Saunas (at least the way we enjoy them here in Finland) can be pretty humid, because we throw water on the stones of the stove. But throwing too much water can make it intolerable, and lethal if you don't follow your instinct to leave if it gets too hot.
Normally in a sauna it's not constantly so humid that sweating wouldn't be able to keep your body temperature normal (as long as you stay hydrated). Throwing water on the stove raises the humidity just momentarily and makes you sweat at full capacity, but normally you would wait for some minutes before throwing more water.
If air is humid enough, sweating can't cool the body anymore because sweat won't evaporate, so already 35C is lethal in 100% humidity.
Your strategy is not optimal. If you want to be efficiently freeloading, you should not be announcing your position.
Freeloading with vaccination only works if just a small enough minority of people are doing it. In order to minimize your personal risk from both covid and potential side effects of vaccination, you should be advocating for others to get vaccinated but not get the shot yourself.
If you publicly announce that you are not going to get the vaccination, that may encourage others to avoid it as well. That's against your own interests, because then it's more likely that you get covid when the vaccination coverage in the population is lower.
I already thought about this and I fully agree! But I feel rather anonymous on this global message board.
I tell all my friends who asked for my opinion to just do what they please and lied to them that yes, I am registered for my shot. Which I am not and won't be, unless my employment or personal comfort are threatened too much.
I am also happy my elderly parents took the vaccine. A covid infection is probably more dangerous to them than the vaccine and now I can visit them without testing with a clear conscience.
I used to be heavily involved in the demoscene during late 80's/early 90's. (And still occasionally visit demoparties.) I think the best thing in making demos was the feeling of achievement when you managed to get a new effect working. Of course it was a bonus if this was something never seen before, or broke some record, or even placed well in a democompo, but the feeling of "I can do this" was the main driving force behind it all for me.
Recently I've got similar feeling of achievement in DIY electronics. Back in the day making PCBs was difficult and information on how to design them was hard to find. My best attempt was an audio digitizer based on instructions from a magazine, and I never got it working because my hand-drawn PCB was so bad.
These days one can design PCBs with open-source tools and get them manufactured professionally for very cheap. There is a wealth of various microcontroller modules and add-on boards that can be used as building blocks in projects. Internet is full of design resources, and all possible components one can imagine can be ordered online.
Although I haven't participated in any IRL meetings, I think there's also something similar to demoscene in these communities, both online and IRL. It's not as competitive as demoscene used to be though (but I think that's only a good thing).
Most of these DIY electronics projects would never be possible in commercial setting because there's no viable economy behind them. However, as it's relatively cheap these days to implement even fairly complex electronics projects, we are seeing stuff that's somewhere in this intersection of non-commercial / creative / cutting edge technology - just like the demoscene used to be.
This is not about peak sensitivities. The RGB colors are used as primaries because they provide a large response on one type of cones, and as small as possible response on the two other types of cones.
Blue is chosen to have as small wavelength as possible (S=small) and red is chosen to have as long wavelength as possible (L=long), while both being still in the visible spectrum with large enough response from S and L cones respectively.
Since M and L response profiles overlap anyway and just the ratio of the response changes, green is chosen to be as far away from the red, but still outside of the response curve of S cones that get stimulated by blue. This happens to be also around the peak sensitivity for the M cones.
CMY/RGB is not an arbitrary choice for color model. It's the best approximation for stimulating the color receptors in the human eye. RYB on the other hand is just historical model that still exists because traditions in the art teaching change slowly.
It's a wrong notion of primary colors that one could choose any three colors for primaries. Yes, it's possible to choose any three colors and mix a set of other colors within the triangle defined by these three. However, by definition a primary color is a color that can't be mixed from any other colors. Cyan, magenta and yellow are such colors. It's not possible to mix cyan or magenta from the RYB palette, on the other hand red can be mixed from magenta and yellow, and blue can be mixed from cyan and magenta.
The reason why RGB/CMY are the primaries is exactly because of the stimulus response of the human eye. The purpose of color reproduction is to cause a specific response in the three receptors in the eye. Since there are only three different kinds of receptors, it's possible to produce the exact same response in the receptors in multiple ways (thus we have metamerism). RGB primaries are chosen because each of the primary colors causes a large response in one type of receptors and as small response as possible on the other two receptors. (And CMY is then the opposite of this by causing as large response as possible on two receptors, and as small as possible on one.)
The reason why the traditional RYB palette has two versions of each of its "primaries" is because RYB "primaries" are so bad at covering the visible color gamut that by introducing two versions of each color it's possible to expand the triangle from which to mix into a hexagon.
The exact wavelength profiles for R, G and B may vary between different display technologies, and some technologies can represent the color better than others. This doesn't mean that the RGB model is arbitrary in any way, but that there are just practical reasons why the theoretical optimum is not always reachable. Some of the standards for RGB reproduction take this into account and define a color space that follows the common technologies rather than the theoretical optimum, and thus have a limited gamut.
Color printers with more than 4 inks don't abandon CMYK model. I have a large-format printer that in addition to basic CMYK has gray, light cyan, light magenta and light yellow inks. The purpose of these lighter shades is to allow printing light areas with less visible dot raster. The color model is still CMYK.
Some printers also include red, green and blue. These exist basically for the same reason there's black in CMYK. Even if CMY is theoretically correct model for wavelength response to match the human eye, there are real-world limits to ink and paper technology; for instance 100% fill of all CMY is not as black as 100% fill of black.
Purpose of spot colors is not related to color model, but color reproduction. If you define your spot colors by Pantone number, there's a guarantee that the color will match exactly what you ordered. It's much harder to get exact color reproduction with CMYK process, because the number of variables affecting the end result is so high. Another purpose for spot colors is all kinds of specialty inks like metallic colors etc. Sometimes it's also a cost issue, because it can be cheaper to use black + one accent spot color than a full CMYK process, or a quality issue, because with spot colors you don't get the color raster.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac...