A lot of languages including Germanic and Romance languages have "gendered" nouns, which is a weird term for "these are some arbitrary categories we put nouns into". While that idea of noun classes is often called "gender" and they are also named "gender-y" things like masculine and feminine, the idea doesn't have a lot to do with gender as in identity.
Compare English irregular verbs - how come you don't say "swimmed"? You "just don't", that particular verb is in a different class. Same thing applies to nouns in certain languages, and affects (among other things) how they're conjugated.
Without knowing the nature of the simulation, we don't even know if there is an analogue for RAM or limited memory. Maybe you could walk in and out a door repeatedly and then glitch into a locked room. Maybe the whole thing would crash - our programs tend to do this when memory runs out. Maybe everything would just get paused or "adjusted down" to fit the restriction. The crash, pause or throttle wouldn't be apparent to us "on the inside" at all if it were happening.
Esperanto is an interesting case though but it wasn’t designed to be as simple as a language can be
Maybe not literally the simplest possible, but simplicity was certainly an important guiding principle. The idea was just to not make it too taxing to learn, since natural languages have a lot of arbitrary complexity in them.
Because you can't escape labels. Even if you don't depend on them (you very likely do) other people do. In reality you are perfectly right - which bits you have and whether you feel manly, womanly, both or neither, consistently or varyingly should not matter. But apparently they do.
Since the labels are going to be there, they might as well be applied in a way that doesn't hurt people.
In school, I happened to notice exactly when some random topic went from "uh, I guess I kinda understand this" to having it actually "click". That clued me off to the difference between e.g. knowing a bunch of shitty formulae, and actually understanding the topic to the point where you can actually use it for problem solving. Also, that all the teaching and books I received revolved 100% around the former.
If the word “cryptography” here is what throws anyone off, it’s not some advanced field of study, it just refers to the physical manifestation of messaging, which a child can get behind.
Just be aware, to everyone else that word does mean the field of study, which is fairly advanced.
All the examples are specifically constructed by humans to carry, but not hide, meaning - Morse, Braille and Quipu "encode" information, but for transmission/accessibility/storage. Cryptography roughly translates to "hiding-writing" and is more or less specifically intended to keep secrets. An encoding is just a different representation of whatever underlying message, assuming one is there. As a result, they can only roughly be interpreted as encryption. Actual encryption means you can know which "format" it's in and still only get the original message if you have the proper key (or whatever).
All of this seems unrelated to seeing "messages" in mundane things. If you look at a flower and think "fuck me, that looks nice" that's great. If you look at it and think "well, the arrangement of these petals is clearly a message for me," then it might be a symptom of things.
Every major religion tends to be extremely flexible about what God will and won't judge. If you're talking about any of the typical monotheistic ones, they're supposed to be all-knowing, all-powerful beings who love you - if that were true none of that shit could happen. Since it does all the time, it clearly isn't, so whatever else seems like an "academic" point.
No, it is not a scam or like the TSA. (... which is of much less clear benefit, but that's a different story.)
Security that we never needed before, but now suddenly we do.
How do you figure? Dropping unsafe practices earlier would've been a great idea, it was just another item in the long list of "people suck at technology", that stuck around out of habit and sloppiness. HTTPS is not new, but for a long time it was much more acceptable to deal with plain unsafe solutions for many uses. Since setting up an HTTPS site for free got very, very easy, there just weren't many excuses left.
Now we’re dependent on a third party gatekeeper for permission to have a web site.
Sort of. By necessity, in a chain of trust, the buck has to stop somewhere, that's your root "authority". In some cases you just make your own on the logic that you trust yourself, or accept some other cert/authority as trusted, or tell the browser "yeah whatever, I know what I'm doing" if you know it's safe. The catch is that then, for any number of reasons, you can't necessarily know it's safe.
It’s a move by the weasels-that-be to turn the Internet into yet another tool for profit and control.
No offense, are you sure you have the technical background required to know that?
A lot of languages including Germanic and Romance languages have "gendered" nouns, which is a weird term for "these are some arbitrary categories we put nouns into". While that idea of noun classes is often called "gender" and they are also named "gender-y" things like masculine and feminine, the idea doesn't have a lot to do with gender as in identity.
Compare English irregular verbs - how come you don't say "swimmed"? You "just don't", that particular verb is in a different class. Same thing applies to nouns in certain languages, and affects (among other things) how they're conjugated.