I'd be cautious with saying evolutionary advantage here.

I don't believe the "Gay Uncle hypothesis" any more than the somewhat debunked "Grandmother Hypothesis", which aimed to explain menopause with biological altruism. Just because we could think of a way in that it might be advantageous for a species doesn't mean it's advantageous for an individuals fitness.

Of course, it can be still an advantage, but we'd only know with more free, uncensored research.

Yes.

We humans are very well adapted to tell humans apart, penguins are very well adapted to tell penguins apart. They have gender specific mating calls for example.

Contrary to popular belief, Emperor Penguins do not mate for life. They are serially monogamous, only having 1 mate per year, but between years fidelity is at around 15%.

I think this means that they only choose last years partner 15% of the time. Still higher than random chance, but in no way dependant on their partner.

Was looking up something else on Wikipedia and stumbled onto this fact. I know this is not exactly related to the point you wanted to make, but I might as well share it.

From the penguin documentaries I watched as a kid, I feel like the "leaving eggs behind" might involve relentless bullying.

I think I used to eat mud when I was bored.

This bike lane is on the left side, but the bike lanes in the rest of the city are on the right. Someone then thought the best way to connect them is to have them cross 2 streets to get to the bike path leading to the right, and from there take 2 left turns if they want to go left, which also has a separate lane for right turns - just for the cars, of course, so that is another lane bicycles need to cross.

So, depending how the traffic lights work, bicycles have to wait up to 5 times to do a simple left turn. The traffic needs to flow after all, and traffic just means car traffic to some city planners.

Actually, it was the train that has come the long way.

It might look like you're moving when you focus completely on the train, but you are in fact standing still while train spotting.

I think that is thinking a bit too narrow. A lot of the stuff we use today might just be our bronze to our successors iron - you can build an unstable society on either. And what we do use up today could still work if used more efficiently - we might not have enough rare metals to give everyone a smartphone in the post-post-apocalypse, but I could see us still launching satellites if only big governments had computers - because they did.

You are correct, but that doesn't mean I can't speculate about it.

The ability to do photosynthesis is widely distributed throughout the bacterial domain in six different phyla, with no apparent pattern of evolution., according to this random paper I found on the internet (I'm not a biologist either).

What I can glance is that photosynthesis has (probably) evolved independently 6 time in Bacteria and 3 times in Eukaryotes.

Plants evolved to photosynthesise after photosynthesising bacteria already existed for billions of years.

(But then we have to also acknowledge that multicellular life evolved like 25 times in Eukaryotes, and the Eukaryote - aka Mitochondria-"Powerhouse of the cell"-haver- is the real big step as it only happened once to our knowledge).

We have had Millions of years of (presumably) intelligent Dinosaurs on this planet, but only 200.000 years of mankind were enough to create Civilization IV, the best Strategy game and peak of life as we know it.

So clearly, Civilization™ is what sets us apart.

Jokes aside, the thing evolution on earth spend the most time on is getting from single celled life-forms to multicellular life (~2 billion years). If what earth life found difficult is difficult for all, multicellular collaboration is way harder than photosynthesis, which evolved roughly half a billion years after life formed.

A filter for sure, but not a great one. Call me optimistic, but I don't think that will set us back more than 10.000 years. If humanity can survive, society will re-emerge, and we are back here 2-3000 years into the future.

Is +5°C Earth a good place to be? No. Will the majority of humans die? Absolutely. Will the descendants get to try this society thing again? I believe so.

On a cosmic scale 10.000 years is just a setback, and cannot be considered a great filter.

No, there's barely any physical evidence that anyone a few hundred years ago existed.

But if writing is enough, there are some. Tacitus basically said: "Nero blamed the Christians, followers of that Guy called Jesus who Pilatus executed a few decades ago."

Wikipedia at least says both his Baptism and crucifixion are not disputed by historians.

I have read the sign, yes, but you have to agree that a sign saying these are big taboos and that it is seen as an offense to Japanese culture and to the chef if I broke them makes it seem like I will be blacklisted and kicked out.

What I didn't know was where exactly the restaurant is, the people in Italy can after all think whatever they want when the Italian chef is in Sri Lanka and happy to acclimate to local customs.

So anyways, the restaurant is probably "Sushi Kisen" in California, it seems to be a high class one. Given that I am probably expected to identify a salad fork in an equivalent french restaurant, and I don't sit in front of the chef in that one. They probably in a position to make these demands of their customers.

The news say Eastern Ukraine, though take that with a grain of salt as I haven't been there personally.

I have never seen a sign saying I shouldn't cut spaghetti, shouldn't order pizza Hawaii, must split the potato with a fork, must have the knife in my right hand, or that the different cutlery for side dishes are mandatory.

Might be different in a high class restaurant, but whatever.

The only things signs in restaurants tell me is either "we only serve real meat, pussies can beat it" and "we did indeed pass the last inspection, here's the grossest looking cartoon implying we shouldn't have".

Just evolve to have a more pronounced overbite and shorter nose like the rest of us.

"Zwei" is the one data point in the top left corner. The entire top row is 2,12,22,32 and so on, after 12 all these numbers start with "zwei" in German, and are therefore among the last 10 numbers alphabetically in this range. Happy coincidence that 12 just makes it into the last 10 digits alphabetically to not mess this up.

Even his good opinions need to overhype AI...

Anyway, we all saw that Tom Scott video, we know it's a bad idea.

It has to be so, why else would it say so on my chart?

I never bought any Apple product and thought they were overhyped, so it might be easy enough for me to say, but no, I personally wouldn't have been Ok with it.

I can see more people begrudgingly using it if Apple did it though.