Maybe the article was updated but right now it says “The browser should isolate agentic browsing from regular browsing”
Tabs in general should be security boundaries. Anything else should propmt for permission.
Readit NewsDeleted Comment
mapontosevenths commented on Comet AI browser can get prompt injected from any site, drain your bank account twitter.com/zack_overflow... · Posted by u/helloplanets
It upsets me that so much video was recorded on tapes instead of film, because it didn’t wear well and looks awful today. The only hope we have now are approximations using AI.
Think of all of the 80s TV shows and movies we’d be streaming today if the quality weren’t so poor.
Of course tape isn't the best, but you can actually squeeze more out of tape than you might expect.
One of my latest nerd rabbit holes has been using the Domesday Duplicator, and now the MISRC, to extract higher quality video from old VHS, VHS-C, and 8mm video. Thanks to the vhsdecode project you can now bypass most of the original hardware and use software to reconstruct the video from the raw RF. It's expensive, computationally, but with a proper RF extraction you can now capture better video than the the original hardware ever could.
I haven't tried it yet, but I hear that with dirty tricks like "stacking" multiple passes, or even captures from multiple tapes, you can further enhance it.
Deleted Comment
mapontosevenths commented on Death and What Comes Next (2002) lspace.org/books/dawcn/da... · Posted by u/internet_points
Okay, I see what you are saying and I’m happy to put 1 Thess 4:16 completely aside a moment since I do not know Greek to be certain either way.
I do think there are holistically other reasons to conclude prince Michael and Jesus are the same, for example comparing the use of “stand up” in Dan 11:2,3,4 referring to kings, and then Dan 12:1.
Also there are parallel accounts of the prophecy regarding a great time of distress and resurrection in the last part of the days: 1 Thess 4:16b, Matt 21:23 and Dan 12:2, each describing the same foremost person, but they use Jesus and prince Michael interchangeably.
If this is not convincing then I just have to let it alone, it doesn’t really change the Bible’s message if Jesus is Michael or not. But it is good to hear from someone who cares as much as you do.
> But it is good to hear from someone who cares as much as you do.
I'm not a religious person, but I've read the bible a few times in different translations, and I do find it all very interesting. Thank you for taking the time to explain your perspective.
mapontosevenths commented on Death and What Comes Next (2002) lspace.org/books/dawcn/da... · Posted by u/internet_points
Michael is the archangel (Jude 9) and 1 Thess 4:16 say Jesus is also (14-16 for context), so if there is one archangel then they are the same person.
Not uncommon to receive a new name after a significant event, for example Saul renamed to Paul, Jacob to Israel. Or maybe Michael is just the name used by angels and Jesus is what was picked by his human parents.
That's an interesting take, but it all sort of hinges on the exact translation you use because it leans heavily on interpreting one particular sentence, and even one word in a very particular way. In this case it seems to be the word "the" in the phrase "the archangel." That's dangerous, and I'd love to talk about why it's dangerous. Lets start here:
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Thessalonians%204%...
If we check out some of the other translations, we can see that Thessalonians 4:16 has been interpreted many ways over the years, so we'll just have to pick the one that seems closest to the original. Of course, you're free to pick another, but to me the one that makes the most sense is the legacy standard bible version, as they try very hard to stay close to the original greek, and also they italicize the words that a translator had to add themselves which weren't in the original. Remember that ancient Greek sentence structures weren't the same as English sentence structures, this happens a lot. Many other versions of the Bible just gloss over it.
So, in the LSB version, it reads "For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a [b]shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first."
To me that sounds more like the lord is bringing a list of things with him, and one of the things on that list is an archangel to use as a voice, but more importantly the phrase "the archangel" is here which does imply that there is only one, even though it is often interpreted in other versions as "an archangel". Which one is the best translation?
Well there's a clue here. The word "the" is this version is one of the italicized words, meaning it was added by the translator, because it wasn't there at all in the original Greek. The other translators have just been picking whichever one "felt right" to them at the time.
If you're doubting this particular translation, you're free to manually translate that bit of Greek yourself or check one of the other more literal interpretations. I think the NASB version is also very good.
mapontosevenths commented on Death and What Comes Next (2002) lspace.org/books/dawcn/da... · Posted by u/internet_points
While I understand each of the words you have written, I have no idea what you are trying to say. What would you suggest I do with this information?
I get the impression that you were trying for something cryptic and profound sounding, but went a little too overboard and lost the underlying message, leaving the reader trying to decipher a bunch of meaningless 2 to 4 word sentences.
He's saying that the plum is not infinite because the plum is not real, only the perception of the plum is real and implying that the same is true of time.
It's an argument that is akin to, but not the same as, "the map is not the territory."
mapontosevenths commented on Death and What Comes Next (2002) lspace.org/books/dawcn/da... · Posted by u/internet_points
I haven’t read Discworld. Although funnily enough I worked in a team where our services were named after Discworld characters, so I’m aware of _some_ lore lol.
That said.. it’s kind of daunting to start a series with so many books, and I consider myself a prolific reader (~30-40 books per year).
They are very short books, and written at about a 6-8th grade reading level. As a prolific reader you could churn through them in a year or less. It's not unusual for me to read one in a single sitting, but I am a very quick reader. Regardless, I would instead recommend savoring them a bit rather than trying to read the entire series at once and making yourself crazy.
They generally don't build on each other or require that you have read the prior books, so if you put them down for a few years and come back you won't be too lost.
mapontosevenths commented on Death and What Comes Next (2002) lspace.org/books/dawcn/da... · Posted by u/internet_points
>Fundamentally it's a way to make God seem like less of a child-abusing jerk. A sky-daddy who "punishes" those who understand morality, but grants slack to the cutie-patootie babies and puppies is just nicer for people to believe in.
I think this is far too modernist an interpretation. When Genesis was written the characterization of God wouldn't have been interpreted as a "child-abusing jerk." God's behavior reflected what was expected of a father and a king given the culture and morals of the time, as well as the cold and indifferent brutality of the natural world, and was little different in those regards to other sky-father gods.
Bear in mind this same God doesn't "grant slack to the cutie-patootie babies and puppies" either, at all. People sacrificed animals to God and God engaged in infanticide more than once.
All very fair. My interpretation is intentionally quit modern.
To be honest, trying to interpret the original authors intent has driven better men than me completely crazy. The Jewish and Christian interpretations, for example, are pretty clearly at odds with one another as are the modern and early Christian understandings.
mapontosevenths commented on Death and What Comes Next (2002) lspace.org/books/dawcn/da... · Posted by u/internet_points
It will be difficult to understand the human condition without properly understanding universal law.
For example, what authority did Satan have to torture Job in Job 2:1-7 for no reason?
Well, Luke 4:6 clearly shows Satan is the king of the earth, and he gives power to whomever he pleases (1 John 5:19).
Okay, but how did it happen? Humans rejected God’s support in Eden and sided with a rebellious sect (Satan, meaning “resistor”) and as long as humanity sides with that sect they will be dealt as co-conspirators along with that rebellion under universal law.
We now harbour the demons on earth (Rev 12:7-9) and there is apparently a Demon pulling strings behind every nation (Dan 10:13, Dan 10:20,21). This bodes badly for us, although Michael, also called Jesus, is very fond and cares greatly about humans and wishes to spare many.
> Michael, also called Jesus
Is this a Jehovah's Witness thing? I'd never heard it before today.