Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

ewtnnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 473 posts

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#451

Post by saulpw »

kovek wrote: post #413
rebolek wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I write stories and tech docs. I'll happily outsource writing tech docs to AI. It would be better than anything I would write. I won't let AI to touch my stories. Their input is boring and cringy. So both things can be true at same time.

For the tech docs writing, just give me the bullet points and I'll send them to the AI and discuss the bullet points with it.

It's more like, here's 80 pages of too much information, just give me the API in a tight section here, with an architectural overview.

Usually these tools are used to compress, not fluff.

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#452

Post by SanjayMehta »

soderfoo wrote: post #154
adrianN wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a lot of faith in the qualities of average priests.

To be fair, faith is the crux of Catholicism.

If you have faith, why do you need brains? Just follow the AI!

/s

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#453

Post by za3faran »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #388
soderfoo wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, faith is the crux of Catholicism.

The crux of all religions. The only comparatevely harmless religions are the ones who don't claim that gods demand absolute obedience, but their orders are spoken through a chosen few; otherwise they're just a form of primitive government.

There is a difference however, of faith based on evidence vs. faith based in no evidence. Without getting into too much details here since it is not the avenue, Islamic faith is strictly based on evidence.

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#455

Post by qsera »

cwillu wrote: post #435
qsera wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Wrong. It's not strong evidence of absence, but it absolutely is evidence.

Wrong. If there is no evidence, then there is no proof either way.

Imagine looking at a point in the night sky and say you want to check if there is a start at that point. You look at the most powerful telescope that we have, and yet you see no star.

Is that a non-strong evidence, as you put it, that there is no star at that point? I think not. There is no evidence one way or other. That is it.

But the scientific community of today is like "We have looked with the most powerful telescopes that we have, and yet there is no star, so it seems that there is really no star there".

This is ABSURD.

Because "most powerful telescope we have today" is an arbitrary claim. There is always the chance that the "Most powerful" is just not good enough for the task at hand. But the "scientists" (as well as the business that wants this proof badly to sell their products) don't like to admit it.

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#456

Post by sigmoid10 »

stbede wrote: post #426
sigmoid10 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also varies inside countries. Some priests are simply more demure than others. The church as an institution certainly prefers the more radical conservatives as you go higher up the chain, but many low level employees that still talk to commoners do realize that these views are going to put off more people than they attract in developed countries. So in the long term they will only be left with a bunch of crazy rad…

> The church as an institution certainly prefers the more radical conservatives as you go higher up the chain I think right now it’s the exact opposite.

Have you seen the current pope? He's a big step back from the last one. And the reason for this is the cardinals who wanted back, because they were never fully on board anyway. Then again what would you expect from a group where average age is significantly older than even US congress.

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#457

Post by sigmoid10 »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #383
sigmoid10 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you could share your alternative characterisation of the church to clarify what you mean?

I would say that the burden of proof is yours first. But since you asked... > The church as an institution certainly prefers the more radical conservatives as you go higher up the chain Where are these "radical conservative" bishops? They're anything but "radical". If anything, they tend toward a soft middle that is very slow to act. Indeed, that's one of the gripes "radtrad" types tend to have. They would prefer mor…

So.. you basically agree, you just don't like the wording because you somehow felt personally attacked? Given your reasoning I suspect you work(ed) for the church in some capacity or are at least deeply involved. But it'll be quite obvious to anyone reading this that it is not exactly an objective opinion.

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#458

Post by manquer »

portmanteur wrote: post #311
adrianN wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a lot of faith in the qualities of average priests.

Not sure what this is implying, but aspiring priests are required to have a Bachelor’s degree before entering Seminary, or it tacks at least two years onto a very rigorous six-year seminary program. The seminary program is on par with getting a Master’s degree in Philosophy and Theology. Further, only 30-50% of seminarians ultimately become ordained as priests, due to the rigorous vetting program and “discerning out.…

That would be the Catholic Church.

Other churches have varying degrees of requirements to become a priest.

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#459

Post by gedy »

hippo22 wrote: post #447
gedy wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can't articulate an idea yourself, it's not worth conveying imho

I guess you’re not a big fan of Plato then?

Plato's one thing, but SV "idea men" who have a hard time explaining themselves is another, ha

Re: Pope tells priests to use their brains, not AI, to write homilies

#460

Post by ben_w »

kstrauser wrote: post #365
ben_w wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3/4-agree; LLM advice is only one step up from an Agony Aunt column in a newspaper. And I'd expect "Target stock scheduling system does for target employees for restocking shelves" to be an A* or similar. But also, Google maps has directed people to their deaths: https://gizmodo.com/three-men-die-after-google-maps-reported... isn't even what I was originally looking for, which was: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/google…

Sure, people die from regular programming. Mistakes happen. That’s not good or ok, but it seems unavoidable given today’s technologies and tools. However, I think that’s in a different category than giving life advice. How is an LLM to know that God forgives Joe for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his children, but doesn’t forgive Tom for doing the same thing because Tom had money but was saving up to buy cooler sho…

Yeah, no. What you described here and what I described before are not programming errors, they're data errors. An A* route finder isn't going to know a bridge is out unless it is told, an LLM won't know that case history unless it is told.

I'd say the real problem with using an LLM for this kind of thing is not what the LLM writes, but that the act of writing helps the human understand their community, so when it is skipped that understanding remains absent. It's like cheating on your homework.

Post reply on HN