davisoneee

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Intelligence is being able to _consistently_ make accurate predictions of the future.

The main benefit is that markdown is really readable _without_ rendering. You don't need to edit and then open in a browser.

You can comfortably read plaintext that has a little structure, while HTML adds some ceremony that makes it a bit harder to glance at the material as the tags are much more in your face.

I consider 'fuck you' money to be enough that it'll last until you die, while living comfortably. This is still an amount that you burn through in a lifetime. Something _like_ 'financial independance, retire early'.

I think the parent is suggesting a money threshold beyond which you can't really feasibly spend it fast enough (without being deliberately wasteful), so 'the rich get richer'.

Give yourself more opportunities to latch onto the card.

Instead of Name -> Birthday, try "X's birthday is in {month}", or "Y's birthday is the {N}th of January" or "Z's birthday is just before {some notable date, like Christmas}" or "A's birthday is just after {B ... someone whos birthday you remember}". e.g. I remember my best friend's wife's birthday because it occurs shortly after mine. I remember a girl who I used to live across from 25 years ago because her birthday was just before mine.

This way, you have multiple different ways of relating to the information. If the related key date is coming up, you can think "oh...Z's birthday is around now"...which should be enough for you to functionally act on it.

Try to avoid the mindset of single cards. If you _really_ want the information, break it down in different ways.

Wrestling with the information in this way is a good way to find patterns and relations to it in the first place (put the information IN your brain well)...then use spaced repetition to practice getting the information OUT of your brain well.

They MAY have an X bias, but I think a much more generous interpretation is simply that they are highlighting which _alternative_ platforms BBC have given up on.

Threads and Mastodon are both _alternative_ choices, with Twitter being the main real-time shortform source. TFA highlights that BBC is giving up on threads, but not on alternatives in general.

I think it could much more fairly be read as "...out of alternate sources for real-time short-form communication, BBC has given up on Threads, but is sticking with Mastodon".

Twitter/X is the 'default' and the assumption that media will be on it...while Threads and Mastodon are the _alternatives_. This article, to me, is just suggesting that BBC has dropped _one of the alternatives_.

If you have a reasonably long `updatetime`, you could try something like `autocommand CursorHoldI * stopinsert`.

On both vim and nvim, updatetime is 4 seconds, so if you have 4 seconds of inactivity that autocommand will automatically put you back into normal mode.

It may be more than the _hosting_ cost, but what about the labour in actually generating that insight or maintaining and updating the content. Or what about recompense for, you know, providing such value in the first place?

'The bare minimum hosting cost' is a pretty poor bar for informational content.

If a result is incredibly hard to replicate, that's a good indicator that the effect is either so niche, or so small, that it's not actually telling you any details of the world worth talking about.

If 'priming' only works every wet Tuesday in February, after someone has had a cheeseburger with no sauce and took their Grandma to the bingo, perhaps there's some _actual_ interesting artefact explaining it...or it could just be random noise.

Krashen is speaking with regards to languages. He doesn't expand on this to other fields.

It may well be the case that 'comprehensible input' is enough for languages because we already _understand_ at least one language to a functional degree, and there's no real 'learning' a foreign language, moreso _remembering_ words and structures. Much like most people don't 'understand' the mechanics of their native language, they merely use them.

I don't think that we can readily assume that comprehensible input is thus generalisable across other things we would wish to learn.

I actually find it a helpful reminder. "People spout shit. Don't just blindly trust it". Otherwise, you end up chasing things, thinking they help, when there is little evidence backing it up other than someone's opinion.

It's very _easy_ to swerve at speed on a motorbike. In fact, it's part of the UK's motorbike license test ('hazard avoidance'). You are required to go through a speed trap at 50km/h+ and swerve approx 1m out of your riding line and come to a controlled stop. I did the swerve at 63km/h.

All it takes to swerve at speed is a small shove on the appropriate side of the handlebar, and 1m should be enough to put you either into the 'lane split' or into the other lane entirely.

I actually disagree strongly with (part of) this. Having a singular target menu I think is a good design decision (I used OSX in the past, but currently use windows+wsl at home, and linux for work).

Having a singular menu position is consistent. It gives you an 'infinite' Y target...you just slam your pointer into the top of the bar and get menu options, and only have to care about X accuracy.

The persistent menu on minimise, I do agree, is daft. But having a consistent location I think is a good decision. Need menus? Look at the top. Need menus? Mash your mouse into the top of the screen.

I get entirely what you mean, I just consider it naive utopianism. Dreams without any plan are just delusions.

The system is going to continue on, for the near future at least. If you've got some plan to fix 'the current shitshow', do that, _while making the best out of the current shitshow_.

You say you are refusing to eat dog shit. You're not. You're just letting society decide which shit you eat, without putting your vote in. The better, or worse, of two evils is still going to be elected. You're still going to be part of that system unless you're entirely off grid and self sufficient.

I didn't say you asked for it...I said you're going to get it either way, so make the best of a bad situation.

Sticking your head in the sand just gives more opportunity for _you_ to get the worse outcome.

In the case that the greater of two evils wins, you are then complicit.

The world isn't perfect. There will always be issues with candidates, because the world is messy and complex. If you chose not to vote for the lesser of two evils, you leave more opportunity for the _greater_ to succeed.

I hope a browser add-on comes along that just replaces all these blog posts with "Just use ChatGPT, lol".

What do you mean by efficiency here...just getting an utterly shallow understanding of some random topic, trusting that someone else, be that human or GPT, has understood it?

Part of the benefit of the slowness of reading is that it gives you time to actually mull over the topic, so you can build it into your own mental framework. The repetition, with slightly different wording, helps anchor the idea in your mind and provides spaced repetition to help you remember.

Other people's summaries are poor because _they don't have your experiences_, so the things that they found relevant might mean nothing to you, and the things they find shallow and skipped might be exactly what you need. Even if the highlight is useful, without the context, it's hard to actually make sure it sticks in your brain in order for it to be functional.

Lists might feel useful because the information is condensed...but how much of it do you _actually_ remember? Efficiency is being able to _use_ the information. Just getting through the material may be _fast_, but that's (in my view) antithetical to efficiency--it leads to shallow understanding and likely poor memory.

We all like to think 'I just need the 1 line summary'...in reality we're not special. You need to put the effort in.

The author links to their timer script, which links to what looks like dotfiles[1].

The author uses awesomewm (window manager), and loads the default font[2]. Default font is noto sans[3].

edit: add missing 'h' to start of ref 1.

[1]: https://github.com/madprops/awesome-setup/blob/f8557150941ce...

[2]: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/blob/b13ac3e34d7702778a...

[3]: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/blob/b13ac3e34d7702778a...

If that's the case, your direction doesn't matter. You've got a task to complete. Your boss sets the direction and requirements. You might disagree with a 'new person's' implementation, but that's a discussion point. 'Direction' and 'implementation' are distinct. For a commercial project that you're tasked with, the direction is part of the task.

If you're setting the direction, you've likely the authority to set the direction, in which point it's not 'team' and more 'manage' or senior dev.

The initial paragraph talks about {author} creating a project and not putting it on github. That seems directly to me to be personal, and related more strongly to the idea that you have a direction for the project.

The followup seems like a bit of context to combat the idea that additional manpower does not just give free productivity.

If its corporate, your 'direction' doesnt matter. Your boss, and their boss, tell you what the direction is and the discussion is around implementation. Therefore, arguing direction change from project newcomers doesnt make sense.

It seems to me that the author is talking about _personal_ projects, and people coming in to hijack them...not about working as part of a 'team' in a company.

Many of the replies here seem to conflate the two, which I think is either a poor reading or just ignoring the message I took from the article.

...and how do you imagine they do that (spend their time waiting for gig work by working minimum wage)?

Work at McDonalds, and then walk out to go do an uber run?

It's often claimed that the flexibility of gig work benefits workers to 'top up' their wages...but the reality is that companies push this work, and it just ends up with workers earning less than minimum wage, because rather than companies paying you for the 'between time', you now end up earning nothing. Much like other commenters say, should you get paid for the Jira ticket, or just the coding work? Gig work suggests just the actual coding.

I took the parent's comment to mean they would rather 'free' viewers leech off other people's bandwidth, as if they're not Premium and not watching ads, they are just consuming bandwidth and costing resources.

If they go to a competitor and block ads and consume bandwidth, then they are actively costing the competitor rather than costing Youtube for hosting.

Youtube allowing competitors to host would just consume youtube's bandwidth but with the 'views' also going to the competitor's domain (so the competitor could then potentially get additional sponsor support for having 'eyeballs' on their domain).

What's your solution for letting a citation be easily parsed within the flow of text?

E.g. if I was reading an article and saw (Jmole et al 2020)--and was familiar with the field--I could easily continue on with an idea of what your paper contained.

If you cite using numbers (as is common in my field, engineering), then the current paper becomes a bit easier to read, but you lose the flow if you need to jump back and forth to the references (e.g. what is [0]? oh, it's jmole 2020, oh where was I in the methods?) and need to rebuild your mental model.

As an academic, I don't think this would stick as it makes it hard to refer to papers in a common way (if you're chatting with your team).

Referring to something like the "Lin transformers paper" or the "Vaswani attention paper" is easy to get people onto a common ground. If you randomise the authors, you'd need to fall back to full paper titles, and long paper titles aren't particularly evocative.

Randomisation may be fine for citation (particularly numbered citation formats like[0], where the names are only in the bibliography), but even then, you are breaking the flow of thought. If someone references an article like "blah blah(mayford 2020)", then for those familiar with the field you can more easily continue reading without having to break your chain of thought to jump to the bibliography and figure out what paper that was.

edit ----

a further thought... referring by TEAM might be alright, but falls down when you're multidisciplinary. e.g. you might refer to the "Deepmind" paper, or the "Facebook llm paper"...but my area of research is agritech so we work with animal scientists from a different institution. Do we refer to both teams? 'The google/meta paper'? Again, you're likely to just fall back to whatever is the first author or institution in your mind.

Companies told customers what they want, because they get to dodge regulations, thus more profit. Manufactured demand.

I'll try to find the source, but previously read that the reason SUVs are so popular is that there was some law that let 'utility vehicles' be taxed or something differently, so the manufacturers could make much more profit off them. Thus, they created this demand for a "high seating position", and pushed it on the market...and now because other cars are so large, it's an escalating war. You don't want to be a small car among giants. Nasty feedback loop.

Then you have a very naive view of reality. People, society, 'facts and numbers' are complex machines, and don't exist completely separate from anything else. There isn't some disease that just comes along and flicks an immediate 'off' switch, so dumbing it down to 'covid and nothing else' is like talking about a spherical cow in a vacuum.

Everyone has different histories, different immune systems, different current healths, different short and long-term health care availability. Knowing that COVID was in their system recently, and observing that covid can have noticeable impacts on your cardiovascular system, means that COVID is likely a contributing factor (to some degree, large or small) in their death.

I would suggest looking at different tyre brands or models. I have been running tubeless (on road) for about the past 3 years...varying between 30mm and 42mm (gravel bike, but running basically slick tyres).

Different tyres have different wall constructions, and so some can leak a lot of air. I find that after I put on a new tyre, they leak air for the first couple days, but it's greatly benefited by going for a few rides (the extra pressure gets the sealant into all the nooks and crannies of the tyre casing, filling the gaps), and then maybe lose a PSI or two per week (when I run at 50psi).

I change sealant about every 6 months, just because it dries up. Not particularly due to fluid leakage.

This seems willfully antagonistic and simplistic.

There are degrees of effort in any lifestyle. Degrees of 'veganism', or 'anti-AI' use.

Is there _really_ cognitive dissonance of someone doing some action to reduce their impact on animal welfare? Doing _more than most people_ to reduce their impact on animals? I say this as a regular meat eater, not a vegan. Your point comes across as bait-y for the sake of being bait-y, rather than contributing anything meaningful to the conversation.