Shoot. Maybe someone’s card is in the right order.

Destroys well-paying jobs has been a major public issue since the mechanical loom was invented in 17whatever. I like mechanical looms. I think there’s varying opinion even on here about which squares are actually bad and which are just whining.

Dating apps and similar with insufficient moderation come to mind, or even ones that effectively paywall dickpics and harassment instead of removing it.

For gender nonconforming people, lots of forms.

Are they making elevators without mechanical fail-safes now?

I mean, it is cringe. There’s strong norms about modesty when it comes to intelligence for a reason.

So that comes out to 0.7% of eligible people. Honestly that’s pitiful if it comes with discounts like other people are suggesting. Those meetings must be really obnoxious.

Lol, isn’t that symbolic.

Yeah, I’m reconsidering now that someone mentioned that. I’m not going to the meets, though, they get bad reviews for exactly this reason.

Edit: Uhh, looks like it’s only the US Mensa? Maybe some of the other Mensa-like things have benefits beyond the “pleasure” of their company, I don’t know.

Oh shit, maybe I need to reconsider, as a very poor person with fancy test results.

Edit: US-only, it seems.

And yet it exists. Ego might seem like a pretty useless motivator, but it doesn’t seems to anticorrelate with intelligence. If anything, it correlates, probably because when you’re “the smart one” it becomes a vicious cycle pretty easily.

I mean, it also selects for people that have something to prove.

Germanic languages are usually considered more gutteral, aren’t they?

I have noticed an attitude like being a computer person is a defect, but they still want us to fix their shit, sometimes.

Hey, summer semesters do exist as well.

Haha, I thought it was a homework question. It would be a pretty good one; it’s not hard to answer, but the a proof touches on a lot of things. I probably would have gone about this differently if I hadn’t thought I was addressing someone who’s actively studying these things. Hopefully you still knew most of the terms I was using.

Best of luck.

Definitely.

It’s a violent world. If you think you can magically opt out of that, somehow, you might have lived a massively privileged life (to this point).

That being said, look at all the people in the thread who are afraid to admit possible abstract, hypothetical support for something. On a hard-left instance, of an alt platform, that I’m currently using over Tor. That should be an indicator of how much actual will there is to brave a shooting war. (You didn’t ask if we wanna revolution specifically, but this is .ml so I have to address it)

The practical takeaway of the literal question is much more nuanced and subtle.

I would go seriously digging for the source for you, since a cursory search is full of modern stuff and I can’t remember where I saw it exactly, but that would require non-glued fingers.

If you look at old (siege) engineering manuscripts, they’re full of “take the square root of the armslengths and rewrite as dactyls”-type rules for everything. They didn’t know much about mechanics, and often had funny ideas like momentum being self-dissipating if not sustained. but enough experimentation and basic calculating tools allows you to make rules of thumb anyway.

And, it’s not like nobody could see how things moved through the air when launched or dropped. Basic principles about falling things go back to the 14th century at least, and the ancient Greeks thought so much about parabolas one must have at least noticed that’s the trajectory of a thrown javelin, albeit without even algebra to start to explain why.

For example, we don’t need to know about ballistics to use a gun.

Sure, but you need to know about the trigger and where the bullet comes out of. And, if you don’t know about the recoil, how to load it and where the casing is ejected you might not use it well.

Thinking about places like Europe and China, there’s probably over a billion people that have never seen a gun operated in real life, so I suppose that’s actually not really necessary, either. On the other hand, I have trouble imagining a modern person who’s never needed to convey “perpendicular”.

You can define knowledge as enablement to do things.

If you’ve ever done home canning, it’s kind of a huge process.

What’s wrong with, say, canned beans in water? I feel like you’re painting with too broad a brush there.

I think I did napkin math once that included cost of labour, and surprise surprise, mass production works. Just the energy is a good point too, though.

It sounds like energy pretty cheap right now. But, it’s also artificially cheap unless you have a lot of renewables on your grid, and somebody somewhere is going to pay for those emissions.

I didn’t do bread - maybe I should reconsider that one, per the other users here.

Yes, you’re allowed having hobbies. Not everybody is looking to do it because they love it, though, and people plowing massive time into saving a few bucks with DIY projects is a very real thing. So, it’s probably good OP mentioned it.

Blyat.