I've heard many people quip that the best thing about using a $25000 terminal is being connected to other people who can afford spending $25000 on a terminal.
I've come to appreciate this book more after finishing it, as I'm able to process the themes without being subjected to the torture of actually reading it. Good luck!
The Count of Monte Cristo was my introduction to classics. I remember being intimidated yet excited by it's length. It's a great adventure, a page turner, and has interesting characters and sub-plots. I had the honor of visiting Dumas' tomb in the Pantheon this summer. Notably, his tomb was raised above the others who shared his room, including Victor Hugo.
I think Gnome removing options was more about having a smaller and more manageable set of features that need to be QA tested. I'd much rather have well-designed and well-supported defaults than 500 buggy customizable components that don't work well together.
I'm not sure about you, but I find Gnome very easy to use, although I miss some features. Those features can be added with Gnome extensions that are maintained by third-parties. Meanwhile I find GIMP extremely hard to use, as it packs in too many features to allow their designers to figure out a good UX which doesn't break some component.
I don't have a study that I can use as an appeal to authority, so you'll just have to contend with the argument on the basis of it's internal consistency and how much you agree with the premises :)
For what it's worth, I don't use the gnome app drawer either. I exclusively use the dock + search to launch applications, so in my workflow both are actually pointless. I would still argue that opening the app drawer to reach your application shortcuts is easier and more consistent than resizing/minimizing windows to un-obstruct the desktop until you can point and click to launch an application. But I suppose managing folders on your desktop could be viewed as a plus? I'm not sure if GNOME's app menu supports that.
>KDE doesn't let you do it either
My bad. I'm not too familiar with KDE.
Not the case in Notepad, Edge, RegEdit, Windows Settings, MS Teams, Firefox on Windows, Bruno, Windows Search. Where exactly did you experience this? All aforementioned were tested in Windows 11
Completely agree. Besides, if clicking above/below the thumb is PgUp/PgDn, that means the buttons get smaller as you get closer to your destination, making them harder to press. Not good UX! The main counter argument to instantly moving I can think of, is that people may miss-click when trying to resize a window, and struggle to find their way back. Maybe a Ctrl-Z for window location history wouldn't be such a bad idea. You could piggyback off Vim's jump list which is navigable with Ctrl-O and Ctrl-I, though I'm sure a lot of applications already register those mappings.
This is why I love GNOME. The community is doing a great job with creating GTK4 native applications. I'll often pick a GTK app over a more featured app, because they usually do enough. It's very satisfying to be able to use the same shortcuts in most applications.
Could be because this promotes a bad UX? In GNOME, you have a dock for your most used applications, which can be launched or navigated to with Super+1/2/3.., there is the apps menu accessible with Super or by clicking the top bar, where you can organize apps as well as search for them. Desktop icons are distracting, and requires you to remove windows obstructing them to access the icons. If every DE just mimicked windows, we wouldn't ever be able to move forward. Though KDE is there for you if you prefer the windows way.
Writing can be painful because putting pen to paper forces you to think through every word and sentence. You immediately realize that the first thought that came to mind, wasn't a 100% correct idea, and it'll be more accurate and better formulated this way or that way. Writing is a sort of extended thinking, in which you're being held accountable for every word (by yourself). Some people argue that slowing down the writing process even more, for example by going from keyboard to pen and paper, gives you more time to process your thoughts, and leads to better and more articulate writing.
When I read AI-enhanced writing, I always feel like I have to peer through the blinds to see the writer's true intention. This feels very dishonest and partly offensive, because it can sometimes take several paragraphs before I realize that I'm reading AI output, rather than someone's processed thoughts.
It's worth having a look at https://areweanticheatyet.com/. I found that the most of the games I play which use anti cheat work on Linux. It's also not hard to dual-boot windows as a backup, though I haven't had a use for my windows partition yet.
Yes, this is Windows 11 (forced by company). I believe the first right-click is blocked by loading something, though I'm not sure what, as after opening the menu it shows "Loading..." in place of "Open With Terminal" for a second. Subsequent right-clicks are ~1000ms and sometimes 2000ms to open. Probably also varies by equipment, as my company machine is loaded with a lot of bloatware, though it's not a weak machine by any means.
I discovered and set this up the other day, added jellyfin, immich and forgejo and was really happy about the result for five minutes, before I discovered that limitation in the TOS. Now I only use it for forgejo. Have you found a different solution to exposing jellyfin?
>> And potentially as a byproduct of enabling all of this, you can now slop your way to a one-shot 3D game over the weekend which looks impressive.
Do these games really look impressive? Everything I've seen has looked like someone completely new to Unity/Unreal has slapped together a bunch of premade scripts and very poor 3d assets.
I haven't played Daggerfall, but Arena had hand-crafted main dungeons. There were side quests that took you to proc gen dungeons (that sucked) and a massive proc gen wilderness outside the cities that you never had any reason to go into. The towns were also proc gen, but that mostly amounted to just shuffling around the inns and shops, to give weight to the "ask NPCs for directions" mechanic.
Isn't "information diet" perfect usage here? The medical doctor's information diet probably consists of different information than the tech enthusiast's, or the STEM PhD's, and the journalist's information diet may consist of more politics and contemporary events. I thought it was a pretty creative and apt word choice
IANAL, but only the owner can consent through the TOS. The owner does not collect or process the data, so it's entirely on LG to ensure proper consent, not the owner. Breaking a TOS is not a crime, and can only be punished by restricting or disallowing access to a service, but collecting personal data without consent is a huge problem in the EU.
Wow. I just read this one now, and DHH really makes it hard to defend him. It's definitely possible to make this argument without likening groups of people to wolves and sheep...
It's not really around Omarchy, but around DHH due to his political beliefs. I'm not deep into this, but I think the majority of the controversy stems from this article:
One of the fascinating things about these ancient stories is to see how they reflect the current culture of wherever and whenever they are recounted. For example, Alexander the Great has been recounted as a Greek hero, a Macedonian hero, or even a Muslim hero. Stories have always been malleable. Scribes would make small (and sometimes large) adjustments to stories, which over time could lead to entirely different plots. People recount stories from memory, and often make up details they can't recall.
I personally believe that stories like the Iliad and the Odyssey were more like a performance art. Someone would tell a story, while the audience would come with suggestions "he killed the Cyclops!" "the wine was poisonous!" "they hid among the sheep!", and they would change the story according to the mood of the room. Similar to how DnD works today. If this is true, there can't even be a definitive true original story. This opens up many cans of worms like "who decides the cannon? The author or the audience?".
Nolan's movie is in many ways a good adaptation (it's fun and engaging to modern viewers), while also being a great reflection of current Hollywood (casting, substitution of religious plot for natural plot).
I haven't had the pleasure of reading Wilson's translation yet, but it's good to see that she's trying to improve her work. One of the major criticisms leveled against her is the overuse of the word "slave", which is very loaded in today's vocabulary. There were many different types of unfree work, and attitudes toward them would be very different from today. Grouping them all into slaves would definitely remove a lot of nuance. Really nice to see that she is working on this problem; I think she will be respected a lot more if she solves it.
What features did you end up implementing? I assume tree-sitter based highlighting, lsp, and maybe fuzzy search? Did you implement anything different that you didn't get out of existing editors that you tried?
The volume of commits is quite crazy. For example, he wrote a +486/-51 commit in 20 minutes (33287cb) with quite dense rust code. That's about 25 changes per minute -- very impressive! The docs also smell of LLM output, for example describing the app as native despite using egui/wgpu.
I was about to come here and say that egui is a terrible choice for web. Everything is rendered in a canvas, so accessibility and extensibility is thrown out of the window. Basic browser functions like pinch-zoom don't work, it has some very wonky visual bugs when resizing the window, interactions have a very noticeable delay, no browser extensions work with this.
This is really not a good solution for web apps, and if you're vibe coding your apps anyway, there isn't any reason not to have a native browser application.
OOP is sold on the promise that everything is modular. Since everything is neatly encapsulated with clearly defined API surfaces, you can easily swap out any part for any other. This should make developers interchangeable, because anyone can go in to the code and swap out parts as needed.
In reality this seems to make coupling even worse. Now you have to dig 8 classes deep just to find the business logic for a particular feature. Changing it is even harder because the rest of the program expects this part to behave in a very specific way.