I have the same feeling. Boredom is necessary for me to focus my energy on work. If I'm really into a game, it's easy to spend a large portion of my time and mental effort on something purely for fun. It's ok to indulge in entertainment if we are living comfortably, or need a break, but not if we're trying to actively build something.
I think "rock star" is a superficial term which is mostly poking fun at some programmers for having long hair, liking rock music, maybe even owning a guitar.
Being better aligned with astronomical events makes it more correct. The purpose of the calendar is to map the year, the orbit of the Earth around the Sun. The drift in the Julian calendar was not intended. It is a flaw.
Scholars generally accept that the book of Mark was written between 66-70 AD. The idea that the gospels were written "hundreds of years later" is a common myth on the Internet that scholars do not take seriously. It is clear that Jesus's followers believed in his resurrection, they proclaimed it loudly and suffered and died for it, gaining many converts.
It says fertility isn't an issue today, but it's a little out of touch with today's anxieties; most of Europe and Japan have such low fertility that their native populations are in decline.
If only people without an income qualify, then it is not Basic Income. Basic Income is received by everyone without any means test. The purpose is to avoid perverse incentives in which people on welfare see little value in getting a job.
The Great Depression is the precedent. The money supply dropped by a third, prices for everything dropped dramatically, and much of the labor force was thrown out of work. The general understanding today held by the Fed is that it was because the Fed failed to create new money and inject it into the banking system to prevent a systemic collapse.
You get this money without even working. Any money you earned while working (there would be no more minimum wage under this system) would be in addition to the $12,000 you got from the basic income. Also the basic income is presumably not taxed, as it's welfare income.
Paradox is not really so alien to Western philosophy, as this article initially suggests. It does end up referencing a number of modern Western philosophers, but the idea is older than that. It's ironic he refers to "Western orthodoxy" as being strictly anti-paradox, as traditional Christian theology is full of official paradoxes; a major example would be the doctrine that Jesus is simultaneously fully human and fully divine. Many were declared anathema for refusing this and other paradoxical doctrines. So rather than Western orthodoxy being unaware of paradox, it has insisted on it. The concept of the dialectic also touches on this idea of reconciling apparent contradictions, rather than defeating your opponent as one does in a debate, and this idea originates not truly with Hegel but spans all the way back to Socrates, and probably before.
I agree with the sentiment, however, that understanding paradox is extremely important to a person's capability for nuance and understanding. If you insist on a simplified internal consistency, you will end up sacrificing (and demonizing) whole parts of your thought process rather than trying to reconcile them as having some truth. It can be a process of self-indoctrination purely to avoid the pain of confusion. Another way to think of paradox is simply rejecting false dichotomies in favor of a more complex and uncertain reality. I don't think the lesson here is to "break the chains of Aristotelian logic" (God forbid) but rather, well, reconcile it with the idea of paradox.