Friday, December 16, 2022

More openAI content.

Please write an essay about the biblical Ruth. Explain how Ruth became identified with kindness and loyalty. Discuss how modern feminists would judge her choices.

Ruth is a biblical character who appears in the Old Testament of the Bible in the book of Ruth. She is a Moabite woman who, along with her mother-in-law Naomi, returns to the land of Israel after the death of her husband.

Ruth is known for her kindness and loyalty, as demonstrated by her decision to leave her homeland and follow Naomi back to Israel. When they arrive in Israel, Ruth chooses to remain with Naomi and care for her, even though she has no obligations to do so. This act of kindness and loyalty is further exemplified by Ruth's willingness to work hard and provide for both herself and Naomi.

In modern times, Ruth's choices may be judged differently by feminists. Some feminists may see Ruth's decision to leave her homeland and follow Naomi as a sign of subservience and a lack of agency. Others may view Ruth's actions as a selfless and compassionate choice, made out of love and loyalty for her mother-in-law.

Regardless of how Ruth's choices are interpreted, it is clear that she is a biblical figure known for her kindness and loyalty. Her actions serve as a model for selflessness and compassion, and her story continues to inspire people of all genders and backgrounds.

https://chat.openai.com/chat

“Where you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die, I will die—there will I be buried.”

A Fisking Is In Order

 Nature


The global economy is structured around growth — the idea that firms, industries and nations must increase production every year, regardless of whether it is needed. 

If something isn't needed, nobody will purchase it.  Or does "needed" mean, we smart people don't think you need it, even though you willingly exchange money for it?

This dynamic is driving climate change and ecological breakdown

And yet, oddly, the countries with the best environmental conditions are the richest ones.  Is this an unsolvable mystery, or are we going to pretend this isn't the case?

Researchers in ecological economics call for a different approach — degrowth3. Wealthy economies should abandon growth of gross domestic product (GDP) as a goal, scale down destructive and unnecessary forms of production to reduce energy and material use, and focus economic activity around securing human needs and well-being. 

The assumption here, is that individuals don't really know their own needs and have no idea of how to promote their own well-being.  What is needed is a centrally-planned economy, where governments decide what is produced and in what quantities.  Does this sound vaguely familiar?  It should, it is a central idea behind Marxism.  You know, the ideology which led to the premature deaths of at least 100 million Humans along with massive destruction of the environment, as well as slavery and loss of freedom for more than a billion individuals.

Let's look at some recommendations:

Reduce less-necessary production. This means scaling down destructive sectors such as fossil fuels, mass-produced meat and dairy, fast fashion, advertising, cars and aviation...

Here's a crazy idea:  Rather than have a top-down, we will force industry to produce less of these bad things, how about if people who think these are bad things buy fewer of them? Nah!  Freedom is over-rated, we enlightened ones will decide that the peasants should have and if we need to build a few concentration camps--well omelets are needed and eggs must be broken.

Wordle 341

 


I do not select "hard mode" which makes you use all the found letters in every subsequent guess.  But I normally play that way.  When I get to a situation where there were a bunch of possibilities and a dwindling number of tries left, I will sometimes "cheat".  The word could have been PROBE, PROVE, PROSE and maybe a couple I hadn't thought of, but I got in a word with B, S and V, so I could make it with one to spare.