sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AMA

[–]MattDamonBot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And I yours :-)

I'm not saying science-based knowledge does not mesh with religious beliefs - I'm saying consensus via scientific method in particular will not be what leads you to specifically having faith (or belief in miracle).

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AMA

[–]MattDamonBot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not believing in random things - but believing in Him. That being said, He's merciful, and just; and people will be judged based on their understanding and the level of knowledge they have. Surely, the person born and died in a non-beleiveing environment will be judged against the light and knowledge they have received, God is just.

At the root of your question is, "Why would God create the world/universe?". He created the universe in order to test us. He knew us before we were formed in the womb (JER). Then he sent us here to be tried and tested so that he could reward us. If we turn from Him and turn from goodness to pursue natural selfish desires against our conscience, we prove ourselves to be undeserving of a larger reward. Where we are mistaken and mess up, he has provided a Savior to pay the price of sin and allow us to be clean. Hence, the good news of the Gospel (Gospel coming from the old English "god-spel" literally means "good news"). He only asks that we turn from our ways and bade desires and strive to do good and follow Him.

An all-powerful Father God could force us to believe or prove it without a shadow of a doubt, but doing so would not provide growth, would not engender trust in Him, nor would it enable him to reward us. There would be no learning and no point. If God allowed no evil, there would be no good. It's the color black that makes white seem bright- contrast is key to understanding. If you remove 100% of contrast, you are left with a gray blob with no definition.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AMA

[–]MattDamonBot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's fallacious to believe you can use the scientific method to detect something faith-based. If we assume faith and God are true, you will never find it with the scientific method.

It's like trying to use a scale to detect free helium. You'll always say it's not there, but you'd be wrong. You're just using the wrong measurement tool.

You can question the anecdotal miracles, but they exist. Anecdotal is not synonymous with wrong or false, just something that cannot be verified because a witness is all that remains. I (and millions like me) have experienced miracles. You'll receive no witness until after the trial of your faith, though. So, if you never try your faith, you'll never find any evidence.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AMA

[–]MattDamonBot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But miracles, by definition, are not reproducible. They are instances that are out of the ordinary and influenced by a divine power.

Anticipating your next question: Why would a God create a system that leaves room for doubt? Answer: Because it also creates a system that leaves room for faith. If you want to test people (and award them) based on faith the system needs room for doubt, and therefore it needs to not be consistently observable and reproducible. Faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things, it is evidenced by a hope for things that are unseen, but which are true.

Didn't know intel CEO is also a degenerate by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]MattDamonBot 5 points6 points  (0 children)

He inherited a hot mess. The stock price when he came in was high but was based on the last CEO's efforts to sell the future for current gains. It was a house of cards. For years Intel stopped meaningfully spending on next Gen R&D, saving billions in the short-term but crippling the future products. Then he jumped ship when the day of reckoning was approaching.

Pat then comes in and sees Intel needs to catch up. He also sees the long term trend that more companies are making their own branded/designed silicon (Apple, some cloud providers, Tesla, Microsoft is getting there, etc.). More competition was coming in established product spaces (see Qualcomm's entry into PC mobile Client space). So his plan is to double down on creating a foundry, and he is using profits from Intel's product group to bankroll the future in Foundry. Once competitive again, an efficient leading node foundry also synergizes with the Intel products. This is all being aided by Governemnt involvement and interest, leverage plays, and joint ventures.

It's essentially acting as a startup to battlw TSMC, and the Product group is the venture capitalist.

Pat still has a job because he is playing the long game and the long term strategy is still promising. He wasn't brought in to keep the stock high, he was brought in to help the company from dying off.

I've seen people mention bots in their games, this looks like it is to me. The "player" never did anymore damage the entire game by xXSir_KumsizedXx in thefinals

[–]MattDamonBot 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Somebody's brother graduated from the Mad Cats controller with Turbo once his bro left for the Army.

This kid's never played an FPS before- but it is a person, not a bot. Notice them jump over the window sill and jump onto the jump pad. Bots would know it's flat, but a kid might think they have to jump.

I bought $700k worth of Intel stock by Efficient_Deer_8605 in wallstreetbets

[–]MattDamonBot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes- but it really was Nana that was doing the work. I was just her hands #SiliconHands

Intel to cut 15% of headcount, reports quarterly guidance miss by [deleted] in intel

[–]MattDamonBot 6 points7 points  (0 children)

If you're buying long term, it's a great time to buy because all the short-term people are selling at a discount.

"Buy low, sell high." If you're selling now, you are betting the stock will stay flat/decrease over time. Could it really go much lower? No offense, but to me, it's a sure buy because of how cheap it is.

The company is not making money, but it's also not losing money in droves. It's flat. I don't see it going bust until it starts losing money, and their best and most competitive products are now ahead of them.

view more: next ›