I'm a Russian speaker, but I've never thought of goluboy and siniy as separate colors, unlike blue and green. To me, goluboy and siniy are like pink and red; just different shades of the same color.
> It looks weak when it goes up against answersingenesis.org, and a rabidly (maybe not literally, yet, but give it time...) culture of opposition to basic science, such as vaccination, among many evangelicals.
But that's a problem with American evangelicals, not religion as a whole. The earliest universities were sponsored by the church; and the works of ancient scholars were preserved by Catholics and Muslims.
> Ultimately the claims of religion are moral, and they're on very thin ice when religion has such an appalling history of support for slavery, torture, murder, exploitation, grift, war, paedophilia, and biblical literalism.
Sure, but religion also has a long history of fighting against those claims; a lot of slaves adopted Christianity, and used it as a tool to fight against oppression. It was also a large part of the civil rights movement; Martin Luther King Jr was a Baptist Minister, and Malcolm X was a Muslim.
> and an apparently endless series of scandals and court cases featuring youth pastors and grifting megachurch multimillionaires.
Plenty of grift among the sciences too. Look at the replication crisis, or companies like Theranos and FTX. In the United States, medical malpractice is the third leading cause of death.
> Personally I'd rather not be in any community that trades comfort for complicity and/or denial, no matter how nice its social events feel.
You should probably stay off Hacker News then. For example, plenty of people here celebrate electrification, even though the raw materials needed for that are mined by children and slaves.
> But you're far more likely to see atheists trying to progress public ethics than religious believers, especially in the US.
> In the United States, medical malpractice is the third leading cause of death.
No it's not; this claim comes from a flawed study that even the BMJ's then-editor-in-chief has admitted was poorly researched. And even if the numbers were accurate, the number is for medical errors, not malpractice. It's an important distinction that matters to your point.
> Rat traps are less expensive, more effective, less prone to killing things other than rats, sanitary, don't have to be fed, don't need a litter box, don't cause allergies, don't need shots, medications, or vet visits, and don't have kittens. Far lower impact and much less work than a cat.
Are they? If the cats are eating rats, then they don't really need to be fed. If they're allowed to go outside, then you might not even need to clean the cat's litter box. Rat traps have to be reset, and the corpses disposed of; cats do all that automatically.
Yes, they are, objectively. The minimal amount of labor involved in setting and clearing a trap (literally 30 seconds) is significantly less than the time spent tending to a cat. Even if you only pet it occasionally. I own traps I don't even have to touch with my hands. And they were inexpensive.
Rat traps work 24/7, unlike a cat which sleeps up to 16 hours a day.
Cats must be spade or neutered, an additional cost and effort lest they contribute to the epidemic of semi-feral cats.
Outdoor domestic cats kill an estimated 7 - 26 billion wild animals yearly, most birds, 3/4 of which weren't eaten when studied.
Outdoor cats especially need flea treatment, else they'll bring them into the building. Having dealt with a flea infestation, trust me you don't want to. Involves poisoning your whole dwelling for a few days at significant expense.
That's funny, I find it much easier to fall asleep in a cold environment. Then again, I also like to use a heavy blanket, so maybe it's the weight more than the cold that's helping me.
I think that's also consistent with the idea behind a hot shower. The shower doesn't help by increasing your body temperature, in fact it does the opposite. The hot shower induces the body to try to cool down, so near-skin blood vessels swell, and that dumps heat into the cold air, which reduces your core temperature, and a reduced core temperature helps you fall asleep.
I think where I read about this was Why We Sleep from Matthew Walker. But he suggests just washing your face with warm water, as opposed to a shower.
> Would it be a mistake to use Desmos in a math classroom, or 3Blue1Brown style animations, to build up visual intuition?
I don't think there's anything wrong with showing kids some videos every now and then. I still have fond memories of watching Bill Nye.
> Should we not teach basic numerical and statistical methods in Python?
No. Those should be done by hand, so kids can develop an intuition for it. The same way we don't allow kids learning multiplication and division to use calculators.
>> Should we not teach basic numerical and statistical methods in Python?
> No. Those should be done by hand, so kids can develop an intuition for it. The same way we don't allow kids learning multiplication and division to use calculators.
I would think that it would make sense to introduce Python in the same way that calculators, and later graphing calculators are introduced, and I believe (just based on hearing random anecdotes) that this is already the case in many places.
I'm a big proponent of the gradual introduction of abstraction, which my early education failed at, and something Factorio and some later schooling did get right, although the intent was rarely communicated effectively.
First, learn what and why a thing exists at a sufficiently primitive level of interaction, then once students have it locked in, introduce a new layer of complexity by making the former primitive steps faster and easier to work with, using tools. It's important that each step serves a useful purpose though. For example, I don't think there's much of a case for writing actual code by hand and grading students on missing a semicolon, but there's probably a case for working out logic and pseudocode by hand.
I don't think there's a case for hand-drawing intricate diagrams and graphs, because it builds a skill and level of intimacy with the drawing aspect that's just silly, and tests someone's drawing capability rather than their understanding of the subject, but I suppose everyone has they're own opinion on that.
That last one kind of crippled me in various classes. I already new better tools and methods existed for doing weather pattern diagrams or topographical maps, but it was so immensely tedious and time-consuming that it totally derailed me to the point where I'd fail Uni labs despite it not being very difficult content, only because the prof wanted to teach it like the 50s.
Fwiw calculators were banned in my school. Only started to use one in university - and there it also didnt really help with anything as the math is already more complex
I was allowed to use calculators when I started algebra in seventh grade.
I found that calculators didn't help all that much once you got into symbolic stuff. They were useful for the final reductions, obviously, but for algebra the lion's share of the work is symbolic and at least the relatively cheap two-line TI calculator I was using couldn't do anything symbolic.
I know that there are calculators that can do Computer Algebra System stuff, and those probably should be held off on until at least calculus.
Absolutely. When I was in college, I had to stop using my laptop to take notes, as I would just always end up scrolling reddit for half the class. I switched to pen and paper, and while I almost never ended up looking at my notes, just the fact of manually writing them down helped me remember them.
That was my experience as well. I did best in the classes where I didn't have a laptop out. I had no temptations to be distracted and simply writing down the notes by hand was a huge benefit.
I suspect the people I see saying they were able to not get distracted when using a laptop in class are either outliers or liars.
> In my experience there's a substantial number of women who are fans of something like overwatch, but not of actually playing Overwatch. They like the designs and the world, they make fanart and fics and such, but they don't actually play
I'm the same way with Warhammer 40K. I love the lore, but have no interest in actually playing with the miniatures.
> Isn't it kind of misguided to approach this as men studying women and trying to make more things that appeal to them?
Why would it be misguided? There are plenty of works that are created by women that appeal to men (Harry Potter, Animorphs, Full Metal Alchemist), so I don't think there's anything wrong with men trying to make something that appeals to women.
I think you are saying something fundamentally different than the parent comment.
I think they are saying 'make something that appeals specifically to you as the creator, and it will resonate with some people out there'.
I personally agree that this seems top result in works I enjoy. (As evidenced by behind-the-scenes content or interviews with creators espousing a similar philosophy.)
I think my advice still follows. If you're making a game for yourself, then it's best to know and understand yourself. There's often a difference between what people think they want and what will actually bring them joy.
reply