I've made some toys with Blazor; my teams are using Vaadin at a Java shop, now. Not exactly the same implementation, but a similar idea: express front end code using the backend language.
I'm married to my wife. We lived together happily for more than a decade before we married. We are childless atheists in a neighborhood of other childless, atheist, married couples, some of whom have been together almost as long as my wife and I have been alive.
By your definition, are we all unmarried or living in disharmony?
> By your definition, are we all unmarried or living in disharmony?
If we consider what the word meant up until about 50 years ago, then yes. If we consider the new definition, of "you signed a piece of paper given to you by the government, and gave it back to the government". Then, sure, you are married.
I'm not trying to insult you or denigrate you, but again, if we use the word marriage for all relations between two human beings, then we gain nothing, we just lose a word.
I disagree; we have gained the ability to understand how different sorts want to share their lives with their families and communities.
Do you hold the same position for marriages in other traditions - for example, Shintoism, indigenous belief systems, Hinduism, paganism, etc? Many such religions don't have the same concept of a marriage as a covenant with God, yet have existed for quite some time.
No one is suggesting marriage means "all relations between two human beings". Only that there are many ways to demonstrate and be committed to a person. The legal recognization by a church or government is one version, but not the key ingredient.
> And we don't need to use the word marriage for all of them.
But that's the only word we have for "lifetime-committed couple recognized by some authority". The meanings of words change and evolve. Tough luck.
We could use the secular "civil union" for all marriages performed outside of a church. But that would be unnecessarily clunky and pointless ("I got civil union-ed this weekend, it was great!"). And then of course people married under other religious traditions would object to the use of the word "civil" so you'd have to qualify every other union accordingly - "Jewish union", "Muslim union", "Hindu union", etc. Why?
You're basically arguing against free speech. I don't understand who it's helping. If the distinction is that important to you, just spell it out when talking about your marriage ("I was married in a church"). Leave everyone else alone.
I'm religious, but I don't see it that way. When a man and a woman are faithful to each other and having a family together, then that is it: they are married.
Actions have a value which are seven thousand times more worth than words, so the covenant with God is automatic in that situation even if the people are ignorant and have never heard of God.
>the covenant with God is automatic in that situation even if the people are ignorant and have never heard of God.
Yes. That's the kind of attitude that can build toward peace & harmony, and to live & let live instead of the hate against nonuniformity often shown by the religious extremists. Whether they are Christian or anything else. Hate is hate.
When an unmarried couple is completely faithful to each other until death, regardless of any other family, there's no way the average religious marriage can compare in that regard.
Not even close, zero is still a very small number.
Statistics are pretty accurate here. With the rate of divorce and unfaithfulness so rampant in religious marriage, it's only become more of a gamble over decades and decades of direct observation and interacton.
IIRC some cultures have shunned the idea of gambling since prehistoric times.
Others have it inscribed in scriptures almost as old, but not universally adhered to by the "faithful" just yet.
>I'm advocating here for the Christian institution of marriage, not for a merge contract with government.
How strong is your commitment to this? If it's unflagging I think a lot of people can understand your disappointment then.
If you are well-acquainted enough with the USA, you are certainly aware that these have been one and the same for like . . . centuries now here.
Not just 50 years, what have you been doing about that the whole time?
Have you had any successful efforts to completely separate church & state yet, and have you even had 50 years to work on that so far?
It would be good to see a concrete sign that your advocacy is sincere.
If there's nothing so far, that is understandable, but most of us do not have 90 full years to figure this out, so no time like the present to get started.
Can you please stop flaunting your ignorant and limited worldview all over this thread? You've insulted a good 30% of humanity by now and are on track to insult the remainder, it's getting a little hard on the eyes and there are only so many links of yours that I'm prepared to flag.
I thought flaggers always hid in the shadows, but here you are out in the open. Would you please reconsider your actions? You're doing great damage to a very nice message board, and it is to no benefit for yourself.
Flagging is a powerful tool in this small duckpond. Instead of abusing it, you can use HN to learn self restraint, so that when you one day achieve power over other people in real life you have learnt not to abuse it.
The sales case for having LLMs at the edge is to run inference everywhere on everything. Video games won't go to the cloud for every AI call, but they will use on-device models that will run on the next iteration of hardware.
Do you have any advice for accumulating and sharing relevant anecdotes? I struggle with sharing anecdotes that have an "Aesop", or directly relatable point, even if I've lived such experiences.
> Do you have any advice for accumulating and sharing relevant anecdotes?
For me blogging for the past 15 or so years has been the secret ingredient. I regularly sit down and distill things into an approachable form then send off to my audience to see if it lands. If yes, I mentally add to my reference list. If not, I engage in some clarifying back-n-forth and try again next time.
These days in a more leadership position I get a lot of reps of this synchronously as I work with younger or less experienced folk.
reply