There is no probability. No rolling dice. It is every combination of everything. I know Hilberts infinite hotel, I know (enough about) probability and statistics.

I am talking about the multiverse that many people imagine. The one where you can say “there is a universe in which I am president. And one where Lincoln is a velociraptor, and a universe where chairs sit on people instead of the other way round”. In that multiverse, I can construct a universe without triangles that is identical to another universe with triangles in every regard except for the existence of triangles. And I can do that for every universe with triangles. Its a bijection.

We dont permute a (in)finite set of initial parameters and then evolve the universe from there, we have a universe for every CURRENT state.

In the hypothetical reality where such a multiverse exists (it would be a case of Russells paradox as OP has discovered), there is a 50% chance to be in a universe where it doesn’t.

I know. But I case of the multiverse that many people think about, the one where there is a universe for EVERYTHING, there will be exactly as many universes where triangles exist as there are universes where triangles dont exist. And the same is true for everything else.

And it is exactly the same number, not just the same type of infinity. Because for every universe with triangles there must also exist the exact same universe without triangles (and vice versa), otherwise the multiverse wouldn’t contain all possible universes.

If there are infinite universes, covering all permutations of all properties (i asume thats what they mean by omniverse), then there will be exactly as many universes with a certain property then there are without it. So it is actually 50/50.

In the “multiverse of all possibilities” there will be 50% without a multiverse

Smartphone cameras are (bad and) very limited. Their sensor is very small and their lenses have to be flat, very small in diameter and cant have moving parts (maybe the aperture moves not sure). All this means they capture very little light on a ultra dense sensor (dense sensors have bleed where one pixel is influenced by the interference of the photons hitting the pixel next to it).

So they cheat. Wherever they can. They often take multiple pictures at the same time using multiple cameras and overlay them digitally (black/white and color). And of course they need different cameras with different lenses because they can’t have a zoom (moving parts). They also heavily edit the pictures without ever telling the user.

Often a smartfone image will look better than an unedited image taken by a 5000$+ camera. At least until you zoom in and look at the colors

Why do i want a copy of something I am only going to watch once? And why should I keep a copy if I can just stream it again from the same or some different site for free in the future?

Streaming is just more practical. Doesn’t matter if its legal or piracy

Edit to clarify: I am not saying this opinion is good, it is an example of how many people think and the reason why pirate streaming sites exist

What are egg wets? Tried to look it up but can’t find anything that would fit this meme

Except at some point a politician would look at the big pot of gold and decide that its a good source of money to fund their new political project. So the insurance reserve becomes a normal part of the state budget. Then the fire happens and to offset the huge hole in the budget, social services and schools are shut down.

Just because it is state run doesn’t mean a rich person wouldn’t misuse it to enrich themselves and fuck over poor people.

Ever been to a restaurant, ate a meal cooked by somebody other than yourself? Pre-made frozen meal? Fast food?

Dont want to sound mean or anything but most people are comfortable with having somebody else prepare a meal, so why is it different when you prepare it but somebody else tells you how to do it?

They do better about privacy because they make enough money from their inflated prices and blind brand loyalty where they dont have to become an ad company like google. Google is very good at protecting their users data from third parties, as long as they can still collect all of it.

Apple (currently) doesn’t collect a lot of data which allows them to design products with security as a primary component instead of as an afterthought

here is how to opt out.

Proceeds to never say how to opt out