Strong opinions drive interaction. Driving polarization is is monetarily beneficial.

A moderate viewpoint gets glossed over because it doesn’t stand out. It won’t drive views, revenue, interaction, responses, etc. It’s the extreme claims and views that bubble to the top of media and social media via algorithms designed to elicit response or interactivity.

Even if moderate views exist, they get suppressed. Then people also want response, so they skew what might otherwise be moderate opinions to be more aggressively polar in order to get that response. The polarization is mutually self-reinforcing as a result of existing algorithms.

It would take active algorithm design seeking to deemphasize extremes to attain anything else. This would naturally decrease user interaction (and thus $), so it’s unlikely.

>It is ironic and appropriate to be reading this on Reddit.

Fixed.

Typically yes, although we could coin a term for the concept expanded to the galactic level.

Dyson suggested the Dyson sphere.

I propose that a megastructure harnessing the entirety of a galaxy’s energy output be referred to as a PantsOnHead Sphere.

At sufficient distance from the stars, it approaches being a single centre of mass, so it’s certainly possible.

Close orbits would not be long-term stable unless one star is around 2 orders of magnitude more massive than the other, and the planet orbits in the L4 or 5 Lagrange point of the less massive star.

Even in our own system the question is more like “are the orbits stable on a particular time scale?”