deeply about what some mullah has to say is very foreign. There's a mass of these people though. Their life must be so incredibly different than mine, it's just hard to fathom. I can't even imagine caring about the Pope or what they have to say. In my imagination the Pope is something out of roman times, it's just so weird this still exists today.
I don't see any value discussing which set of rules and outcomes is better because it's all nonsense.
To be honest, I did have some very in depth conversations with religious friends, and it was enlightening. I am convinced that for them, it has some benefits.
But I know all this stuff is totally made up, so even if you can channel it to a good thing, I personally can never do it. And even though I won't say this to their face, part of me thinks, how can you believe this stuff.
Have you actually read it? It is not a boring take. It's actually the best thing I've read on moral philosophy in quite some time. I suggest you take the time to read it.
