So the wealthy are increasingly scrambling for ways to differentiate themselves from the plebs.

The Internet shot education disparities in the foot, along with equal access measures. Looks and fashion are meaningless, because the first point means that personally made, bespoke items can be very high quality. Health can be maintained very cheaply, with the right knowledge.

So they are frustrating access to education and preventative health measures like vaccines and fluoride.

That poor chair

Sorry, sources are all paywalled.

Sales in these devices are up, while PCs are stagnant. Go look

Chromebook/ tablet people mostly.

The most likely users for Linux desktop, don’t need a tower. Storage and computing are compact enough.

The heavy compute workload people have a lot of history of how and what they use, they need to explore their own migration path.

pass by phone

That’s a ticket I would go and overnight mail a pre configured IP KVM

You are wrong on the point that essential decisions can be made without history. You don’t know the first thing about what knowledge actually is, and I asked you that because I didn’t think you could answer and it confirmed for me that you are uneducated.

You didn’t do the barest minimum of work on this, your opinion is uneducated and you are being disrespectful.

Can? How? Go read any intro book on epistemology. You are talking out of your ass and it’s disrespectful to everyone that actually takes knowledge and human progress seriously.

Nah. Define your axioms like I said. If you won’t, you can’t.

You apparently have no idea

Define “tainted”, “wrong”(your word I never used that word) and how the context of history is not required to detect such things.

Define what we know in a way that doesn’t have a historical basis.

That’s a very uneducated take, and shows that you don’t understand how access to information can be changed, and modeled to elicit certain outcomes.

Alright, thanks for confirming my opinion.

Things don’t happen that way. “Can, may, could” means that there will be pockets of people that don’t subscribe to the ideology and undermine it.

That “could” is doing a lot of work for that premise. We are currently structured as an amalgam of disparate chains of systems interacting with each other in loosely defined ways.

If you want to take the ability of sovereign entities to self determine, then sure we “could” organize in this other way.

But we don’t have a god emperor of earth, so we will need to rely on this loose consensus instead of a dictated one.

Wikipedia citing sources is exactly what keeps it accurate. Conflicting primary sources are both considered, and the discrepancies discussed.

That’s a very uneducated take, and shows that you don’t understand how access to information can be changed, and modeled to elicit certain outcomes.

Unbiased, well cited repositories of information are essential.

Ok, you can go and talk about whatever you want. I’ll do the same.

We recently received a response from the Chair UZH Faculty of Arts and Sciences Ethics Commission which:

Informed us that the University of Zurich takes these issues very seriously. Clarified that the commission does not have legal authority to compel non-publication of research.

I don’t think they can prevent publication, at least they are saying they can’t

Ooof the response from the ethics commission is very neutered.

Maybe they can’t comment on discipline matters outside of what they said, it’s really surprising if they stopped at a warning about this.

Smart lady