Think Different.

The server at www.haproxy.com is taking too long to respond.

Not the best advert for a high availability proxy...

You won't be satisfied unless the actual word 'literal' appears? It appears in the first paragraph of the Stercoranism link, and again in the second paragraph.

"the 9th century Carolingian theologian Paschasius Radbertus... wrote an influential tract around 832 upholding the literal interpretation of Christ in the Eucharist". He supported the literal change, but said that the holy bits dissolved before becoming poo.

If you check out the Middle Ages section, it shows that the theological debate that it wasn't physical alteration started... at a date that is closer to us than the birth of jesus.

Check out Stercoranism [1] as well (which contributed to the above debate), whose whole basis is that the doctrine of physical change must lead towards normal digestive processes happening, and wondering if this turns the eucharist into, literally, holy shit.

At the end of that article is a bit of modern apologia stating that christ probably leaves as soon as the cracker hits your stomach ('but nobody knows precisely when'[2]). :)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stercoranism

[2] god does, after all, move in mysterious ways...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

Plenty of people have believed it historically. Scroll down to the Catholic section and you'll see some of the mental gymnastics I talked about to claim it in modern times.

Protestants don't believe in literal transubstantiation; I'd say they probably trust their taste-buds more, but then again, compare Protestant/Anglo-German food against Catholic/Franco-Italo-Spanish food :)

> "questions that have no answer". They have more perhaps retreated to "god of the gaps"

I don't personally see a difference between these terms - they both mean claiming to have an answer for something that is unanswerable. If you have an answer for which the only proof is basically "just trust me", then it's not much of an answer. Russell's Teapot is a pretty clear example of this.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

It's exactly the same with women's rights and minority civil rights: "Really, people would listen to them more if they just toned down and spoke politely". We already know that that doesn't work and just gets you ignored.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/07/08/t...

So where does the 'useful dialogue' start? I think it starts well before we just give moral authority to a bunch of very old men arguing about rules that only they made up. They should give us a better chain of authority than "since time immemorial".

Truth is that economies change slowly, and politicians have much less control over it than we all like to believe.

A colleague of mine had a son who needed to get seen there. They asked him to fax in the admissions forms. Who has a fax machine? He found somewhere and faxed them in, in a couple of jobs. Nope, can he fax them so they all come through in one continuous job. So he goes back and faxes them again. Nope, can he fax them so that the documents arrive in the right order? So he decides to go to a different children's hospital in the city.

I had a friend who worked in the QA dept of that hospital and tried to get processes improved. He said that any time you tried anything, the relevant head of department would say "If we make this change, children will die". Everyone around the table would know the lie for what it was, but the head of dept had the final say if it involved child health.

In short, faxes will still be going strong there for a while yet, and they're a big hospital. :)

At the time, he thought that schizophrenia would break up into four basic groups, based on positive/negative affect (does an episode have the person doing extra activity or withdrawing) and, I think, whether or not the person has hallucinations.

I haven't really kept in touch with the literature to see how his 4-way prediction went, but I have never seen anything to counter the idea that schizophrenia is more than a single disease. And, of course, classification of disease is a key element of treating it, so if schizophrenia is not being properly classified...

True, I wouldn't pay either $1 or $10 to generate a meme, but I wouldn't 'pay' $0 either.

I'd also discourage a patreon- or kickstarter-style offering for a B2B product, because it signals very clearly that you're not playing with the big fish.