Germany at a secondary school, grades 5–13:
That was about 20 years ago and learning Latin, let alone Ancient Greek, had become the exception even then.
I’d argue that there are good reasons other than selfishness for pressing red. But even if not, an experiment where everyone wins if everyone acts “selfishly” is not designed well for the supposed purpose of showing that selfishness is bad. (Not saying that it isn’t but that’s beside the point.)
Without reading the article first because it probably covers similar ground, here are my thoughts after hearing of this thought experiment somewhere else recently: The relevant question is the likelihood of a blue majority. I consider group A, the people who will press red in any case to save themselves. That’s probably a large percentage but might not be 50 %. But then I have to add group B, people who might have pressed blue but believe A to be over 50 % and because of this press red. Next is group C following the same thoughts, believing A + B to be over 50 % and because of that press red, and so on. All of this makes a win for blue almost impossible, leading to almost everyone pressing red. There will probably some remain who press blue either because they’re not thinking it through or because they, falsely in my opinion, would have taken on moral responsibility for “blues” dying and want to avoid that.
While this is an interesting experiment, I don’t think it can be used as direct analogy for anything like elections in real life because those are rarely life-and-death decisions, so trying for a better but less likely outcome is viable. More importantly communication is possible.
Edit: I just noticed that here it’s not stated that people cannot communicate. With communication it’s actually less interesting. You can try to convince everyone to press blue or everyone to press red. Both would have the same outcome if perfectly successful but with red people are more likely to do it and there’s no catastrophic failure if 50 % isn’t reached.
It looks ridiculous. Should at least have been a smart watch. But I guess you can’t demand a six-figure price without making it an analog watch — no matter if it fits the design.
Vim is actually highly ergonomic; you can do everything with a minimum of keystrokes without moving a hand away to a mouse or touchpad or oven the arrow keys. If that’s worth the time investment to learn it, is a highly subjective question. But I’d say it’s a lot easier than many people think.
If you have your (encrypted) password manager file backed up to one or more otherwise unencrypted media, then remembering your master password will be enough in a pinch. But yes, for day to day password handling you’d want to have a few more memorized, e.g. the ones you’ve mentioned. As those are passwords you enter daily, it’s usually not much of a problem, especially if you use memorization techniques.
uBlock Origin works fine with Firefox but it’s not better. Brave Shield is basically UBO rewritten in Rust and integrated directly in the browser code so it isn’t limited by the extension API and works more efficiently.
This! I never understand people who recommend Librewolf or other forks over Firefox just because some default settings are better.
I trust Vanadium but it’s not the best if you like your web ad-free.
It depends. The artist being a bad person doesn’t automatically make the art bad. But I also don’t want to support bad people. So, relevant questions to me are: Is the artist still alive? Do they profit from my consuming their work? Do I promote them perhaps indirectly? The answers will be different for e.g. Lovecraft vs. Rowling, or rereading a book I already own vs. convincing my book club to buy new copies.
Getting downvoted in a What’s your most controversial opinion? thread is just funny.
Having children in general is selfish and immoral. People shouldn’t be forced into existence to give their parents’ life meaning, take care of them, and/or keep civilization going.
Actually, yes! What is “important” in a general sense is a similar question to that of the meaning of life. In the end there is no external, absolute rule of nature that decides this for us but we must create our own values. And privacy is such a value. In part you can derive it from others like personal freedom but that only moves the question. Different opinions on what our values should be and how to resolve conflicting ones in specific situations is the subject of ethics and has been debated since humans could debate.
deleted by creator
Because knowledge is power and most people don’t like giving whomever power over them for no reason. Also, it shouldn’t matter why privacy is important to people, the fact that it is should suffice to protect it.
I’ve been using the pro version, Moon+ Reader Pro, for years. It’s great for reading EPUBs, which I either buy DRM-free or, if that’s not possible, in any format and then download a “liberated” copy from Anna’s Archive.
Very subjective. In my opinion introducing romantic subplots is the laziest of writing.