After reading this blog post, I realized, that after doing exactly the same things for last couple of decades it was not decision of mine... but this guys decision.
The issue with software developers is that in some places there was no requirement to finish uni to work. Though, I would advise to finish studies asap, as later you won't have that much energy to share among work, relations, family, health and studies.
I am planning to finish my course after a very long gap in my 40s. Not sure if I need to, but for the sake of finalizing it, so it does not bother me anymore. The long gap seems to bother my university at my home country more than it should bother me and they have still the same irritating procedures in place that I do not like... but why should others care about how you spend YOUR money and time?
Person who asked this question, should have calculated how many lightbulbs he need to heat up the room - unless he has built tiny room for some pet, then it makes sense to use just one lightbulb.
I would assume, that most of the folks on this site are heating up room using their PC... For me it is clearly a 2-5 degree difference if the room is not heated by PC.
PS Ironically, I use the most energy consuming and brightest lightbulb I could find(among the energy efficient lightbulbs, because there are no other options).
What I can't get from this article is price. When I was student, reason why students shared those rooms with bunk beds was mainly because that was the thing they(or rather their parents) could afford and renting proper flat was out of their capabilities.
Nowadays, in the city I live in 20min distance from university my rent for flat might be cheaper than what students are paying for their dorm room(with windows).
Somehow I have a feeling, that prices for these dorms are adjusted to property rental prices(and income from renting square meter here is larger, than what you might get from flat) and those who have friends might share some place and rent together to have place with more breathing room...
PS If there are no windows - why it had to be built as tall building and not some underground hole, from where those students - lesser humans can crawl out for the time to study...
Isla Vista is the closest community to UCSB, and the students get packed into the private housing there as well (monthly cost of renting a house is about $1200 per bedroom, and you often have to sign a lease for 12 months even if you'll only be there for 9).
If the Universe is cyclic and recreated again and again and has the same outcome(and appparently has no beginning and end), simulation hypothesis have problems to explain why things that follow exactly the same tracks again and again can't be part of Universe as natural mechanism observable by enough developed brains and why there is such necessity for someone to create something that is natural. It also concentrates on humans, but there is nothing that prevents animals - at least for mammals to "remember or guess future". Or even things to "remember" their place, that humans can observe.
Anecdotally, but some of the issues, that are discussed in regards human behaviour, were already present in old folk tales, that discuss exactly the same issues, that simulation hypothesis have about human behavior, as in those old folk tales it was claimed that humans initially knew their fate and behaved accordingly without any regards for others when their end came, so they were robbed of that full understanding of what is their fate.
>>> Questions of religion vs science plague proper scientists too, Einstein among them
This is something you are making up, because in his own words Einstein clealry states opposite of your claim:
"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
You can't just take one quote out of context and use it to paint Einstein as altogether disinterested in religion -- he wasn't.
To him, there was a difference between believing in Your Own Personal Jesus™, or some variation of Abraham's fickle, meddling god (as in Judaism, Christianity, Catholicism, Islam), vs contemplating religion as a social/moral force and a line of philosophical inquiry about the origins of structure and organization in the universe. The whole point of him mentioning "Spinoza's God" is to underscore that difference.
Einstein wrote about religion on more than one occasion, and his views weren't as straightforward as "religion is dumb, I don't think about it." Far from it; he recognized the universe as something inherently profound and beautiful and drew from it a philosophical sense of spirituality. No one is accusing him of being a Bible thumping Jesus lover, but he was definitely interested (on the side) on questions of spirituality, purpose, etc.
My own personal take is that Einstein recognized the limits of our understanding and drew peace and inspiration from the boundless complexity yet to be understood. He found it powerfully spiritual, but he did not attribute it to a "personal" god the same way a follower of the Abrahamic religions would. Nonetheless he was interested in these questions, even if he didn't have the answers and didn't believe the Christians did.
You wrote a lot of words to argue an unrelated point. Whether someone is interested in religion is not the same as whether they find truth in religion.
> Whether someone is interested in religion is not the same as whether they find truth in religion.
OK, I agree with that assessment. But I wasn't arguing that Einstein was deeply theistic. I was saying he and other scientists were deeply interested in religion -- not to the degree of a theologian, obviously, but interested nonetheless. I believe that to still be true.
