I think there is a pretty marked difference between honesty and passivity that you’re conflating here.

For missing the job interview that passed you for a punctual interviewer - I think it’s fine to be honest in that situation but if it were me, I’d also blame myself for not leaving my house earlier to account for the traffic.

At the current job you could be honest AND active about standing up for yourself at work by providing evidence that you are one doing the work. There’s no rule that says you can advocate for yourself without being honest.

As for reporting the minor hit and run - maybe it’s because I live in a city, but if I wasn’t the person getting hit, and the person wasn’t injury beyond a scrape/bruise then I wouldn’t have reported it. Honest to god, not my problem. I would only do it if the victim decides to prosecute the driver/instigator and was asking to me to be the witness, I wouldn’t go out of my way to do it. Obviously if the scale of the accident was different - imagine something life threatening - then I would then report it, because then the person who caused the accident deserves to have consequences for their actions. And in that case even if I had to spend countless of hours in litigation, I would do it because it’s the right thing to do, not because I need to be rewarded or thanked for it.

I could keep going down the list, but I guess the main point is, rules are written for a reason, but rules were also written by humans. Intrinsically, that means they are sometimes flawed, and it’s a matter of using critical thinking and risk/reward assessment to determine when they should be followed or not.

walking > standing > sitting > lying down

Walking digests food fastest (obviously because you are moving your body/burning calories), and lying down digests foods most slowly. Gravity is also working against you to an extent

Not sure - you’d have to do some research on what that article is referencing. Search “Decree of Memphis” - that’s essentially what’s written on the Rosetta Stone.

For the history of those decrees you may want to look into “Ptolemaic decrees”

The stone was a part of a steele that was displayed in a temple.

The translated text is essentially an announcement or decree for a new Egyptian regime, and wasn’t necessarily written with the intent to preserve history.

The reason why it’s in three languages is because each of those languages served a different purpose.

“hieroglyphs (suitable for a priestly decree), Demotic (the cursive Egyptian script used for daily purposes, meaning ‘language of the people’), and Ancient Greek (the language of the administration – the rulers of Egypt at this point were Greco-Macedonian after Alexander the Great’s conquest.”

You can read more about it here or do your own research. https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/everything-you-ever-wanted-know-about-rosetta-stone