Ah, alright that’s a fair point. Once one of those splits happened then that single life form would have become the common ancestor for all other life. I’m satisfied with that explanation.

Well it’s good to know my schooling might not be a complete waste at least

Well the job market for developers is still pretty tight at the moment. I don’t have the insight to say for sure why (though I have some guesses), but I know that for me and every junior developer I know it’s rough out there.

Number 2.

5 could work if it was refined a bit more.

What if a bunch of the earliest life spontaneously formed by the millions independently in different places? Would we all really have a true single common ancestor then?

Edit: I think there’s been a misunderstanding. I believe that all life on earth came from the same “species”, being the same kind of structure spontaneously generated in the primordial soup, but that there could’ve been a number of those structures that were generated and were all identical to each other. This would mean that any of them could evolve from the same starting point in terms of “design”, but not literally be the exact same object, meaning that we could have a number of origin ancestors that were all identical, and were potentially not an exact one singular living thing.

It’ll be fine. Sharks are older than trees so we can switch to them.

It’s likely a scheme to entice people onto their platform because they’re not as trusted as valve or gog. If they become a monopoly then we’ll get to see all the various catches to that.

I’m sure to a lot of people this fact is no surprise, but from my neck of the woods I haven’t even heard of this stuff.

I didn’t read the article, i just want to rant into the void about this thing that itches in my mind when I see this topic.

I don’t want a robot that looks human. Even if they manage to make one that’s convincing and isn’t nightmare fuel, I’m still going to be uncomfortable around it. It’s because of the fact that this robot’s existence would be inherently deceptive, trying to fool you into thinking you’re talking to a human, only for you to find out that this thing isn’t human. It falls out of the visual uncanny valley, but into an entirely new one, a more existential uncanny valley. If you want me to trust a robot, you can’t make it immediately try to deceive me into thinking it’s human. Look at movies and cartoons, the most appealing robots in those media are obviously robots. I’m sure there are a good few Androids that look human and are appealing in their own way, but for the most part you get things like Wall-e, or baymax, or r2d2, designs that are not trying to fool you into thinking they’re human. All of those designs have a charm or appeal to them, and they all look like robots. I don’t know where I’m going with this, I’m gonna go to bed.

I just know that I have neither B)

I wouldn’t complain if we brought back þe thorn.

deleted by creator