This one could baffle future generations. Phone booths were mostly done when I was growing up, but I think kids would play a game where they would see how many people could fit in a booth, right?
I know very little about contributing to open source but appreciated reading this. Seems like often the interpersonal element is the biggest challenge and the author handled it well.
I like the sentiment. The challenge is that those who violate privacy benefit financially, while those who defend against it are just trying to protect themselves. To go on the offensive requires effort and know-how without any corresponding financial or personal benefit. A spite based effort sounds appealing but wouldn’t be sustainable.
Reminds me of this tweet from Merman_Melville: “Being a billionaire must be insane. You can buy new teeth, new skin. All your chairs cost 20,000 dollars and weigh 2,000 pounds. Your life is just a series of your own preferences. In terms of cognitive impairment it’s probably like being kicked in the head by a horse every day” The experience itself is probably harmful and changes the person. https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/18e0c77d-e341-4343-bbeb-80a0c47c8be9.png
You’re right and I think it helps to remember certain traits which make religion “fit” from an evolutionary perspective can be beneficial to its followers: believing that the most powerful being in the universe is on your side instills confidence and a sense of well-being. Having community members who believe that God has mandated they should help each other means people may receive assistance when they experience difficulty.
I would argue in the long term having beliefs which are more and more consistent with observed reality is more sustainable. The further your beliefs are from reality and the longer they’re held the more likely something will go wrong. Still, if we (whoever that is) want to encourage people to move away from religion we should think about how we can replace the positive aspects of the religious experience.