Many people will be born, have kids, and die in one region and culture. Only recently in human existence have some people been afforded such easy movement. 500 years ago, it would have been basically unthinkable that you could leave your family and go start a life on the antipode of your birth location in exchange for maybe a few months wages. Most of humanity had to work just to survive... agrarian society wasn't THAT long ago even in developed nations. Cultural mores are real and, especially when it came to who gets your daughter, VERY long lasting traditions and rules.

You are viewing this discussion through the lens of your own modern reality. That is dumb, not insightful.

I would think for a pool of candidates of varying temperaments due to natural variations, some temperaments would would be more likely to pass on their DNA depending on various external factors like climate, terrain, and yes - society.

The military has started thinking about societies as "human terrain" precisely because it IS just another factor of environment. It is as real as the physical ground, vegetation, and weather.

The more I think about it and read about it, I see no reason why culture would NOT influence who gets to mate with who. Different cultures value different attributes, and those distinctions regularly decide who you let marry your daughter, who you let your son date, or who a person finds attractive in a mate.

Selecting an aggressive mate may WELL have been the difference between life and death in some cultures. And indeed MANY cultures teach their children to hold overly-driven, businessmen/doctors/lawyers/athletes in high esteem.

You have pointed out the only really good explanation I've read on this. So thank you for that.

Timescale. Great point. I hope someone mods you up.

what is globally accepted in animal breeding, that certain behavioral tendencies accompany accompany genetics right along with certain physical characteristics, is the worst taboo to apply to people.

which is ridiculous. populations living in specific social environments will SELECT FOR and AGAINST various physical and behavioral traits... and those traits which are successful in a specific society will then go on to build the society that those traits are best adapted to. like a feedback loop.

is there something totally crazy here?

I'm talking about cases where internet access is available through the inflight wifi.
Taking control of the network equipment through which this traffic runs isn't harmless.

the whole point of in-flight WIFI is that people can be charged exorbitant sums for painfully-slow internet access while in flight.

While certainly it is no hijacking of a plane, the hijacking of this network equipment isn't nothing.

ahh... so just all the passenger data can be hijacked.
nothing to worry about here.

... but only by using Python.

"what price can we put on avoiding extinction"

sounds like someone's got a great idea for a kickstarter campaign!

The point of the article is that 138,469 wished they lived in a kingdom with a benevolent dictator who can simply make people do stuff because they want it.

...except HE gets to tell you that. Because Master Blaster runs Bartertown.
Like Stalin... Here to administer the equality, not to participate in it.

If there's one thing Obama is passionate about, it is expanding federal power to all aspects of everything.
Why not cut out the middle man and create a petition that asks the White House to assume authority over all levels and government branches? That's essentially what you are asking for.

if your president decides who sells what, where, when, and how... you aren't free.

ditto if your governor, state legislature, or city council is doing it.

this entire thing is bullshit. it isn't up to any of them, for or against.

UFC was more interesting before the weight classes and rounds. The old Gracie way, it was over when it was over.
The modern implementation before you today was scientifically formulated to maximize PPV revenue from people who want to see flying elbows instead of crafty omoplatas.

When someone attacks you, you are reacting to something that is already happening. So of course, without any experience one might revert to panicked pointing and shooting. But with experience and training, you can become fast, accurate, and mindful of the elements like [ firepower, terrain, time, strengths, weaknesses, and leverage ] which MAY help you overcome a time and/or luck deficit. Panic doesn't have to be a forgone conclusion.

USPSA, and even more so, IDPA competition can help you prepare for some of these aspects. Quick and panicked is that guy I was talking about, no formal experience, at best just shooting garbage out in the desert, at worst just bought a gun and tried it once at an indoor range. Practical shooting isn't about pinpoint accuracy, it is about balancing speed, accuracy, and power to achieve the most damage in the least amount of time. And going to local matches on a regular basis provides the repetition necessary for a conditioned-response-style drilled training (read On Killing, Col. Grossman).

Watch some videos of people like Jerry Miculek.