Turns out you are right. At least on the surface.

• While the actual birth rate was 4.5 to 7.5 before 1800, the effective birth rate was about 2.
• Women’s mortality was also not the problem. The probability to die in child birth was '‘only’ 0.5%

But if we dig deeper, we find that only 10% of children made it to their 20s, and the reason for that was famine and disease.
So those that kept the population growing lived under conditions where the reason why their children died was because they could not feed them or keep them healthy. And if we take the 0.5% of maternal mortality, and apply it to those responsible for the population growth (those that made it into their 20s), we get a rough estimate of 50% effective maternal mortality. So it was the agricultural technology in combination with war, disease and child birth that kept the population low.

And that’s what i meant: They lived in a situation where 80-90% of their friends had died of famine, disease and war, and under these horrific conditions they still produced 4.5 to 7.5 children per woman, which kept the population growing (slowly). As soon as that limitation was lifted, the population shot up.

Personally, i don’t see any planning in that. They just had as many children as they could before they died, not worrying about how they would feed them.

I’ve been self-hosting it for about 10 years now. It’s a castle built on sand (PHP): It’s hard to install, hard to update, and becomes slower by the day, but once you have learned Docker, Apache, SSL and a bit of SQL, it works mostly reliable.

If you just want file syncronization you could just buy a hosted instance, and use Cryptomator for protecting your privacy. Then you can have Nextcloud in under 30mins.
If you want to store large amounts of data, or you also want to use Calendar, Collabora, Talk,… then self-hosting will be cheaper/more private. But it will require lot’s of learning, far more than the ordinary person can do.

Innovation and competition at it’s peak: You get to choose the color of your noose.

But (presumably) no cash or crypto because someone has to take a 3% cut.

Now it’s even more depressing because that means humans have been using children as a tool to create social security, knowing full well that most of them will suffer and die at an early age.

It’s a pyramid scheme played with (literally) innocent people at the expense of an insane amount of suffering and death.

The only thing Evil (aka. suffering, disease, war,…) needs to exist is that ‘good’ people continue to have children.

Not true. Humans always reproduced to the absolute limit (set by their agricultural technology and the bodies of women). The reason why this didn’t wreck the environment is because that limited population was too small to turn 50% of land into farmland, they didn’t know how to burn large amounts of coal and they didn’t have the technology to produce harmful chemicals.

But i agree that humanity (or any other species) has no value. Saying humanity has value is like saying the white race has value. It’s pure aestethics, it’s not worth it to make anyone suffer for that.

Suffering is bad, and the intentional or neglient creation of suffering is evil.

Those that have created suffering have done evil, and those that are currently creating suffering, or plan to create suffering are evil. The larger the suffering, the greater the evil.

Those that have done evil, but are no longer willing to do evil are not evil.

In the end, evil is a simplification that allows us to take power from those that want to create suffering without needing to know what exactly they are doing or planning.

Good question. Where to put them, when the camps are full? How much money is it going to cost to imprison millions for life? Is there a more efficient solution?

Your brain right now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA_uJOnAnoQ&t=1456s

… i did not speak out because premature Nazi comparisons diminish the Nazi crimes and are antisemitic.

We’ll have to wait for at least 5 million gassed before we can think about Nazi comparisons.

/s just in case.

They’ll do when they realize that’s the only way to fit 30,000 immigrants into a torture camp that can hold < 1000 inmates.

By May 2003, the Guantanamo Bay detention camp had grown into a larger and more permanent facility that housed over 680 prisoners, the vast majority without formal charges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

Yesterday, inspired by the news about mass depaorations, i watched a documentary on the Final Solution.

Among a lot of interesting things, one thing stood out to me: The original Nazis were afraid that the german people would not only reject genocide, but also reject the idea of jews (aka. their neighbors) being sent to brutal labor camps.
So they produced propaganda movies depicting the city Theresienstadt as a spa town. And then told the public that the jews would be sent there to be protected from the increasingly antisemitic public.

To lull victims into a false sense of security, the SS advertised Theresienstadt as a “spa town” where Jews could retire, and encouraged them to sign fraudulent home purchase contracts, pay “deposits” for rent and board, and surrender life insurance policies and other assets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theresienstadt_Ghetto

Nowadays, you can just tell the american people:

Hey, we are gonna send your neighbors to a torture camp. Great camp. Lovely camp. Most brutal camp of the world.

And they are like: Yessss, finally a solution to the migrant question.

I can also recommend Life Under Adolf Hitler: The First Years Of Nazi Germany.

When your router’s chips are made in China, flashed in China with closed source firmware and the money you pay goes to Chinese companies, then it’s backdoored.

When your router’s chips are made in China, flashed in China with closed source firmware and the money you pay goes to American companies, it’s bulletproof.

Just open your “secure” “American” router and look where they are made and flashed. I bet it’s not USA.

Should they live in the shame and horror of this person that they probably attempted to curb at some point.

No. Those relatives that have not enabled or supported a monsters actions are of course completely innocent.
And if they want, they can of course mourn the loss of the ability to ever have a nice conversation with that person again.
But a burial is not like mourning in your bed, crying yourself to sleep. There you can accept that you are sad about the loss, even tough the world is a better place without that person.

A bureal however is a public performance that, as you say, is for the living. Not for the dead. It is not useful for mourning, but a ritual to pay the last respects to the deceased person. Not only for their good side, but also for their evil side. And the bigger the burial, the greater the (implied) respect. This holds true in any western/materialistic society, and was practiced in ancient times, where pyramids were built to honor kings, and a bigger pyramid implied a better king.

Therefore holding a large burial for a horrific person signals to the living that you not only miss that person as a friend, but also support their actions and choices in life.

Ideally: No.

But i live in a materialistic society where status is expressed trough expensive houses/cars/brands and products.
If you buy a expensive gift (for a living person), you show to them that you are willing to go to great lengths to make them happy.

This is the societal norm in (probably) all western countries. And therefore, making a extravagant bureal for a horrific person implies approval for them and their actions.

So if you are not a materialistic person you can give a small burial to a person without disrespecting them, but there will definitely be some people that will then assume that you did not like that person. They will simply assume it without proof, as it is a custom, unless they know that you are a anti-materialistic person.

A burial is a ceremony where the living show their respect to the deceased. The larger/more extravagant the bureal, the greater the (financial) sacrifice, the greater the respect for the person and their actions.

Everyone who thinks Hitler should have received a state burial (whether by the allies or by his supprters) is definitely a nazi.

Only those that understand a problem even have a chance to solve it. Those who refuse to understand a problem (often for comfort) are not helpful at best, but usually actively harmful.

The problem of suffering runs far deeper than “Rich vs Poor”. We are all trapped inside constantly decaying bodies that are barely capable of survival. This constant decay leads to almost constant pain even billionaires can not avoid. And then there is our anxious brain worrying about all sorts of things that might or might not happen. Yes, all of this is more bearable inside a villa than inside a tent, but it is still abhorrent. This does not mean the “Rich vs Poor” struggle is not worth while. It is, because there is tremendous preventable suffering within this struggle. This struggle, however, is just a tiny fraction of the problem that is called the human condition.

To those who seek to understand the problem of suffering, i can recommend this video. It eases you into the horror of being alive.

If you are having sensitive information stored using closed-source software/OS, you can stop reading right here. This is your biggest vulnerability and the best thing you can do is to switch to FOSS.

For those that have already switched:
It made me think about how to improve the resistance of large FOSS projects against state-sponsored attackers injecting backdoors.

The best thing i came up with would be to have each contribution checked by a contributor of a rival state. So a Russian (or Chinese) contributor verifies a contribution by an American.
The verifying contributors would have to be chosen at random in a way that is not predeterminable by an attacker, otherwise a Chinese-state contributor will contribute harmless code until the next verifier will be a US-based Chinese spy. Then they will submit a backdoor and have it checked by an American citizen paid by China.
Also the random number generator has to be verifiable by outsiders, otherwise a spy in the Linux-Foundation can manipulate the outcome of choosing a favorable verifier for a backdoor.

This can obviously only be done as long as there are lots of contributors from rivaling states. If the US decided that Linux can only allow contributors from USA/EU, then this model can not work and Linux would have to relocate into a more favorable state like Switzerland.

What one should keep in mind that even if the US would ban all foreign contributions and the foundation would not relocate, Linux would still be more secure than any closed source OS, as those foreigners can still look at the code and blow the whistle on bugs/backdoors. It would however be much more insecure than it is now, as the overhead for finding bugs/backdoors would be much larger.