I agree that it would be better to not require JavaScripts. (But, I think it can be helpful to have mirrors on other services as well, for this and other reasons.)
However, there are some work arounds to some situations. Git could (presumably) still be used, if you have that (although you might not want the entire repository and only some files, so that is a possible issue with this). If you have a URL of a specific file that you can change "blob" to "raw" in the URL to access the raw file (this works on other services as well and is not specific to Gitlab). For commits, you can add ".patch" or ".diff" on the end of the URL (this also is not specific to Gitlab).
I had written a NTSC emulator in C, based on some other equations I had found, although it expects command-line arguments to control many things (such as the phase), and expects a grey scale farbfeld picture as input and produces farbfeld as output, so it is with still pictures rather than videos.
It does seem to be common to make LDS not counted as Christianity, although the reason is unclear to me.
Another comment mentions that the rejection of the Nicene Creed does not seem to be the distinction.
I had thought that it is because they have the Book of Mormon, although that is unclear. Orthodox have additional books of the Bible that Catholics do not have, but are still Christian. (Although, I think the additional books that the Orthodox have are still a part of the Bible, and Book of Mormon is different.)
Something that I had heard is that it is because Mormons use a different baptism, which is not Trinitarian. However, it seems that it is Trinitarian, although this trinity is different from that of Christians (even though they still say "the Father", "the Son", and "the Holy Spirit").
Quakers (which are listed as Christian) also apparently do not use baptism (and reject other sacraments as well). Although the Religious Society of Friends is Christian, they do have differences and not all Quakers are necessarily Christian (or necessarily theists).
Look at the text of the Nicene Creed. There is a phrase that reads, depending on the translation, something like "one holy catholic apostolic church". That is the core of the issue.
All mainstream Christian denominations are branches of that original church. Some may see each other heretical, but they still acknowledge the common heritage. If you now have a religion that takes some aspects of Christianity, adds something of its own, and rejects the part all those schismatic branches agree on, it does not look like you are a branch of that "one holy catholic apostolic church".
Your reasoning makes sense. However, it is not quite that simple.
As another comment mentioned, "and yet Jehovah's Witnesses are denoted on the list as a Christian faith".
So are Quakers (also denoted on the list as Christian), which (as far as I can tell) have no creed ; and, furthermore, although the Religious Society of Friends is Christian, not all Quakers are necessarily Christian (there are people of other religions as well, as well as those of no religion).
This does not seem to be specific to the DoD list; I have seen this in other lists as well.
Not at all complicated, you don't get to add another book to the bible and claim to be the same religion.
I grew up in a very liberal christian church. Their take on mormons was "really nice people .. still heretics". Obviously there are bigger problems out there.
As I understand, LDS did not add another book to the Bible; Book of Mormon is not a part of the Bible, although (as far as I know) still considered a scripture according to LDS.
(Nevertheless it is the reason I had thought of too (many years ago), although other people have cited different reasons.)
Joseph smith claims to have had a new revelation and the book of Mormon is "another gospel". It's fan fiction for Americans and claims that the church became corrupted and are restoring the true church with their non biblical ideas. As such, their ideas are sufficiently divergent from biblical doctrine they are considered not part of the Christian church.
Well, the New Testament (what Christians care about) is entirely set in the historical first century Roman Empire [0], all places are accurate and known to exist.
The Book of Mormon postulates some fantasy world perhaps not unlike Middle Earth? And also weird theological stuff from 19th century science-fiction? Sorry, that is a different religion.
[0] expect for the last book of revelations of the future.
Why do you feel that most christian sects cannot decide they are heretics? We're not talking about some Lutheran Synod politics BS, they have this whole fantasy/scifi book and theology.
Obviously it's a free country, so they can say whatever they want.
Curious if your stance extends to the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church. Founded in 330AD, it predates all other canonization councils:
The Council of Trent (1545–1563) - explicitly laid out the 73-book canon for the Catholic Church
Council of Rome (382)
Synod of Hippo (393)
The two of the Councils of Carthage (397 and 419 respectively)
Council of Florence (1431–1449)
Applying your standard literally, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and the Ethiopian Bible are the only true Christian religion and religious text because others have fewer or greater number of books.
It sounds like you're ok with adding books to the bible so long as you're the one doing it. If you're not willing to accept the consequences of your own rules, they aren't rules, they're justifications.
>> Something that I had heard is that it is because Mormons use a different baptism, which is not Trinitarian. However, it seems that it is Trinitarian, although this trinity is different from that of Christians (even though they still say "the Father", "the Son", and "the Holy Spirit").
I had not heard that so I looked it up:
-----------
Catholic baptism:
“I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” The matter is the water poured over the head of the recipient. Traditionally, the one being baptized has water poured over them or is fully emerged in water three times.
Each candidate is presented by name to the Celebrant, or to an assisting priest or deacon, who then immerses, or pours water upon, the candidate, saying
N., I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
(Some groups do it differently, but this seems to be common.)
Mormon baptism:
73 The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
74 Then shall he immerse him or her in the water, and come forth again out of the water.
Yes, I had seemed to remember something different but I looked it up and yes it is still trinitarian, although apparently the working of the trinity is different (although this different working of the trinity is not apparent by the words of the baptism) which allegedly makes it not a valid Christian baptism (according to some Christians, including the Catholic church).
Trinity means the 3 are 1.[1] Mormons believe the 3 are separate.[2]
Baptism does not mean water baptism exclusively.[3] What other sacraments did the Nicene creed mention?
The purpose of the new list was to exclude many groups. Christian Quakers exist does not mean non Christian Quakers do not exist. And the category was copied from an older list without much thought plausibly.
Atheism is not a religion, and someone who is religious can also be atheist (and some religions are not theistic), although having no religion does not necessarily make you atheist either (although many atheists are not religious). (However, considering that, putting "agnostic" in there seems to be strange compared to this.)
Howveer, when knowing what should be in the list, there is the question of what the information is used for, in order to know what divisions are helpful for this purpose.
I agree with it, although still the fork is expensive like they mention. There is clone with some flags, although that does not really solve it.
I think one problem is that it is already how it is; making an entirely new operating system (that is not Linux, not GNU, and not POSIX) would solve it, but that is not the case here, so it would need to be done as it is.
One possibility would be a new function that creates a new empty child process, but the parent process specifies what system calls the child process executes, and can stop if specifying that exec or exit is (successfully) called by the child process, or if the parent process gives it the program memory to execute directly instead of using a file (since that use is also useful). The new function can still have some of the clone flags available. (I don't actually know how much better it would work.)
There are other possibilities as well.
The existing methods can also remain available for when they are helpful, but functions such as popen might be changed to use the new method.
Different people have different opinions (including opinions in favor of AI, and opinions in between, and more nuanced opinions).
I have several objections as well, including the Dijkstra objection (i.e. it is not as precise as using a computer code), as well as concerns about the commercial intentions (and terms of use and other related issues) of whatever companies makes them, and wastes of power and other things like that. There is also expectation of use even if it does not help, and that what I have seen often does not help and is better to do by yourself, or to use different software rather than LLM/generative-AI software. (Many people have different objections, although in some cases I do not consider them significantly important.)
(Some people say there is a paywall. I do not get a paywall; the article is displayed, although it also says that it is only available to subscribers but then the article is displayed without needing to subscribe.)
I would not use LLM and generative AI systems in my programming, for several reasons.
If you can do it better without the AI, then you should not be forced to use it anyways, or tracked for using it. (Even if you only track the statistics, and how much time it takes, that is not sufficient because you must figure out if the result is actually good, and any other related issues, including e.g. costs and energy usage, testing (not all kind of testing could be automated), kinds of statistical bias, etc.)
In general, not all kind of religious exemptions would mean you would be able to do the job, but in this case the exemption is reasonable if she is competent at computers; you shouldn't need the AI systems to do it even if they insist that you should. If they have a religious exemption they should show that they could still do that job or else to leave that job (rather than being forced or coerced).
Thare are both religious and non-religious objections (as well as people of the same religions who would not be opposed, since they are different people even if religion are same; there are also some more nuanced opinions). (There are more religious objections than only Unitarian Universalists and Catholics; I have looked and found some opinions by people of a few other religions, and there are probably more than that too. Different people can also have different opinions regardless of whether or not you are religious or of a same or similar kind of religion.)
They are right that Free software is important, not only games but other stuff as well; I agree with the ideas they mention in this article.
Freedom 1 is also important for understanding the rules of the game in case it is not documented very well; changing which server it connects to is not the only issue (and a well-designed FOSS program would have an option to configure which server it connects to without needing to recompile it).
(In some cases, other people figure out the rules of the game independently and might write independent FOSS implementations (in one case, I have done this for a single-player game; other people have also done for other games). In this case, it may be less of a problem (if the FOSS implementation is actually correct and complete (and might even have less bugs than the original and/or other improvements)), and both official and unofficial implementations can continue to be used.)
Every HN thread is full of people who think webmasters should just pay through the nose to handle bot traffic to preserve the sacred rights of turbonerds to visit their website using Lynx on their toaster.
I should think that there should be a better way (e.g. port knocking, instructions for manually correcting the URL that cannot easily be automated, additionally supporting alternative protocols, etc).
However, there are some work arounds to some situations. Git could (presumably) still be used, if you have that (although you might not want the entire repository and only some files, so that is a possible issue with this). If you have a URL of a specific file that you can change "blob" to "raw" in the URL to access the raw file (this works on other services as well and is not specific to Gitlab). For commits, you can add ".patch" or ".diff" on the end of the URL (this also is not specific to Gitlab).
reply