Thanks, auto correct doesn’t like French apparently because I swear I typed the accent too

Nice to meet another aro in the wild

If, like in the picture, you got accepted into a tribe, you could work incrementally while following along their migration path.

Everywhere the tribe typically sets up a camp, dig a cache and store tools, non-perishable food, pottery, etc. there. You can even purposefully plant seeds for edible plants around those areas where they might have a chance to grow on their own.

It’s true we won’t have mass production crops and most grains are going to be tiny at this point in time, but the plants will be hardy. If they grow in an area naturally, chances are they’ll grow there if you pamper them a little too. You can even start domesticating plants this way by purposefully planting the seeds of the better fruit in better places or weeding out the undesireable ones.

Assuming the tribe follows a regular migratory pattern every year or follows it closely enough, you can slowly build up the caches and natural resources every year.

If you can show off how useful it is to have stored stuff, the other members of the tribe might start assisting you which would allow for better production. Fermenting food while you’re away seems like a good way to show off the usefulness of pottery.

You can also build the walls and floor of some basic dry-stone structures as you go along the route without immediately using them. Seeing how they’ve fallen apart by the time you make it back would also give you insight into how bad the weather gets or if there are destructive tribes who also frequent this area.

Once you have enough supplies to hold you through winter at one of the cache sites and a basic permanent shelter, you decide to stay there through winter.

When your tribe comes back around and finds you still alive, I’m sure some will probably want to stick around with you. Et voilà, you have a somewhat permanent settlement.

Idk about that. Inventing pottery, agriculture, and permanent structures seems pretty easy even for an idiot of our time.

If you follow the comment chain you’ll see me and cowbee talk about how subjective the term “democracy” is.

However, we can illustrate my point using proof by counter example. It is entirely possible to imagine two countries with the same government structure (and hence “democracy”) but with different answers to this kind of survey.

Imagine two nearly identical countries each with corrupt governments having the exact same structure and culture etc. The only major difference between them is that in one of the countries, a recent scandal has occurred which was able to bring to light deep seated corruption and criminal activity of many public figures, whereas similar acts are being committed by the govt. of the other country, but none of it has been brought so fully to light yet.

The citizens of the former country are likely to rank their “democracy” lower than the citizens of the latter would rate their own, despite the fact both governments have equal amounts of corruption. Hence, surveys of popular opinion of democracy are not directly indicative of the “level of democracy” or level of corruption or fidelity etc. etc… QED.

Haha funnily enough that’s the graph I first had this argument with cowbee about lol

that’s why I put quotes around “level of democracy.” If everyone in a country had to vote directly for any and all government action, that is kind of the purest democracy possible, but it would not be a very effective method of government especially for large countries.

In order to rank democracy in a meaningful way, one would need to decide on what the desired outcomes of a “good”democracy are and which outcomes are most important etc. which would make the scale subjective.

Direct comparison of perception of democracy by people who have lived in both countries would be much clearer evidence of differences in democracy itself.

However, the raw perception of democracy without any other reference to other democracies does not allow for comparison/measurement of democracy itself but rather indicates how happy individuals feel within their current democracy.

The data is a good story and it does encode information, but that information is more significantly influenced by culture, current events, and overall happiness of the populace than it is by “level of democracy”

As always, I would like to point out that these kinds of surveys of public opinion are not really evidence of anything besides public opinion itself.

You cannot assert that a certain country has more or less of some quality simply because more people in that country said they think they do more frequently than people in a different country did.

For example if you asked Americans (particularly those in the south or rural areas) if they thought their country was more “free” than the rest of the world, you would probably get higher numbers than you would from most other regions of the world despite the fact that America is not that free relative to much of the world.

If we want to test your assertion you would need to define “The way we do in the west” because I’m reasonably certain none of the countries shown in red have the exact same laws around lobbying.

With regards to “kneeling to fossil fuels,” I’m pretty sure there are more factors at play in that issue than just the laws surrounding lobbying specifically.

I think you’ve misunderstood my comment because that’s kinda the point I was trying to make.

This graph is implying “the west” is corrupt because they have lobbying. China was my counter example because it too allows lobbying but a) was left off the map and b) is likely not a country that OP would call corrupt.

I’m pretty sure it’s not just the countries colored red. Even China allows lobbying

100% of people in America own their houses because if they couldn’t afford it, it wouldn’t be their house. Checkmate commies

/s

“young females”

I’m sure this is a credible and unbiased article. Definitely not written by an author who lacks social awareness or is incredibly sexist against women in general regardless of political leaning. Certainly not one that objectifies or dehumanizes women. No sir.

/s

That’s the art style of the original manga

Have you ever seen one of those images of a tesseract where it’s like a cube in a cube? (You can just look up “tesseract” to find an image)

Now, pick one of the corners of the outer cube and find the line that connects it to a corner of the inner cube. That’s our origin “edge” and we’re basically just going to move in through the cube along that direction.

There are three “faces” which share that “edge” (line). We do those ones first.

Then we move deeper in and do the three faces of the inner cube which share the corner our origin line connects to.

Then we have to zig zag around the six “faces” that exist between inner and outer cubes which are roughly perpendicular to our origin edge. (Imagine you broke the tesseract in half by cutting halfway between your starting corner and the corner opposite it. The “faces” we need to traverse would intersect that plane)

After that, we do the three faces on the far side of the inner cube. (The ones opposite our starting corner)

Then we do the three around the line which connects that far corner of the inner cube to the outer cube.

Then we do the three faces on the outside of the large cube at that corner.

Finally we do the three faces on the outside of the cube around our starting corner.

Wait, isn’t this trivial?

If we’re talking about “faces” as in the cubic faces of a tesseract then each of the 8 faces are connected to all other faces except the opposite face. So just spiral around from your starting face (keeping the faces you’ve visited on the inside of the spiral) and you’re fine.

If you mean 2D faces connecting the 3D ones, then things get more difficult but not that much because you can do the exact same thing. Choose a 1D edge as your origin, pick a face touching that edge to start with, traverse that edge twice to get the next two faces. Then traverse three faces which share edges with those faces you already traversed (there are 6 faces with this property, 3 for each vertex of our origin edge, the set you pick determines the “direction” of your overall progress through/around the tesseract). Repeat that step again but for the faces that share edges with two of the three you just did. Repeat again and again and again until the last three faces share a vertex with the origin edge you started with. You’re done.

Am I missing something? Did the prompt mean to say you can only traverse each edge once?

Edit: the 2D face path I described would miss 6 faces. Those six faces should be traversed in the middle, so do the first three faces, the second three, then all six which touch both those three you just traversed and the three you would have done next on the original path. Then do the rest just like I originally mentioned.

I’m reasonably certain the two are not mutually exclusive

Fun fact: whales and other cetaceans have separate air intake and food intake lines. In other words, dolphins can only breathe in and out through their blow hole, so the blow hole is the correct answer.

Paris international airport does this. The path to the terminals is literally through a CHANEL store in the airport. Silver lining: the perfume may make you choke but at least it covers the smell of Paris lol