"Sanatana" in Sanatana Dharma means Eternal. The 4 cyclic yugas are well documented in every Sanskrit literature. We are currently in year 5127 of Kali Yug i.e. it started in 3102 BC with the departure of Bhagavan Krishna from earth after Kurukshetra war, which marked the end of previous yuga (Dwapara).

Kali Yug lasts 432,000 years. After which the next cycle begins.

Eventually after Brahma's lifetime is over, Pralaya occurs. Then the universe goes quiet for a long time, until Lord creates again. And this cycle of creation and destruction goes on forever.

you only need people's money if you can't control their labor.

did a plantation owner in the 1600s need the money of his slaves ?

if you control a robot that can fight and take over land, enslave workers for things robots are bad at, harvest food, create buildings etc. what do you need other people for ? your entertainment? robots can do that too.

"and some say she's just a big pair of tits"

Now i have to research whether two sources are true or not.

that is EXACTLY what i want in news.

i do not want your summarization opinion out-of-context clickbait eye-catching headline snippet.

just be a parrot.

LLMs are creative. Databases are deterministic.

There is no right or wrong in a 'zero money image'.

There is right and wrong in a 'zero money update'.

almost every heated argument that I've carelessly gotten myself into, I have gotten out of, by saying : "let's first start with what we agree upon - does word X mean the same to both of us?"

far from true. I (and many others) prefer cookie cutter things, because I know what to expect, and due to quality control of big companies.

e.g. hotels > airbnb, amazon essentials > etsy hand-knit, Lays chips > Ray's chips

- need to CLICK on Unlock to show pricing

(just thought it was funny)

why not publish a paper stating - 'the radio is not conscious just because it can speak words'. or "the phone is not conscious because it can speak and listen".

ethics comes from religion. modernity comes from science.

if you say - "I don't need religion to tell me not to kill people"

then i say - "ok. so, why don't you go around killing people?"

you say - "i just don't have the desire to". or "i am compassionate"

i say - "ok. you do you. what about me? I wish to kill people. what's stopping me?"

you say - "consequences. police. law & order"

i say - "so if there was no police in a suburb, or no punishment for killing, I can kill people?"

Your argument falls dead.

Because religion tells us one thing - the law of Karma - there is no place or time in the universe where an action does not have a consequence. Regardless of your belief in God or the soul or spirit or afterlife or past lives.

Almost sounds like newton drew inspiration from the old golden rule - Treat others as you'd like to be treated.

Why? Because every action has an equal and opposite reaction - you WILL be treated exactly as you treated others, whether in this life or the next. Ergo, if you don't want to be killed, don't kill. if you want to be killed, go ahead.

"I personally don't find science necessary to live a modern and fulfilling life"

(I say, as I type using a computer on the internet)

People love to remove attribution when it suits their short-sighted view.

Just as you can attribute something I enjoy today to science, I can attribute something you enjoy today to religion.

i'd never step out to a place where a stranger could see me, without a towel or wet shorts covering my private bits.