I always find the common references to Asimov's laws funny. They are broken in just about every one of his books. They are crime novels where, if a robot was involved, there was some workaround of the laws.

That claim is false — and it actually mixes up two separate myths!

The Great Wall of China is not visible from Spain. Spain is roughly 9,000+ km away from China — no artificial structure on Earth is visible from that distance with the naked eye.

You're likely thinking of the popular myth that the Great Wall is "visible from space" or "from the Moon." That's also false:

(it then goes on with a detailed, perfect answer).

Because there is a global trend towards green energy use, caused by economic factors. It's bound to be more expressive outside the US, because of politics.

Take, for example, trade policy. Facing trade tariffs from the US, Europe can call the bluff, the UK is way too small to have any cards on the negotiating table. It is much better to be in a huge economic block than to face the bully alone. On paper you have more formal power alone, in practice you have no power whatsoever on your own.

The absence of formal action limits can be deceitful. Limits are not only there anyhow, they are worse for you outside the economic block.

So, no, you won't be better in 20 years. In fact, given the direction the world is going, you'll be worse than even today.

- Someone who has mastered some art;

- A teacher;

- The lead artisan in a team, the one who has mastered the art, teaches and leads.

The slave master is a very narrow interpretation on these meanings, and the woke push against the word is myopic. The word has a long history, none of it connected to slavery.

Taken to the extreme, you could model all intrinsic constraints and triggers at the relational database level, and have a perfectly functional anemic domain model.

Find an area where you have to disassemble large problems into small ones, where you have to plan a few steps of the solution. Any knowledge area will do. Writing was suggested in another comment, it's a good playground. As is programming, where there is ample literature of puzzle problems to solve. Algebra, if you are so inclined although, beware, it veers a bit into the abstract. There are physical hobbies with that characteristic too: anything involving woodwork or building stuff out of parts (or disassembling and reassembling, like mechanics).

Having picked up a hobby, apply the hours. Start with stuff you can do, don't overshoot complexity. Then, evolve from there. As with all new activities, embrace failure. Don't just accept failure, expect it, learn from it, step on past failures to evolve.

P.S. I can't imagine not having an inner monologue, or its dual, spatial imagination, but a relevant part of the population doesn't have either, with no ill effects on the thought process. It's amazing, to me, but it seems they are not required for thinking.

In my opinion, it's the latter, after observing how my parents adapted to driving a Tesla. I was actually concerned it'd be a hard transition, but I only had a couple "support calls" related to the car.

If you look closely at any big corporation management, they are all egomaniacs. Just not childish enough to publicize that fact.

We consider cars more fashionable than shoes.