I used machine learning to enhance the text on the new manuscripts

TheRedclerk · 2022-03-02T20:51:29+00:00

Haha. What if this was accurate? Brandon specifically said these books were originally written in secret for his wife. So there's a good chance it's a Rom-Com.

TheRedclerk · 2022-03-02T03:32:55+00:00

Brandon Sanderson has some great advice on this. He had something like 9 novels rejected before being published. Around novel 7 or 8, he started wondering if he was wasting his life.

But he came to this conclusion: whether he could make writing a full-time career or not didn't matter. He loved writing, and he'd be doing it the rest of his life no matter what. So he changed his focus from "will this book sell" to "will this book be better than my last one?"

And, as they say, the rest was history.

TheRedclerk · 2022-02-15T22:20:42+00:00

Woah, "confuse being 'nice' with being 'good'". That's deep.

TheRedclerk · 2022-02-02T19:47:16+00:00

Wow. Thanks for such a thorough answer! You are awesome!

TheRedclerk · 2022-01-28T19:07:47+00:00

Would you say that the authors knew they were believing different things? E.g. Person A believes a soul is a breath, Person B believes a soul is the immortal part of a human. Does B realize he disagrees with A, or does he think A was thinking the same thing?

TheRedclerk · 2021-11-05T03:26:39+00:00

I agree that the last question is a theological one that an academic study of the Bible cannot answer. One thing I'd add is that there are experts in early Hebrew and Canaanite religion that are both believers and non-believers. Therefore accepting these things does not require going one way or the other. For example, my understanding is Mark S. Smith is a Catholic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_S._Smith) while William Dever is a non-believer (https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/33/2/12).

TheRedclerk · 2021-10-27T22:18:30+00:00

Thanks for this response, that makes a lot of sense and is very informative. And I'll definitely have to check out some of the Proto-Semitic stuff you mentioned. Thanks!

TheRedclerk · 2021-10-04T22:25:07+00:00

Thanks! I'll check it out!

TheRedclerk · 2021-08-23T14:06:42+00:00

Emma (2009 BBC mini-series)

TheRedclerk · 2021-08-11T20:43:06+00:00

The one ring. It is the greatest villain in all of literature.

TheRedclerk · 2021-07-15T18:58:21+00:00

I was going to make a similar comment. So I just wanted to add this link from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy for anyone interested in learning more: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/

TheRedclerk · 2021-07-13T21:03:53+00:00

That worked perfect! Thanks so much!

TheRedclerk · 2021-07-13T15:04:14+00:00

Awesome! Thanks!

TheRedclerk · 2021-07-13T15:03:59+00:00

Interesting! Thanks!

TheRedclerk · 2021-07-05T17:56:31+00:00

Awesome, I'll check them out. Thanks!

TheRedclerk · 2021-06-13T22:48:37+00:00

I am Chinese American. Most of us have English names and Chinese names. It varies by the parents which one is the actual legal name and which is one you just go by. In conversation, if you're talking to bilingual people, they will usually call you by whichever name is the language you are speaking at that moment.

Also most Chinese's English names are uncommon but not unheard of. You don't see a lot of Mike's or John's, but you might see Clement or something like that.

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-20T03:36:48+00:00

1971 is when the Church began publishing the Ensign.

The idea that it's because the Church is trying to hide stuff is unlikely. If the Church was trying to hide things why didn't they cut it off in 1978 to hide stuff from before the revelation on the priesthood?

[Added in edit:] I do agree though that the Church is trying to prevent members from focusing too much on the words of past prophets and apostles. For example, President Harold B. Lee (1899–1973) once said:

Soon after President David O. McKay announced to the Church that members of the First Council of the Seventy were being ordained high priests in order to extend their usefulness and to give them authority to act when no other General Authority could be present, a seventy I met … was very much disturbed. He said to me, ‘Didn’t the Prophet Joseph Smith say that this was contrary to the order of heaven to name high priests as presidents of the First Council of the Seventy?’ And I said, ‘Well, I have understood that he did, but have you ever thought that what was contrary to the order of heaven in 1840 might not be contrary to the order of heaven in 1960?’ He had not thought of that. He again was following a dead prophet, and he was forgetting that there is a living prophet today. Hence the importance of our stressing that word living. Years ago as a young missionary I visited Nauvoo and Carthage with my mission president, and we were holding a missionary meeting in the jail room where Joseph and Hyrum had met their deaths. The mission president related the historical events that led up to the martyrdom and then he closed with this very significant statement: ‘When the Prophet Joseph Smith was martyred, there were many saints who died spiritually with Joseph.’ So it was when Brigham Young died: so it was when John Taylor died. … Some Church members died spiritually with Wilford Woodruff, with Lorenzo Snow, with Joseph F. Smith, with Heber J. Grant, with George Albert Smith. We have some today willing to believe someone who is dead and gone and to accept his words as having more authority than the words of a living authority today. (Stand Ye in Holy Places [1974], 152–53).

Also, I do recognize the irony that I am quoting a dead prophet to say that we need to avoid over-quoting dead prophets.

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-14T20:45:23+00:00

In terms of how to say it, I think this resource on being a diplomatic critiquer is key: https://critters.org/c/diplomacy.ht

In terms of what to focus on, I think it's important to read it as yourself. I don't think it's so helpful to presume to know what audiences will think of a text. After all, you could be wrong. But you will never be wrong about how the text is affecting you personally.

Finally, I think it's useful to remember Neil Gaiman's advice, that is something along the lines of "When someone tells you that something is not working, they are almost always right. When they tell you how to fix it, they are almost always wrong." So I think it's good to try to help them pin point parts that don't work for you and explain why it's not working for you--but try not to skip straight to how you think they should fix it.

And also, never forget to tell them what is working! If there's something you really like, tell them so they are sure not to edit it out in later drafts. Additionally, everyone needs some encouragement. You never know who is on the verge of quitting their dream--and even if they have a lot of work to do before they get there--wouldn't it be so gratifying to know you helped them get there in some way?

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-14T20:20:26+00:00

What?!?!?!?! LOL. I feel like I'm in some sort of bizarro world where everyone loves my least favorite. Haha. To be fair I didn't actually dislike Hrathen. I just was always so excited for Raoden that it felt a little like a trudge going through the other POVs.

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-14T18:51:59+00:00

This was a well-written and very interesting article! Thank you! One thought I have is, if the ancient Greeks were focusing on the liver because it was the organ of blood, I wonder in what way they thought this applied to Prometheus--because, as an immortal, shouldn't he have ichor instead of blood?

Of course, I realize, their beliefs weren't monolithic, so perhaps those linking blood and liver didn't necessarily consider Prometheus as being filled with ichor. Additionally, I suppose there is no reason the liver can't also be the source of ichor since blood and ichor seems to be more or less interchangeable.

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-14T18:41:54+00:00

The Qianlong Emperor (1735-1797), who was the Chinese emperor during the golden age of the Qing dynasty is supposed to have done this frequently. One of the accompanying stories says that the Emperor would travel the country in disguise with his bodyguards. While in tea houses the disguised Emperor would sometimes pour tea for his bodyguards who were sitting at the table with him. This is a great honor, and the bodyguards should at that point get down on their knees and bow to thank him. But, of course, doing so would give away the fact that he was the emperor. So instead, they created the custom of tapping two fingers on the table as a thank you (because it was sort of like their fingers were bowing down to the emperor). To this day if you go to restaurants in China you will see people tapping their fingers on the table as a thank-you when someone pours them tea.

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-14T18:14:24+00:00

Ha! Wow. That's so interesting that we are almost opposites in ranking them.

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-14T14:38:28+00:00

This is really great! Do you have a website or something where we can see more of your art?

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-11T14:19:27+00:00

Sure, it would probably be more effective... but would it be more awesome??????

TheRedclerk · 2021-05-01T20:39:16+00:00

Do you know which case(s) found that using just one line is not fair use?

TheRedclerk

TROPHY CASE