pwgentleman

> "catholic" mean something like "universal,"

Christians make a distinction between churches and the church. The former is the physical building or even denominations like Lutherans or Roman Catholics. The latter is the group of people that are part of Christianity, across time and denominations. The Universal Church refers to the latter.

Galatians 1:2 "…the churches of Galatia…" vs Colossians 1:24 "…for the sake of his body, that is, the church…"

I don't think there's a direct line.

"Might makes right" will also force cooperation from those who are less fortunate. I'd argue there was almost never "fairness" in human relationships, from stronger warriors getting the best food to kings forcing their will upon their subjects to filthy rich individuals owning the greatest part of the world wealth today.

My point is in no way that this is right. Only that humans are not intrinsically fair.

> Fairness is intrinsically human

Is it though? Survival of the fittest doesn't sound particularly fair to me.

I've been using this for 1 or 2 years and it makes my life so much easier... I don't understand why Firefox doesn't make this and Multi-account containers an integral part of the browser.

Yeah there’s an extension called Temporary containers that does exactly that (^:

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate...

That's maybe part of a more general "perceived inability of some Muslims to handle polemics against their religion with grace" (from the article). Searching for "bobblehead Jesus" vs "bobblehead Mohammed" on Amazon is a good example of that.

The more disturbing issue is the ECHR's ruling.

That seems to imply those billions of people religious are not rational, down to earth.

Theism in itself is a simpler explanation for existence than atheism, and yet many rational people are atheists. Is it because they weighted all the possibilities or because they discarded the option a priori?

We are all way less rational than we would like to believe.

How long term do you think this strategy is for the human kind?

Does it span more than one generation?

Well I have another iPhone and it's not much better, it's frequent that app install requests will get lost for hours. And there's no obvious way to go look for pending notifications, you need to wait for it to show up again.

Parenting controls still have a long way to go on Apple devices, but still it's miles ahead of other stuff (looking at you Netflix/Disney Plus).

I've been to a company event a couple years ago, for a big Scandinavian tech company, and the main speaker's point was this: The best thing you can do for the environment, better than recycling, cycling instead of driving a car, etc., is having one less child. So it doesn't seem to be that fringe, unfortunately.

There are two (bad) extreme ideas: 1. Women are inferior and should never rule 2. Women are superior and can do no wrong

True equality comes when we realize both men and women screw up just as much, and have just as much good potential IMO.

I personally consider "very few preinstalled apps" a big plus! Uninstalling useless apps (if they are even uninstallable) is always a drag.

To each it's own I guess...

I’m also curious to know. Preview is pretty much the only tool I really miss whenever a switch from Mac to Linux for a while, and it works really well for annotating and basic editing (moving pages around)…