carlos

Thirty years ago, when we were a bit obsessed with demons, we would say that any unexplained phenomenon was caused by demons. Today we would probably say that people have a lot of imagination.

While I haven't tried, there should be no problem. Servers should be available worldwide. I think the main reason to have several servers is to distribute the load. Also for legal reasons. For example, European laws are much stricter and require a lot more paperwork if data such as names, phone numbers and addresses are stored outside the European Union, so having a specific server for Europe solves that (actually that server is in Switzerland, which is not part of the UE, but is in the list of EU-approved countries).

That's not possible at this time. There is a note saying the developers are working to add that feature but they don't know when it will be available.

Paul, I agree we have some very useful tools, but they have some important limitations. If you wish to find a scripture or an article you need to type the exact literal words. Oh, yes, you can use some logical operators, but those are not for everybody. My parents are not even able to type without spelling mistakes, so they hardly ever find anything. Not to mention languages with diacritics or where words change depending on their role in the sentence. A couple examples from real life of how AI can be of help. I was recently trying to remember a scripture about listening to both versions of a story. I can never find that scripture because I don't remember the exact words. So I asked ChatGPT: "What scripture in the Bible says that you need to hear both versions of a matter to be able to make a good decision? Please quote it from the New World Translation." The reply? "A commonly cited Bible verse that teaches this principle is Proverbs 18:17 'The first to state his case seems right, Until the other party comes and cross-examines him.'" This is what I mentioned before about semantic search. Instead of looking for the exact words, it understands what you are talking about and finds relevant information. Another example. I asked ChatGPT "Please find some article exclusively on wol.jw.org about comforting someone suffering from old age". It gave me links to four excellent articles with a very brief summary of every one of them. Sure, I could have used the index, look up Comfort, then go down several pages of concepts until I found "the elderly" but this way it's much easier. I think a tool like that would be extremely useful to spend less time searching and more time studying.

Something I have thought about is the organization might prepare an AI-powered search tool that allowed to search information in our publications in a simpler way. You might ask "What does Genesis 7:11 mean?" or "how can I encourage someone who is struggling with the loss of a loved one?" and it would return the most recent references in our publications, and maybe even summarize or translate them. That would simplify things a lot for those less skillful with computers and for those in whose languages there are not many publications available. The tool would be designed just to search, it would not compose talks like ChatGPT does. Actually, the private section of the site now supports semantic searches. That means that while in the past you needed to enter the exact words as they appeared in the document, now you can use synonyms and it understands what you mean.

I feel the same, Lance. I ignore comments that seem written by AI. I don't have the time to read what a machine has to say about anything.

We have a teenager whose assignments are delegated to his mother. Now he has received a phone, has installed the app and can see his assignments, but his mother wishes to keep receiving the notifications. Is there a way to have both the publisher and the delegate receive the notifications and reminders?

There have been some great comments so far. I just want to mention that what the Swedish government is contemplating is to stop giving the branch money. I think "persecution" is a bit too strong word for that, they are not banning Jehovah's Witnesses or sending us to prison. While it's convenient for the branch to receive those funds, we have managed many years without them, in fact in most countries we don't receive any funds from the government. In Spain where I live, Jehovah's Witnesses don't receive any grants from the government, while the Catholic Church and others do. Unfair, sure, but not really persecution.

I find it very unlikely that the destruction of all false religion can be completed in just a few days. Laws will have to be passed. With all the fanatics out there, I guess there will violence and fights, maybe riots in some places. All of that will take some time. Then governments and merchants will need to realize that destroying false religion will take a toll on their economy. That won't happen in a week or two either.

That's the problem of asking in an internet forum. It's not like we are an official channel or anything. The friends who are replying know as much as you do. Imagine asking a question from all the attendees to a circuit assembly. How many different answers will you receive? Well, there are more members here than attendees at the assembly.

And obviously that is what was meant. The brothers believed that the new world would arrive immediately. There is no need to try and justify that statement, they had an expectation that was wrong. Exactly as the 1st century Christians. Initially that talk was titled "Millions now living may never die". After some time, Rutherford got pumped up and replaced the "may" with "will". It was a wrong expectation as many others. We cannot criticize them for believing the end was imminent, because actually that was the task Jehovah had given them, to help the congregation keep in mind the day of Jehovah.

I contacted Richard some weeks ago. He was fine but very busy with responsibilities. He said he's trying to limit the time he spends online but still visits the forums from time to time. That makes his comments here even more valuable, doesn't it?

That sounds like a very specific situation. What you mention could happen to many professionals who have to see people undressed: doctors, nurses, caregivers for elderly or disabled people... Do they sometimes have to deal with someone with indecent intentions? Maybe, but as long as they just do their work there is nothing wrong in what they do. You may find people with indecent intentions in all kinds of situations and you simply ignore them. Of course, if you are considering that job and you think it will be a source of constant immoral thoughts for you, then you do well to avoid it. But if it's not something that affects you directly, there is no need to worry about it.

Jotham, there is nothing we can do about it. You should send that suggestion to the branch.

What Bible principles do you think could apply to this, Raul? Is the action of waxing itself what you think might be objectionable, or rather exposing your private parts to someone else in order to have them shaved or waxed? Interestingly, it seems that Joseph had to shave all the hair in his body to appear before Pharaoh, as was the custom among the Egyptians: