Which makes it worse in many ways. The entire tech, business, etc world has adopted the same censorship regime without government orders. So who is giving out the orders?
> One of my physics lecturers at university made the offhand observation that the distinction between physics and mathematics is a twentieth-century idea:
It's actually a 19th century idea. The discovery or acceptance of non-euclidean geometry in the 19th century untethered math from physics or physics from math.
> and it seems to be disappearing in the twenty-first.
It can't disappear because math is no longer tied to the physical world. Math is simply theorem generation regardless of whether the axioms and theorems apply to the physical world.
The math used in physics is only a tiny subset of possible math.
> They installed double and sometimes triple undulations think smooth short speed bumps that exponentially amplify lift when traveling over them over the speed limit.
You must have dumb drag racers where you live but then again, most drag racers are dumb to begin with. Our drag racers remember where these speed bumps are and just adjust to them. You literally hear these morons slow down and rev up again in the middle of the night.
Frankly, it's the noise that's the biggest issue with me. I wouldn't care that much if they raced quietly. I'd prefer extremely heavy fines, loss of license and even prison for anyone causing excessive noise pollution in residential neighborhoods. Especially at night.
> Or we could build our roads so that people can't comfortably drive 100MPH with zero feeling of danger.
What about emergencies? If cops, firefighters or ambulances need to get somewhere quick?
> I've seen people drag racing on residential streets because they are 50 feet wide with clear zones on each side.
People drag race in residential areas because they feel they can do so with impunity. If politicians decided to take on this problem head on, we can solve it easily. Make drag racing and noise pollution with cars/motorcycles/etc in residential areas a serious crime ( that includes prison time ). Problem solved.
But Bob was paid. That's the point. Also most of 'intellectual' property is owned by corporations, not the creators.
If Bob prints a book and you take it without paying for it, that's stealing. If Bob prints a book and you buy it from Bob and you make copies of it and give it to your friends, that isn't stealing. And it shouldn't be classified as stealing, morally or legally.
The only reason it is considered illegal is because greedy corporate interests decided to make it so. Historically, people bought books and copied it and spread it around. That was the norm until fairly recently.
'Intellectual property' is theft. It is a fiction invented by the parasite class. Just think about it.
The same thing applies to computer science. Try figuring out even the basics, like merge or quick sort, using pseudocode in a traditional algorithms book. It's an extremely difficult and time consuming nightmare. But watch a video of how merge or quick sort works, then you gain geniune understanding within minutes.
No it wasn't. The roman republic won the 1st punic war. The carthaginian empire was older for sure but not much more powerful.
> and Rome really had no business thinking it could have won either of those wars.
Rome was the rising and expanding power. Carthage was an old has-been. Rome had every right to think it would prevail. Hence why Rome started the first punic wars.
> and only survived by outright refusing to give up, and then somehow pulling it out of the bag at a key moment.
It's like you gleaned your information from sensationalizing documentaries or a kid's book.
> Rome could have very easily failed and become a Carthaginian vassal state.
The odds of carthage invading and holding rome is 0.
> There would have been no Roman Empire
So western europe could have skipped the dark ages and gotten access to the ancient greek culture ( which is the foundation of european civilization ) sooner?
> and the history of Europe would have been a continent dominated by a North African empire.
Assuming that carthage could have held rome or made any progress against the huns, germanic or slavic tribes up north. If anything, the downfall of rome would have precipitated the rise of northern europe which dominates europe today.
> We're not the only intelligent life on earth. We cant even define intelligence or measure it meaningfully.
If we can't define or measure intelligence meaningfully, how can you even claim we are 'intelligent' to begin with?
> Elephants, crows, dolphins, octopi, chimps, orang utan are all clearly very smart
The have levels of intelligence, but they are clearly not very smart. You couldn't even teach them the multiplication table or the basics of number theory.
> and more intelligent than a human child.
No species you listed is smarter than a human child.
> Besides being biologically irrelevant, the separation between humans and animals creates this weird divide where we constantly assume that we are the only intelligent life.
At the very least, we know that mammals with brains have some level of intelligence. Nobody claims humans are the only 'intelligent' life on earth. The claim is we are the most intelligent. And probably the only creatures intelligent enough to ponder about death, mortality, identity and soul.
> Maybe one day we'll understand better what other minds are like and we'll understand better how we are not alone or special.
Or maybe elephants, crows, dolphins, octopi, chimps, orangutans will better understand what other minds are like and they'll better understand how they are not alone or special? After all, they are 'very smart' according to you.