dota_fanatic

I don't want people pushing things at me that I'm 100% uninterested in in the off chance that 1% of those ads is actually interesting to me and I otherwise wouldn't know it exists. I do want to be able to search a database of vendors (with degrees of trust associated with them) with objective descriptions of available goods and services at known costs, either one-time or recurring. If I'm looking for something that's completely new, I should still be able to find it by using relevant terms and weightings (cost, materials, origin of materials, shipping distance, labor chain, etc.)

So, no, I do think someone using their front yard to sell a couch is bad provided we have the internet and a good marketplace built on top of it. Who wants to see human junk covering nature solely so it can impinge on others' field-of-view in order to be sold? I don't think it's bad for them to register the availability of said couch in the hypothetical regulated marketplace.

And, for those who consent, they can ask to have relevant categories of ads pushed at them. But leave people like me out of it. No such consent can be obtained when you just e.g. put it on a billboard.

Yes, I know what I'm saying is probably naive and would never work, or something, or that's where governance is supposed to come in, but it's a nice dream.

Inspire and grow the intelligence of the next generation? Nah, let’s sell ads and figure out how to make people spend more time on social media, getting rich in the process.

I went ahead and ran a pixel test and they're all working fine still. Maybe LG has been cutting costs as their OLED lines have matured? Or it could be bad luck of the draw.

Poor lighting in this room, taken w/ an iPhone 12 Mini. Just grabbed the first result of "50% gray screen" from youtube.

I can see some vertical stripes if I look closely, but that seems to be general aging and not burn in. At least I can't think of any images that could have burned in that pattern with what I've used the screen for. Tbh this picture makes it look worse than it appears but you'll just have to take my word on that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ This TV has gotten a lot of (ab)use, much more than a typical home I would think.

I'm glad you suggested this test because now I have some fuel for upgrading in 2022. ;) I wouldn't say the aging I can see from this test is noticeable in most cases, but it's a tool I'll use in the future to see how the striping worsens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#Age_str...

Our subjective experience isn't all that different. This is especially true if you consider humanity as a whole, not some 0.1%er who has inordinate access to the fruits of civilization.

The harm in "recognizing our superior differences" is in the unfortunate proclivity of humans to take that as justification for not recognizing any rights of the "inferior".

Go read their manifesto: https://github.com/crawl/crawl/blob/master/crawl-ref/docs/cr...

Specifically the section titled "Clarity".

> Things ought to work in an intuitive way.

Spoiler alert, they most certainly do not. There's nothing intuitive about being completely unable of knowing the practical effects of something as simple as equipping a piece of armor or a shield or allocating a point to STR vs DEX. I gave an example in another comment of how other games do provide information when comparing between options so you can intuit their effects. I have faith they'll get there, though. I believe they'll gain many more players if they can, too. :) I'm sure I'll be back in a year or two after they improve the gameplay more.

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of gold in those hills and I had a lot of fun getting better and getting my first win. But after that I was very frustrated with how hard it was to just stop at a fork in the road and try to answer, which choice is objectively better? I like difficult games that are fair and require skill growth to succeed in, but I want to be able to understand them so I can make informed choices as I get better as well. Too much: because that's what the black box determined. sorry, you died. should have been more cautious.

With DCSS? Well... how much damage you do is going to depend on whether or not you're wearing a shield (what size?), what kind of armor you're wearing if any, how much you've trained for that weapon class, how much STR you have, what bonuses it has, and what bonuses you have from gear. Then RNG will play a significant role on top of that. Maybe RNG applies twice, once for your swing, once for their defense? It's been too long, I can't say confidently.

I realize it's challenging for the interface design because everything is already tight but I'm sure there's a solution. If I equip this armor/weapon/jewelry, how fast will I be attacking compared to now? What will my damage distribution look like before enemy resistances? Same with allocating stats, please give feedback in the form of derived data that is closer to the thing I care about (surviving).

Part of the joy of being human is understanding systems and working with them efficiently to achieve goals. Good luck doing that with crawl. You can sort of achieve this by dumping a lot of time and building up intuition via experience, but you still won't be able to say why you chose this over that for all your choices.

I found myself getting into scenarios, wondering, which choice is better along one particular dimension? STR vs DEX? This armor vs that? What are the trade-offs? The only real way to find that out would be to dump the game at its current state and then simulate both choices against a suite of enemies to see how it plays out at least in 1v1 situations, never mind when handling many enemies. It's frustrating playing a game with so many numbers yet the output of the systems they feed into are so opaque.

It's really unfortunate because although it already feels like a gem of a game, it could be soo much better if the interplay of the various combat / character systems wasn't so ridiculously complected. I would love to see some of the sensibilities of the Factorio team applied to crawl's UI and underlying combat/character systems.

> Don't allow yourself to make mistakes. Take the challenging section, come up with a drill for just that section, and work that section until it is perfect at the same tempo where you can play the rest of the piece.

Work that section until it is perfect implies that when you start it's not perfect, i.e. mistakes are made. You can't just be perfect with everything all of the time. How would you even know where to start such as to "make no mistakes"? Finding perfection is the process I tried to describe above, you aim to play perfectly and get as close as possible. Nevertheless, errors are inevitable. Embrace their necessity for they are the stuff of learning.

> One drill is to play that scale run forwards and backwards, slowly, concentrating on perfect intonation, even timing, and percussive finger landings.

Reiterating, doing 50 reps of the above is bound to have some errors. You notice them, your brain notices them. If you only ever played things that you can currently do perfectly, or said differently, vacant of any mistakes, how would you ever get better or play new things which are bound to have things you can't already perfectly do?

I think what I failed to portray is that yes, don't "allow yourself to make mistakes." Care about trying to be perfect. You'll still make mistakes and that's a good thing. As you constantly improve and take on more and more challenging tasks, you're also baking in countless reps that are strengthening the "right" networks in the brain and pruning out the ones that aren't right.

I recommend checking out the podcast because I'm definitely not doing a good job of replicating his lessons / sharing of what the latest in neuroscientific literature shows.

This is at odds with a quote from OP's second point:

> If you keep making mistakes when practicing then you are just going to get good at making them, so it’s best to avoid them in the first place.

That aside, the article seems like great advice. With Huberman's account of encouraging adult neuroplasticity in mind, my thinking would be to amend this method towards going just fast enough to be able to do the chunk of music but not so slow that the attempts are free of errors. And probably the errors should be of one type at a time? Instead of erring in dynamics and fingering and articulation all at once, try to get everything right except for one aspect. For that, attempt to surpass your abilities and err.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/c/AndrewHubermanLab/featured

Edit: Said another way, “perfect practice makes perfect,” where you aim to play perfectly but consistently just barely fall short. The correct networks are strengthened while those tiny errors get tweaked via neuroplasticity the nights after and consistent improvement results.

> it seems like they probably wouldn't have needed to

> they no doubt took

I'm getting conflicting signals here. Could you edit your posts to remove the words referring to probability and impressions since you know for a fact what happened?

Simply put, every thing (and grouping of things up and down the scale of size) is more or less alive depending on the order / configuration within itself and in relation to the things surrounding it. So a door can be more or less alive, taken by itself or taken in context of the wall, floor, and ceiling around it (and so on). Or compare a city with no sidewalks, completely paved with concrete, all buildings identical, square grid streets, no plant life whatsoever to some of the great cities in Europe which organically grew according to the needs of the populace over time. Can't you say one is literally more alive than the other, both the physical city itself as well as its inhabitants?

Since adopting this perspective, I've been able to make great strides in improving the order of my home which has resulted in an increase in well-being and mental health. The house is more alive and so I'm more alive for it, and vice versa, and so the positive feedback cycle continues.

He goes into great depth identifying principles we see occurring in nature to help define this gradient of liveliness and analyzes countless examples of great works of art from human history. He also shows how to bring such life to the world around you and in the things you make. Check it out. :)

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Alexander

Or have your editor and browser window tiled next to each other? Given how often FE development dabbles with design, using at least one decently sized monitor seems requisite.

And aren't FEers generally tweaking design in the DOM via a browser's developer tools when they're not sure what they want yet, copying back over into source once the design is finalized? Seems downright unpleasant to modify styling in the way you've described, and odd given there's a fantastic IDE in every major browser for styling exploration.

The polarization and alienation worsens just as empathy becomes more and more important to facing the massive ecological problems at hand.

Why? If the relief is federal, which I understand to be the case, no state or local level relief, then why must there be horse trading? Do the international relief in another bill. Do the illegal streaming is a felony in another bill. Etc.

It's like creating a massive program around a god function with globals instead of setting up sane module boundaries based on data structures and their relationships. You're gonna have a bad time.

This was my experience exactly after testing different setups. I still use my Lumix GX8 for photography and home videos, but it wasn't even close to worth the trouble of maintaining the setup compared to a ~$100 Logitech option that I leave on top the monitor with good lighting and plug in via usb hub as needed.