Kyle

I’m thrilled to introduce Wallpaper Reactor - the first cross-platform Live Wallpaper application for all of your devices! Wallpaper Reactor supports: 🎥 Videos 🌀 Rive Animations 🌐 Any Website 📺 YouTube Clips ✨ Custom Shaders 🤖 Godot Games 👇 Link Below 👇

There are so many things I could say to criticize the orthodox. I just refrain because I don’t see them as enemies. I don’t care if they’re in my tribe. If they found a path to holiness in the East I’m happy for them. Every time I see them post about Catholicism it just reminds me that we’re the main character. They think about us constantly when they don’t even cross our minds. Peace brothers. There are way bigger problems out there. This is unnecessary.

Announcing: New @Steam Hardware, coming in 2026: Steam Controller Steam Machine Steam Frame Watch our jazzy announcement video and wishlist now: steampowered.com/hardware

Christianity won so thoroughly that paganism turned into this

@Alex_Ortodoxie Not being able to agree on infant communion is insane tbh. Crazy no one brings this up to them except Fr. Josiah

RCs conflate “centralization” and “unity.” All these sects disagree on key issues. What kind of unity is that? (False unity.) When you believe different things, you’re not unified—you’re just centralized.

@jaydyer definitely

Leave a comment if debates helped convert you to Christianity/Orthodoxy:

@Devon_Eriksen_ @TheStarwald "Non-survival moralities, by definition, purge themselves from the universe, and no longer matter." - This is a great argument against atheism, since atheists have abysmal birth rates and require religious populations/immigration to sustain them.

The universe doesn't care who's smart. It cares who is correct. And, no, I don't run into this problem. Your objection already occurred to me. But you appear to have not understood the refutation. See this? It's called the "useless machine". When you switch it on, it switches itself off. If a moral system doesn't promote survival, it is that machine. Sure, it might be internally consistent, but who the fuck cares? Non-survival moralities, by definition, purge themselves from the universe, and no longer matter. So there is absolutely no point in talking or thinking about them except to sneer. This should have occurred to you the moment I said the word evolution. Do I really have to spell everything out?

I think that human morality, as it exists in practice, has two components. The first stage is coded into human genetics. These are the traits that cause tribes of humans to be effective at surviving. If you understand evolution, it's very easy to see where this bit comes from. Natural selection. If you are a pack animal, and your individual behavior is bad for the pack, then either you end up getting the pack killed, or the pack kills you to prevent this. This is "hit a beehive with a stick, and you will see that bees understand property rights" morality. The second stage came along when we developed language and thus the capacity for culture. Because of first-stage (genetic) morality, we had instinctive and strong feelings about what was right and wrong. And because we are a curious species of explainers and storytellers, we made up and argued about explanations about where "rightness" and "wrongness" come from. After all, we had a rock-solid conviction that right and wrong exist, in the same way that we have a rock-solid conviction that shapely breasts are sexy, and spiders are disgusting. One such story we came up with to explain these feelings (as well as other things) is "the gods". Because one of the evolved traits of humans is that our brains are very flexible, second-stage morality (cultural) can sometimes override first-stage morality (genetic), leading to some interesting weirdness on occasion. But what all this implies is that the statement "morality is either wholly objective or wholly subjective" is a false dichotomy. It doesn't apply to other things which impact the real world, why should it necessarily apply to morality? There is, after all, no one single right way to make a sandwich. There are lots of right ways. But there are a lot more wrong ways to make a sandwich, and all of them are clearly, objectively wrong. A sandwich can be made with ham or turkey, as you prefer. But you can't make it with ceramic tiles, because then it no longer fulfills the purpose of a sandwich. So it is with moral systems. They can be better or worse, depending on how well they serve the purpose of a moral system. Which means we face a big, important question: what is the purpose of a moral system? That's not a moral question. It's a practical one. And moral systems can indeed be judged better or worse based on practical criteria. For example, a hypothetical religion which forbids sexual activity of any kind is a stupid morality. No babies = no people. Same for a religion that mandates homosexuality. This gives us a hint at one purpose of morality: It must preserve the group of humans who practice it. Any moral system which wipes out its own practitioners, as a group, is stupid. It's self-erasing. We can discard it immediately. We don't need to consult a creator god and wait for him to tell us that suicide-pact moralities are bad. If I had to take a stab at "What is the purpose of moral systems?" I would say this: A moral system must balance two sets of interests. 1. The survival and thriving of the tribe as a whole. 2. The survival and thriving of individuals within that tribe. This allows us to discard many, many possible, and some actual, moral systems without having to invoke god or gods at all. More importantly, it gives us a general, objective criterion by which to judge moral systems, which we don't need to settle religious arguments in order to use. If you rely on "god or gods" as your source for morality, what you get is exactly what we've gotten for thousands of years: religious warfare. Muslims ain't ever going to agree with you on what right and wrong are, and so on. So your appeals to the supernatural simply are not a solution to any moral question we actually have. Now, we may not always know exactly which small variation on our moral systems best promote group and individual thriving, but that doesn't mean objectivity is impossible. It merely means our understanding is limited by our knowledge. And appealing to hypothetical "unlimited understanding" is no solution to this, because our limited understanding must be used to figure out whether that unlimited understanding is benevolent or exists at all. So that's just kicking the can down the road. We all must make choices about what to treat as right and wrong, and we cannot escape that responsibility by deferring to a priest or a book, because then the choice of which priest and what book is a choice we made, which we can be held accountable for. Thus, belief in the supernatural is helpful for enforcing moral systems, but not for designing them. Is enforcing morality a huge and important problem? Yes. I would never argue that it isn't. But designing your moral system is a completely different problem, and if your design considerations aren't at least partially consequentialist, then you are in big, explosive, burn-down-the-cities trouble. Genetically encoded "feelings", and ancient traditions are a good starting point, but they aren't a complete answer, because technology changes the landscape forever, altering the consequences of existing moral questions, and posing new ones that the ancestors never had to consider.

@Alex_Ortodoxie @WesleyLHuff It's always "muh scholars" with Baptists until someone asks what the "scholarship" says about the deity of Christ lol

Are we also going to accept the dates of those scholars who say the New Testament is post-apostolic? Seems like @WesleyLHuff accepts whatever dates line up best with his reformed *tradition*.

@FedPoasting Pretty sure he is complimenting the church & using it as an example of good lighting

Catholics talking smack about LEDs in an Orthodox Church while their Pope opens Vatican prayer rooms for Muslims. Log/speck moment.

Just created a quick YouTube promo for Wallpaper Reactor: youtube.com/shorts/R1RxV2O…

I made a live wallpaper app for Android, Windows, and macOS! Available now at wallpaperreactor.app/releases/

@Marvin06260 You have to buy it through the Play Store, then when you switch to the github version the app will unlock

@LikeEich quick question: i tried to click the upgrade button in the github build of the app, but it just resets it. how can i buy the pro version since the one in the playstore is not updated?

Console Launcher now supports dual screens for the upcoming Thor and Pocket DS devices! Get it here: github.com/likeich/consol…

@TheNeoism No, there is not. But if that becomes an issue let me know and I'll try and fix it!

@LikeEich Question, is there a toggle for the dual screen support? I'm curious as I will use CL while my Xreal One glasses are plugged in and that may cause an issue if I'm trying to pick something from the launcher 😁

@LuisAlvesNY It is the Retroid Pocket 5

@LikeEich What is the handheld that is being used in the video?

@CalMaple3 yes it is

@LikeEich Is it connected with hdmi or what?

@BobWulff Thanks! Looks good. I'll have to add an option to switch the screens too, maybe in the next update

@LikeEich But also

@BobWulff I think those require an update. Check out Settings > Frontend > Frontend Settings > Update Platforms. That should get them to work.

@LikeEich hhhhm that doesnt seem to work. Are Azahar, Eden or MelonDS not supported?

@BobWulff Awesome! Either Settings > Frontend > All Platforms > "Set Player" option Or long-tap the platform on the home screen > Edit > Advanced Settings > Set Player I would love to see a pic of the Thor with CL if you get a chance!

@LikeEich IT WORKS, but how do i set the emulation app per console?

Dual screen frontends are coming 😍🥹