I asked AI how followers of Abrahamic religions (Old Testament, New Testament, Quran) explain the fact that if you count all those mentioned tribes and who gave birth to whom in the Bible, it results in only 6,000 years, while Earth is actually 4.5 billion years old. AI said, well… religious leaders say not to take the words in the Bible literally, that one day of creation could be equal to a million years… basically, making stuff up… I really hate the fact that when they dont allow women into leadership positions in religious institutions, they follow literal instructions in the Bible, citing the words of the Apostle Paul that women should remain silent in church (1 Cor. 14:34), but when you show them real nonsense and gaps in chronology, they say “you shouldn’t take everything literally”…
People suffering from mental problems are healthier than the average person. This is how personal growth occurs – a painful rebirth. All evolution proceeds through crises. Strong individuals grow stronger, while the weak drop out of the mind-blowing drama of the Universe.
I was watching a video which said that people who become rich often don’t turn to art (like painting or writing) but instead focus on making more money. The speaker mentioned that even Maslow noted that only about 3% of those who reach the top of his hierarchy of needs (self-actualization) will engage in art creation. This shows that self-actualization isn’t always about art. If we consider the highest point in the chakra system – the crown chakra – it represents unity with God.
I was thinking, will there ever be an .org social network? A non‑commercial one, where promotion wouldn’t be based on payments but on the amount of audience interest. Because nowadays paid social networks purposely limit organic page growth in order to sell paid promotion. Well, that’s the way they pay for functionality, security, and data storage. That’s understandable. But what if a social network ran on voluntary donations, like Wikipedia for example, just enough to keep it running, not to make profit?
In 1991, a 21-year-old posted “just a hobby, won’t be big” to an internet forum. Today, his “hobby” runs 96% of the world’s servers and 3 billion phones. You’ve used it today—and never knew. August 25, 1991. Helsinki, Finland. A computer science student named Linus Torvalds was frustrated. He’d just spent his summer savings on a new 386 computer—powerful for its time, but useless without an operating system he could actually customize for real work. He’d been using MINIX, an educational system designed by a professor for teaching. It worked, but deliberately limited. The professor wanted it simple for students. Linus wanted something he could actually use. So he did what seemed insane: he decided to write his own operating system. From scratch. In his small Helsinki apartment. As a hobby. On August 25, he posted a message to an obscure comp.os.minix forum: “I’m doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won’t be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.” He was being modest. Impossibly, historically modest. That “hobby” would become Linux—the operating system that would eventually run the majority of the world’s computers, though almost no one would know its name. By September 1991, Linus had something barely functional: 10,239 lines of code. Enough to boot up, run a shell, do basic operations. Then he made a decision that seemed unremarkable but would prove revolutionary: He posted it on the internet. For free. With all the source code visible and modifiable. “If you want to use it, here it is. If you can make it better, please do.” This was radical. 1991 was the era of proprietary software. Microsoft, Apple, IBM—they all guarded their code like state secrets, selling expensive licenses and maintaining iron control. Linus did the opposite. He gave it away. And something unexpected happened. Programmers around the world started downloading his kernel. They found bugs and fixed them. They added features. They shared improvements back. A community was forming. In 1992, Linus made another crucial choice: he licensed Linux under the GNU GPL, which meant anyone could use, modify, or distribute it—but any improvements had to remain free too. No company could take Linux private. It would remain forever open. This accelerated everything. By the mid-1990s, Linux had evolved from student project to serious operating system. Companies building websites needed cheap, reliable servers. Linux provided exactly that—free, stable, secure. The internet companies of the dot-com boom ran on Linux. Then came 2008: Google released Android, built on the Linux kernel. Suddenly Linux wasn’t just for servers. It was in billions of pockets worldwide. Today, Linux’s reach is staggering: 96%+ of the world’s top web servers run Linux ALL 500 of the world’s fastest supercomputers run Linux 3+ billion Android devices run Linux Amazon AWS, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure—mostly Linux NASA’s Mars rovers, SpaceX, International Space Station—Linux Yet most people have never heard of it. You used Linux today—probably multiple times—and didn’t know. Checked Google? Linux servers. Used your Android phone? Linux kernel. Streamed Netflix? Linux servers. Online banking? Linux. The modern Linux kernel contains 27+ million lines of code—from those original 10,239. Over 19,000 developers from 1,400+ companies have contributed. It’s the largest collaborative project in human history. But what made Linux revolutionary wasn’t just technology—it was philosophy. Before Linux, everyone “knew” complex software required corporate control, proprietary development, profit motive. How could quality emerge from volunteers scattered globally, contributing unpaid in spare time? Linux answered: extremely well, actually. Open-source collaboration outperformed corporate control. Thousands of experts examining code meant bugs got fixed faster. Diverse perspectives meant better innovation. Universal benefit meant stronger incentive to contribute. This inspired countless projects: Apache, Firefox, Python, Wikipedia—an ecosystem of freely available, community-developed tools that power modern computing. The cultural impact extended beyond software. The idea that valuable things can be created collaboratively, without corporate structure or profit motive, influenced science (open-access journals), content (Creative Commons), even hardware (open-source designs). Linus himself never tried to monetize Linux. He works for the Linux Foundation coordinating development, earning comfortable salary—but he’s not a Silicon Valley billionaire. He’s famously blunt, technically brilliant, uninterested in business politics. He still reviews code and makes final decisions, the same role since 1991—just vastly larger scale. His leadership model has been studied by management experts: decentralized coordination, technical meritocracy, letting the best ideas win. Leadership by facilitating, not controlling. Linux proved revolutionary principles: You don’t need corporate ownership to build something world-changing. You don’t need profit motive to inspire excellence. You don’t need closed development to ensure quality. You need talented people, shared purpose, freedom to collaborate. Linux proved that 10,239 lines of code, released freely by a student who insisted it was “just a hobby,” could become the foundation of global infrastructure. It proved sharing makes things stronger, not weaker. Every Google search, Android interaction, website visit—there’s excellent chance Linux is silently working in the background. All because a Finnish student decided his hobby might be useful to others and shared it freely. The world’s most successful operating system is also its most generous—built by thousands, owned by no one, available to everyone. From “won’t be big” to backbone of modern computing. From 10,239 lines to 27 million. From one student’s hobby to 3 billion devices. Linux didn’t just change software. It changed what we believe possible when people work together freely. And it started with a modest forum post, a small download, and a programmer who thought someone else might find his code useful. They did. Billions of them. Linus Torvalds (1969-present): The student whose “hobby” changed everything—by giving it away.
Question for AI: Buddha said – be generous to get rich and compassionate to defeat your enemies. Is this true?
Answer: This is a very interesting question that touches the depth of the Buddha’s teaching. There is no direct quote with this exact wording in the canonical texts (for example, in the Pali Canon).
However, this phrase very accurately conveys the spirit and logic of the Buddha’s teaching, though not in the sense of benefit as we often understand it. Let’s break it down.
“Be generous to get rich” From the perspective of classical Buddhism, this does not mean: “Donate 100$ to get 1000 back.” That approach is a transaction, not true generosity (dana).
The truth behind this statement is much deeper:
Wealth as a karmic consequence: Generosity (dana) is one of the primary qualities that creates good karma. In Buddhist cosmology, generosity leads to rebirth in the heavenly realms or in a wealthy human family in the next life. So, “to get rich” here is understood as karmic response, not an immediate profit.
Wealth as an inner state: The Buddha taught that true wealth is not just gold, but also the wealth of faith, morality, wisdom, and generosity. A person who practices generosity frees themselves from greed, stinginess, and attachment to things. This feeling of inner freedom and abundance is the greatest wealth.
The psychological aspect: A generous person creates a positive social field around themselves. People treat them better and trust them more, which in the long term can lead to material prosperity as a side effect, but not as the main goal.
Conclusion: Yes, generosity leads to “enrichment,” but primarily karmic, psychological, and spiritual.
“Be compassionate to defeat your enemies” This is an absolutely brilliant and central idea in Buddhism. Here, “victory” is not about destroying the enemy, but about ending the circulation of evil itself.
The law of karma: Hatred only gives birth to new hatred. If you respond to an enemy with evil, you only strengthen the cycle of violence (samsara) and become part of the problem.
Compassion (karuna) as a weapon: Compassion is not weakness, but a powerful force. When you respond to hatred with compassion, you break the vicious cycle.
Who is the real enemy? According to Buddhism, our main enemy is not an external person, but our own poisonous states of mind: anger, hatred, ignorance. To defeat an enemy through compassion means to defeat the anger within yourself. When there is no anger inside you, external enemies cease to exist for you.
A key quote from the Dhammapada that confirms this idea:
“Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is it appeased. This is an eternal law.” (Dhammapada, 5)
Summary
The phrase you cited is not a direct quote from the Buddha, but it brilliantly and concisely summarizes the essence of his teaching on karma and working with the mind:
Generosity is an investment in your happy future (in this and subsequent lives) and a way to cultivate non-attachment.
Compassion is the most effective “weapon” for disarming an enemy and ending a conflict that begins in your own mind.
Thus, from the perspective of Buddhist philosophy, this is the highest truth, albeit understood on a deeper level than simple conventional wisdom.
Before I couldn’t come to a single conclusion about what I believe in—a Creator God (Hinduism, Abrahamic religions) or the Law of Karma (Buddhism), which all gods obey. But today I thought, who created the Law of Karma? So, this question is dualistic, and I will no longer think about it. Because it’s either “both at the same time” or “first one, after another.”
