Visually? Zero. That's not how my mind works.

Interesting link/video. Thank you.

I'm an EE, and visualizing things is a really important tool for my work. Circuit diagrams, circuit board layout / routing, how a board fits in an enclosure, transformer design, etc.

That's fine, and no doubt it's powerful, but it doesn't mean there aren't other ways to approach the same kinds of work. I've been doing hardware design for a bit over 50 years now, and have quite a collection of successful original projects, many quite complex. I've been writing software since the early 1970's as well, and again, lots of completed projects in that domain. For some systems, I did both the hardware design and the supporting software.

WRT schematics and other diagrams, I'm comfortable and effective on a drafting table at putting together complex ones; but, being lazy, I've also written both schematic capture and PCB layout software, including auto-routing and auto-placement. In assembler. :)

I'm a "5" — I can't visualize anything at all. But I can juggle concepts as both words and abstractions just fine, and I find it a comfortable process to realize them as concrete products.

Likely related, I really enjoy photography; it serves as visual memory for me. It's how I can "know" how my mother and father looked, old flames, places, pets, etc. I also take pictures of my hardware projects both under development and at completion. There's definitely a worthy aspect to being able to access that information. Also, some of my most complex software products have been image manipulation systems.

The bottom line is there are definitely multiple highly functional modalities to dealing with most creative tasks.

Completely agree re the 8gb, especially as that is shared between desktop and RAM. However, having used one of the minimal spec M* macbook airs before, it was completely fine for average desktop usage (ie web browser machine, maybe Word/Excel).

The 256gb I don't think matters at all for many people.

In this particular case, all RAM is part of the processor package. So yeah, it's a bit different than adding a few dimm slots.

An embryo is an organism in and of itself. It is alive and it is human in a very scientific sense of the word.

It's not human until it has a functional nervous system with a brain capable of, you know, humanity. Up to that point, it's a clump of cells, not "a human." In fact, short of that level of development, it's no more "a human" than any similarly sized clump of native cells in any person's body.

Humanity does not arise because some muscles contract or a bone develops. Early stage pregnancy does not involve a human. Later on, sure. But to pretend otherwise is anything but scientific.

Likewise, arguing that an early stage pregnancy is an organism is irrelevant; so is a blade of grass. Same for life: grass is alive. These are completely inadequate — in fact, irrelevant — metrics.

Humanity is actually the thing that is reasonable to consider; and if you try to use "humanity" when describing an early stage pregnancy, you are promoting superstition. No functional brain defines that the organism is not capable of humanity. That's a fundamental scientific truth. Consequently, if you claim otherwise, you're either being disingenuous, demonstrating that you have had a completely inadequate science education — or are stupid.

A physical fact? What, exactly, is the physical evidence of people-ness that these embryos lack?

A functional nervous system incorporating a brain capable of, you know, any aspect of humanity.

You're welcome.

All criminal law is the imposition of somebody's morality

Nonsense. A great deal of law is the result of objective determination of harm reduction — the axiom that gives rise to that is that "harm is inherently bad and therefore should be avoided when possible." Not "harm is immoral." Or "harm is un-Christian" (because as we know, Christians have a rich and storied history of causing harm, which path they continue to follow to this day.)

Although I'll grant you that legislating an early stage pregnancy is in any way equivalent to a child is definitely not an objective determination of anything. Because it's bullshit, y'see.

But yes — too much of Christian superstition and Jewish superstition has failed to admit their debt to their actual roots in a myriad of preceding superstitions. Because they're too busy pretending their imaginary friend is real and nothing else matters.

FTFY

Thus the persistence of slavery in almost all societies...
 
...Christianity took a long time to get to a rejection of slavery

Christianity has done no such thing, at least in the USA. To wit (emphasis mine):

13th Amendment:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Where are the majority of Christians rejecting the 13th amendment's direct endorsement of slavery? It's okay, I'll wait. I actually like the sound of crickets.

It's also important to note how Christian morals have generally influenced what is acceptable

It's also important to note how Christianity is (a) pure superstition and (b) hardly the only source of determining and/or resolving "what is acceptable" and (c) a rich source of decidedly dubious positions and associated action:

For instance, crusades are not acceptable; blood libel is not acceptable; burning people at the stake is not acceptable; subjugation of women is not acceptable; brainwashing is not acceptable; inquisitions are not acceptable; pretending superstition trumps science is not acceptable... although, you know, we certainly can look to Christianity for promoting and performing all of these particular exercises in influencing people to think it's okay to go about them. So... yes. Christianity certainly has been influential in these matters. Point to you, Bruce66423.

The prevalence of NAT causes almost all consumer cameras to be cloud based, otherwise users have no other way to reach them.

Nonsense. Unless by "consumer cameras" you mean webcams, which are definitively not security cameras, regardless of the associated marketing drivel.

I feel you on the local bank. My local bank, one with a long history in my area and the first bank I opened an account with in highschool, got bought out by Wells Fargo and it just went to hell. I'm still sad about that one. I'm not surprised that Capital One was similiar when dealing with a local bank.

On your other points, I've never had any issues with Capital One website or tech. I've used the chat function a handful of times over the years (I had an accidental late payment on a credit card once; one check I was depositng was having issues clearing; etc) and they were very good. Removed my fees in the case of the late payment, figured out the failure to deposit. Basically, nothing to complain about. I don't doubt your experiences at all, I just haven't had the same.

So my account is currently listed as a "360 Performance Savings" with 4.35% APR. Not too shabby. Not the absolute best, but not bad either. I haven't done anything to modify my account in years...

Out of curiosity, what have they destroyed that you liked?

I have a CapitalOne360 account that I guess was formerly ING and it's been fine.

high vehicle prices

Aside from products that are perceived as absolutely required (which EVs are largely not), the higher the price, the narrower and shorter-term the market. But there's always greed and next-quarter thinking driving these decisions on the "let's make a vehicle" end of things. TL;DR: foot-shooting.