I like Win31 UI. Sure MDI was an error and hot corners would be very useful but I like how unclutered it looks and the absence of a taskbar and other always-there elements is positive. I dislike the idea of a taskbar. It takes screen real estate that would be better used by apps and when I do need the taskbar's features, those are all cramped at the bottom of the screen. Give me a hot-corner-activated win31-style program manager over a win95-style start button please.

>I dislike the idea of a taskbar. It takes screen real estate that would be better used by apps

Since the very beginning in Windows 95 the taskbar has had an "auto hide" mode if that is your concern. For the vast majority of users, having a consistent present launcher and switcher is important, as seeing a screen with no button to switch apps would be incredibly confusing.

A few words toward the end for the ellusive ai menace, but zero word for the real, already existing, open source fonts. Nowaday I'll consider IBM Plex, Mozilla Fira or even Google Roboto before Monotype Anything.

Not least because Fira is really beautiful.

Lato is another superb open licenced face.

Let me rephrase it so the meaning of what you just said impregnate my mind: you were denier money because their records showed you badly needed it. Sound to me the credit agencies aren't the only evil.

A non profit is "trust us, we know what's best", while a cooperative is legally controlled by it's member on the basis of one member, one vote, and profits, if any, are distributed between members. I wonder how different would be a cooperative Wikipedia versus the non-profit Wikipedia we got.

leading cause of death in some African countries

Jambo mouzugu. Mambo vipi!

This is called "The great man theory": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory

For another perspective, an iPhone looks a lot like a Newton with phone capabilities. Maybe without Jobs returning to Apple, Apple would still be in the phone market.

Everytime the subject come around, someone repeat this like it's a fact but nobody care to explain. Is criminalisation really the only hammer the gov has? What are the goods of saving people against their wishes? Are these goods higher than the damages caused by criminalisation?

> Is criminalisation really the only hammer the gov has?

Of course. What else could they have?

Every government "hammer" exists only through the threat of force, which is violence.

Don't pay your jaywalking ticket? They will arrest you. Resist arrest? They will, uh, FORCE you to comply.

There's quite a bit more hammers in the government's toolbox. Off the top of my head, the government can use taxation, education, propaganda and mental health policy to address drug addiction. None of those need the judicial system to operate.

That seems like reductionist reasoning. How about, all power comes from the Sun. Government violence is the mandate of the Sun.

“don’t bring it to school”, yes, but the rest should be safe.

airport too

Nothing about it looks particularly dangerous except the label. Slap a "random tone generator" sticker on it instead and you'd be fine.

Why?

The history and engineering teachers were impressed, the English teacher claimed it was an effort at a bomb scare and called the police. Sigh.

An industrial revolution is not a single event but a journey. Somebody innovates, then somebody else get the innovation better, then yet somebody else innovates again using what previous people did, etc. Romans could have had their IR from their starting point but they didn't. I don't think it's because they didn't have roman numerals or cast iron. Those could have been part of their revolution. Needs is the prime factor for innovations and this is what they lacked: needs.

They didn't need to innovate because they had abondant and cheap labor in the form of slaves and whatever machine someone could come up with was more costly than slaves so the journey did not began. This is why the aeolipile stayed a novelty and the roman didn't have an IR: they didn't need it.