Oliver Conway

I mean, it was designed to facilitate reading on modern computer screens, and it was chosen to replace Times New Roman, the typeface that Rubio wants to go back to now, in 2007.

Calibri was designed to work well in tiny sizes and on coarse office screens, which it still does, much better than Times New Roman.

It's especially meant for reading long pieces of text on screen, so the rhythm is great.

And when you see it in big sizes, it's a friendly typeface.

It has a warmth, maybe even a little bit humanistic, even though it's a sensory font.

Yes, because one of the quotes from Marco Rubio's instruction to diplomats around the world was, he said they were going to go back to Times New Roman to restore decorum to the department's written products.

Still, SensRef works better in small sizes on core screens.

I'm just on the question of screens.

Yeah, just briefly and finally, are you confident that Calibri will survive this outrage?

Absolutely, yeah.

Typeface designer Lucas de Groot.

Are you more like a meerkat, gorilla, or maybe a Californian mouse?

Well, all those animals feature in a new Monogamy League table which assesses how committed they and we are to pairing up.

Humans are apparently 66% monogamous, far above chimpanzees and gorillas, and similar to meerkats and beavers.

We heard more from lead author and anthropologist Mark Dybul.

We know, of course, that humans vary cross-culturally and within cultures in our marriage practices, mating behaviour.

But from an evolutionary point of view, there's value in stepping back and considering our species as a whole and characterising our mating system, as it were, in general mammalian context.

So how do we compare to other species?

That's partly because we're such a cooperative species and we often see the evolution of highly cooperative animal societies follow on from the evolution of monogamous mating.

So we have these theoretical debates about how monogamous humans are today and were in human evolutionary history.