TonusOH

Joined

• started 1 topics
• posted 3,312 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by TonusOH

• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  Simon: Yeah - all posts made from the same IP address.

  In other words... the comments are coming from inside the house!!
• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  I'll just point out once again- if he believes that he's drawing a salary for his "work" then he's not an activist. He's an employee. And he cannot then refuse demands for content and grouse about doing things when he feels like it.

  Second- it's not about "earning money by helping people." He has threatened to stop his 'important activism work' if he cannot make a living wage at it. In other words: help people for free? He won't help people for anything less than a living wage for him, his editor, and his wife and kids.

  But, sure... keep defending him.
• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  He's just horrified at the idea that someone might practice activism without being paid a living wage. LOL
• 
  7

  Why infant baptism in Jehovah's Witnesses?

  by Antonio_Madaleno in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "adult baptism was not simply a question of religious dogma; it was an issue of power.

  if baptism was delayed until adulthood​—thus allowing a person to make a decision based on faith—​some might not get baptized at all.

  and individuals not baptized would, at least to a degree, remain outside the control of the church.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  JWs don't baptize infants, unless there was a change in doctrine recently.

  That looks like an explanation of why other churches may have instituted the practice. JWs do allow fairly young people to get baptized, but I think the youngest are 9 or 10 and those are relatively rare.
• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  slimboyfat: LE will never “understand” that his actions disqualify him because he simply cannot tolerate that conclusion.

  I agree. Not just the income, but the prestige and the adulation. Even now, after everything that has come out about him (most of which he verified himself), there are people who don't just support him- they practically worship him and live for the chance to go after his 'enemies.' I don't think they would do that if he was making a living washing dishes. He really does need the validation that comes from them, as it justifies his narcissism.
• 
  57

  Is Bible chronology true?

  by Fisherman in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.

  since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.

  what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  Fisherman: The Bible says that humans began to exist some 6000 years ago whereas scientific dating says much older.

  I don't think the Bible says that, it's just what people have extrapolated from (possibly incorrect or incomplete) genealogical lists in the text. Thus, the comparison is between ancient writings of indeterminate authorship and questionable reliability versus decades -if not centuries- of scientific research by millions of people in several (dozens?) of different fields of study and learning, which is documented and testable.
• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  His penis's name? Tyler Durden.
• 
  8

  The Last Days?

  by ozziepost in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  today's issue of time magazine bears the front cover headline "the last days of the taliban".. the urgency of these "last days" is re-inforced in the magazine's articles by the use of words such as "final reckoning", "last sanctuary", "rule unraveled for good", "endgame".. words and phrases such as these may seem familiar to regular readers of the watchtower magazine which regularly describes the present time as being the "last days" of this "system of things".. interestingly time describes the "last days of the taliban" as occurring just two months after the commencement of the "time of the end" for the taliban.. i wonder how many witnesses will give this some thought as they consider the watchtower's latest declaration of urgency for the last days of this system of things.

  at what stage will these "last days" cease to be the last days?

  can they last 100 years?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  In fact, in this year 1967 we are actually living in the final part of that time!

  Imagine if they then added, "if that seems close, think about how excited you will be in 55 years, when we are even closer still!"

  So, when Stephen Lett told us that we were in the last day of the last day (or however he put it), did he mean that it might be another 55 years before the end? If "close" and "just around the corner" and "the final part of that time" means "at least 55 years away," how can you assure people of the urgency of the end?
• 
  78

  Top AI inventor Geoffrey Hinton reluctantly concluded that AI will probably humanity fairly soon

  by slimboyfat in

  1. social
  2. current

  geoffrey hinton, major inventor of artificial intelligence: .

  “if you take the existential risk seriously, as i now do—i used to think it was way off, but now i think it’s serious, and fairly close—it might be quite sensible to just stop developing these things any further, but i think it’s completely naïve to think that would happen.

  there’s no way to make that happen.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  From https://www.aerosociety.com/news/highlights-from-the-raes-future-combat-air-space-capabilities-summit/

  Aside from how chilling it is to realize just how much time and effort and resources are being constantly expended in the quest to find more efficient ways to exterminate one another, there was an interesting talk about the potential issues with AI. There is now an update at the start of the part in question, where the speaker walks back his claim that these simulations actually took place. He now claims that they were "thought experiments." That sounds... questionable in light of what he originally said. Here are some parts:

  Having been involved in the development of the life-saving Auto-GCAS system for F-16s (which, he noted, was resisted by pilots as it took over control of the aircraft) Hamilton is now involved in cutting-edge flight test of autonomous systems, including robot F-16s that are able to dogfight. However, he cautioned against relying too much on AI noting how easy it is to trick and deceive. It also creates highly unexpected strategies to achieve its goal.

  He notes that one simulated test saw an AI-enabled drone tasked with a SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses) mission to identify and destroy SAM sites, with the final go/no-go given by the human. However, having been 'reinforced' in training that destruction of the SAM was the preferred option, the AI then decided that 'no-go' decisions from the human were interfering with its higher mission - killing SAMs - and then attacked the operator in the simulation.

  [...] "We trained the system - 'Hey don't kill the operator - that's bad. You're gonna lose points if you do that'. So what does it start doing? It starts destroying the communication tower that the operator uses to communicate with the drone to stop it from killing the target."

  On the one hand, it's possible to simulate and debug AI in an environment that is completely safe. On the other hand, when you are developing systems that will put military-grade weapons in the hands of AI at a scale capable of winning battles and wars, you are counting on a 'mind' that sees everything as a simulation- as a logic problem to be solved within a closed system, and not as actions taken in the real world.

  Automated combat systems will be developed and eventually deployed, IMO. That is where things will eventually go off the rails in catastrophic ways.
• 
  57

  Is Bible chronology true?

  by Fisherman in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  according to jw interpretation of bible chronology, the earliest human, adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.

  since jesus validated the creation of adam and eve as historical people and jc’s own lineage is traced all the way back to adam, bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.

  what proves scientific dating as accurate that humans are much older than what bible chronology says?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  I'm more interested to know if the concept of Bible chronology has been defined in a way that all Christian denominations agree upon, or if they have reached agreement on parameters for its use. If it is used differently by anyone who relies on it, then it's unreliable by definition. Is there a set of guidelines that all organizations use? Does any organization publish any sort of guidelines?