Interestingly enough the issues you list seem related to capitalism rather than just any form of societal system.
Many literary utopias have non-capitalist systems but usually some sort of circular sharing system (some are outright communist, but others more slow living).
Greed must always be checked by a society. But since Calvinism we've had a dual moral reasoning (was that Charles Taylor or Hegel, can't recall). Through Calvinism capitalism attained the moral good of earning more than you need, to deploy greed for God.
Humans are naturally greedy (natural egoism is not immoral just a biological drive) and our political system should balance that out somehow.
While on the subject of etymology, spelling the Greek word “dilemma” (δι+ληπ+μα) incorrectly does not help with providing a definitive answer as a Greek. I'm not starting a flame war, I just make an observation (and as it happens, I'm a fellow Greek).
Yes, the word “European” (inhabitant of Europe) is rooted on the Greek word Europē, Zeus' mythical mistress (one of many), after whom both the continent and the satellite were named, but is the “-ean” a proper transcription from Greek?
Perhaps “Europaean” could be the better answer to the question we discuss; after all, in English the continent's name is a modernized “Europe” while the satellite stays closer to the intermediate Latin as “Europa”, and since this discussion is in English, I feel that the difference in suffix justifies a different label for the inhabitants of the satellite.
I think it was a joke, not a argument from authority as a greek :)
That said, I think ChatGPT is right here:
...the term "Europans" seems the most appropriate choice for the inhabitants of the Jovian moon Europa. It aligns with the linguistic patterns used for other celestial bodies, maintains clarity by avoiding confusion with "Europeans," and respects the Greek origin of the name "Europa" without introducing non-standard formations.
Mercury: Mercurians
Venus: Venusians
Earth: Earthlings
Mars: Martians
Jupiter: Jovians
Saturn: Saturnians
Uranus: Uranians
Neptune: Neptunians
Pluto: Plutonians
Moon: Lunarians
Io: Ionians
Europa: Europans
Ganymede: Ganymedians
Callisto: Callistans
Titan: Titanians
Rhea: Rheans
Iapetus: Iapetians
Triton: Tritonians
Eris: Erisians
Ceres: Cerians
There are currently two Jupiter moon exploration missions either en route or about to launch. Oddly, the European one (JUICE, launched earlier this year) will focus on Ganymede, while the NASA one (Europa Clipper, launches next year) will focus on Europa.
I never could get used to jq's syntax so instead I've just been grepping. But this looks to be for jq what htop is to top, which is great for exploring response data.
IMO Python imports behave like the bash source command.
This is why people use the `if __name__ == "__main__"` so the majority of people will address it in all their scripts even if they don't know the reason why.
It's a feature not a bug IMO. You can use importing a .py file as a singleton hack. You can also use `refresh` to re-load a module, to clear it of any runtime overrides.
Python inports collect the locals in the "module script" and store them in a module object, which is then made available to the module that ran `import`. That module object is cached, so reimporting the module another time will not run the code again.
Python imports are much more principled than sourcing bash though. They are executed in a new namespace, and subsequent imports reference that namespace directly instead of re-evaluating the code.
C extensions don't significantly change matters because the module is still constructed by procedural C code.
It’s definitely a feature! Just one that’s often not understood. If you include a file in a C program, that codes just sitting there until you call it (more or less, yada yada #define, etc.). If you import a Python module, it executes the code in it. That code is typically a set of statements that defines functions and classes, but it could be anything.
If you're right, that's probably a good thing, not sure it'll be enjoyable.. However records are being broken much faster than the worst predictions, so it might be faster than you think.
In my unqualified opinion the usability of e.g. phpBB forums (discussing through the browser) was much better than calling up a local BBS on telnet. Multilevel prompt menus in telnet can be quite maze-like.
Web crawlers indexed online forums too, so you could find the content right away through the same search engine instead of having to search the BBS discussions for hours or post a request on the local BBS and wait (days) for replies. Your technically illiterate aunt could browse the search results for posts containing the recipes she wanted from a number of disparate forums, and choose to read anonymously (and print out) or login and contribute. All you need is an email address.
This accessibility and semi-transparency created a major shift in where you go for content, effectively forcing the tech literate to follow suit as well. It fits in the general trend of democratizing the internet, and IMO was a good thing for tech. (I blame the monetizing and large commercial entities for the current state of fragmentation.)
I still login to a local BBS about once a year to say hello. Although I have a shell account now so I don't need to telnet over the net. It's still very alternative and hacker friendly.
It feels silly to say this since it sounds like you’ve been using Usenet since the dawn of time, but you can get GUI-based news readers that fetch articles from your Usenet over the internet, no dialing up or using Telnet required.
Properly configured, these news readers feel just like email clients, with threading and signatures and all that. Yes, the configuration part is some work but you only have to do it once and then you’re set up for all of Usenet. With forums you have to find and create an account separately for each one.
Usenet could (and still can) be operated via telnet using the NNTP protocol [1]. The whole protocol is ASCII-based, just like HTTP, and works via simple text commands. The most common way to access Usenet back in the day was over dialup.
Sure, but the most common way to access Usenet/NNTP servers was through graphical GUI software or "TUI" for those that preferred terminals. Most people didn't write NNTP commands directly, although I did that because I wanted to learn the protocols (same with POP/SMTP/HTTP that are surprisingly easy to get started with)
NNTP worked great with dialup. You could connect and download all the new content since the last time you were online and catch-up offline without blocking the phone line. The clients were designed to work both in both online and offline mode
