Slashdot Mirror


Global Christianity and the Rise of the Cellphone

Hugh Pickens writes "Alan Jacobs writes in the Atlantic about Every Tribe Every Nation, an organization whose mission is to produce and disseminate Bibles in readable mobile-ready texts for hundreds of languages including Norsk, Potawatomie, Bahasa Indonesia, and Hawai'i Pidgin as the old missionary impulse is being turned towards some extremely difficult technical challenges. The Bible is a large, complicated text containing three quarters of a million words and the typesetting is quite complex because of the wide range of literature types found in scripture and the need for several types of note. 'For all the issues that are still to be solved, ETEN is trying to do things that the world's biggest tech companies haven't cracked yet, such as rendering minority languages correctly on mobile devices,' says Mark Howe. 'There's a unity among Bible translators and publishers that stands in stark contrast to the fractured, fratricidal smartphone industry.' But once these technical challenges are met, it won't be only Bibles only that people can get on their mobile devices, but whole new textual worlds."

16 of 559 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Leading the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Like many slashdotters, you're completely dismissing the amount of benifical influence on Western civilization brought about by pornography.

  2. Bible translation is already a big help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bible translation is usually the one taking the big step of documenting a new language and defining a character set for it. So really, this isn't new.

  3. Sample Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Crowd: OMG 4000 dudes 7 loaves 2 fish
    Jesus: Lotsa food now LOL
    Crowd: WTFBBQ!

    1. Re:Sample Text by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 5, Funny

      FMAI (Fisherman's Association of Israel): WTF PIRACY

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
  4. Re:Use LaTeX by WWWWolf · · Score: 5, Informative

    We all know LaTeX allows you to focus on the content and magically comes up with beautiful layouts. I mean the single best page layouts are always in the looks-the-same LaTeX format! And it's so intuitive to use!

    Looks-the-same format? Wha...? =)

    Also, funnily enough (and relevant to the article), one of the groups who is trying to improve (La)TeX's suitability for modern font technologies and supporting obscure languages is SIL, a group that does, among other things, Bible translations. (The end result is XeTeX, one of the best TeX versions out there right now if you want good PDF output and TrueType/OpenType support out of the box.)

  5. Re:New technology, old mindsets by stoolpigeon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    so anything with religious motivation is bad no matter what they do?

    that seems as narrow and short sighted as the other way of taking it.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  6. Re:New technology, old mindsets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What a sad life you must lead if you truly believe that a man cannot find his own purpose and happiness.

  7. Re:New technology, old mindsets by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In a sense, yes. If you are logically minded, you know that from false premises, one can prove anything. Someone who is driven to do stuff for bad reasons can do good an evil.

    But you have no guarantee. So in some sense, it would be better if there were no drive: that way, you needn't worry that next time, instead of typesetting, it'll be bombs.

  8. Re:New technology, old mindsets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As an Atheist, let me state categorically: I do not fear death. When I die, I'll be too dead to notice. QED.

    I always find this particular statement perplexing. Apparently it's the Atheists who fear death, yet it's the Christian (amongst others) who need to make up stories about an ever lasting afterlife to make themselves feel better about the fact that people die. Why would you pretend that people "live on" if you're not afraid of death?

    You will go through life wondering what the point of it all is and why it's all worth it.

    No. Why do you believe that I would? Why do you even think that I spend any significant life pondering such philosophical questions? There is no point to life. Life just is. Now that's a concept that Christians do find scary!

    When you lose loved ones, they are gone forever and you know that you will never be able to spend time with them again. No matter how hard you work, how many possessions you acquire, or accomplishments you achieve, you will end up being a bloated, rotting carcus, just like everyone else, and nothing more. The final chapter of your life involves is about compost.

    Yes, and? Fairy tales about them living up in the clouds might make you feel better, but it doesn't change anything: people die.

  9. Not the first time... by dadjaka · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bible translators have also given us XeTeX, which is now an important part of the TeX ecosystem. And a bunch of useful (and good looking!) fonts: http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&id=FontDownloads

  10. Re:New technology, old mindsets by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    - it is insulting that you think (against evidence, I might add) that atheists cannot have peace of mind. After all, Buddhism is an atheist philosophy, and peace of mind is their trademark.
      - It is insulting that you think people do good things just because they are afraid of the great CCTV in the sky. People do good things for their own sake.
      - It is insulting that you believe one cannot have any other hope in life than the afterlife. I am a scientist, and my research will live after me, so will my memory in my friends' minds. A writer's books will survive him. And artist's works. The good you do while alive. If you need materially motivated pretexts to do good, there it is.

    You should live your life to the fullest, in awe of the universe, precisely because you will return to dust and nothingness. But knowing, because of the immense privilege we have of living now, that we exist because a generation of stars formed, aged and went nova so we could exist as carbon-based lifeforms. We exist because every single one of our ancestors, for four billion years, did no fail to reproduce. We stand half-way to the death of our star, and the beings which will see it die will be as far from us that we are from the first unicellular organism.

    You, on the other hand revel in bronze age mythology.

    I'll spare you comments about the "no true Scotsman" fallacy you committed in your last paragraph.

  11. Re:3/4 million words. tl;dr by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really? You clearly haven't read it then. It boils down to this:

    God created intentionally created humans ignorant. God then commands humans not to become less ignorant. As humans were created ignorant by asshole God, they obviously can't know any better, so they eat the fruit and progress beyond their woefully subservient roots. God then condemns ALL OF HUMANKIND TO ETERNAL TORMENT BECAUSE TWO PEOPLE ATE A FUCKING APPLE.

    Then, God decides that women need a little bit of extra punishment, because fuck women, that's why.

    Shortly thereafter, this omnipotent, omniscient God KILLS EVERYTHING ON THE PLANET because, apparently, not even being all-powerful can keep you from cocking things up now and again.

    Once humanity gets back on its feet, God sends his chosen people on a mission to ETHNICALLY CLEANSE the promised land, raping, pillaging, murdering, and basically committing every war crime we have on the book for a few hundred pages.

    God then decides that the best way to save humanity is somehow to send himself down to Earth to be horrifically executed in public. He couldn't just, you, know, forgive us. Imagine if your dad decided that he was going to forgive you for crashing his car, but first you had to watch him brand himself with a hot poker, just for you. Pretty fucked up, right?

    Even after all of this, the prime directive is still to worship the divine asshole dictator in the sky; you can spend your whole life treating everyone around you BETTER than you treat yourself, and you will still be cast into a lake of fire for not believing.

    When you boil the Bible down to its basic essence, it is every bit as vile as Mein Kampf, if not more so. While there are some nice, happy little sayings in there, they do little to redeem the overwhelming monstrosity of the rest of the text.

    --
    To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
  12. Re:New technology, old mindsets by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You mean the same Crusades where a group of people tried to regain access to the Holy Land after it was cut off? What do you think the Muslims would do if Israel cut off access to the "Dome of the Rock"? Would you blame them? When they attack Israel, would you call it "among the most evil human undertakings ever"?

    Shit like this is just adding weight to the argument that religion is bad. Fighting over something with mumbo-jumbo significance is crazy.

  13. Re:New technology, old mindsets by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 5, Informative

    The existence of gods is undecidable. Therefore using it to justify anything is dodgy. Note that using the non-existence of gods is just as dodgy.

    You should justify your actions by some reason wholly outside the realm of theogonies. And therefore religion is useless to guide human actions.

    I further claim it is harmful. Because it uses an undecidable (and unlikely) premise which is not necessarily shared by all the recipients of the actions.

  14. Re:New technology, old mindsets by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But I prefer to call myself an atheist. Because I lead my life as though no gods existed, as opposed to leading my life as though they might exist. So from the point of view of an external observer, I am not affected by the existence of gods, and therefore I am not and indication of their existence, nor of belief in their existence.

    The idea is that to me, something exists if it is observed to have an effect on the universe. Since the effects beliefs in deities cannot be observed from my actions, I am, for the observer, an atheist. Does it make sense?

  15. Re:New technology, old mindsets by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So if you take the false premise that God does not exist, you can prove anything?

    Bear in mind that the theists are just as strong in their beliefs as the atheists, but neither can prove their belief either way and must rely on faith.

    The idea that atheists have some sort of "faith" or "belief" that there is no God is a divide by zero function.

    What is that with so many fundamentalists? A lack of belief in something does not mean belief in something. Who gets down on their knees every day and prays to "no god" that they profess to not believe in? Who builds a house of worship where people go to have a ceremony every week to something that they believe that they don't believe in?

    Imagine someone standing on a street corner, handing out pamphlets that say that there is no God. So they convince someone that there isn't. So the convertor now asks the convert to pray with him.......... to what?

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.