fedeb95

because certain political parties have made energy technologies part of their identities, which is... stupid.

interesting point, but in a real desktop, or multi-desktop setup, you can have different things on each one and look at them one by one, by table. The alt+tab default behaviour on MacOS is not that. This is my problem with their design choice.

I didn't mention Windows so I don't know where the person commenting got it from ;)

gnome is not a distro but a desktop environment.

windows phones were very good design-wise, sadly no one made apps.

exactly.

it's not the same function since it's way slower than using the keys.

afaik Mac OS doesn't have the option. If so, I still am questioning the default choiche ;)

this is true. We should focus on avoiding bad habits and forming good ones. But they are bad also because of the methods they use, because of the deliberate and systematic study of how the mind works and how to tweak it. It is also the method that needs to be changed, and using it for "good" habits is just as problematic. That is because we don't need others to decide what is "good" for us.

As for "we're all not doing both those things" I am sorry to contradict you. No one is perfect, but adopting simple strategies can help a lot. I know because it has been almost a year since I have done the following:

1) I deleted all my social media, except for Mastodon which I use very rarely since it's not that interesting, and it is ok to be so: no mind engineering on their side, even though I don't like the concept of social media in general and am still undecided whether to keep it or not.

2) I try not to eat junk food, or keep it at a minimum. What helps a lot is not buying food from restaurants, even good ones use an impressive amount of oil and fats that is not good for our system. Cooking for double what you cook and freezing is a good thing. Cook simple things and don't do complex recipes, they can taste mild at first, but with habit our mouth adapts and even a simple bowl of rice with vegetables tastes good.

3) I try to incorporate exercises into my daily routine. Some weightlifting at home, because I have 30 minutes every 2 or 3 days to do it, and since I work at home most of the times I cut transport time; if I were to work outside I'd pay a gym near my work, or go to a gym near my house to again cut transport time; I cycle to work (1:30h). The point is minimizing barriers between you and exercises. I read some of the atomic habits book a while ago and I think I am using some ideas from there, but I really can't remember.

4) I cut all TVs if not for movies; sometimes I watch TV series because my girlfriend like those, but they are a waste of time too.

Less is more.

I am against mandatory public education and for the existence of the possibility of free education for everyone. You shouldn't be paid to go to school though.

I have used a lot of systems, and inside them a lot of programs (I make design choices for a living, even if they are at a lower level, UX and intuitiveness exists also in libraries). I was comparing Mac OS to GNOME and not to Windows because Windows is almost the same as Mac OS relative to my point, just worse.

It being different is a fair point, and when designing a system you always make tradeoffs; what I feel is that Apple tradeoffs and design goals are slowly turning more toward additional monetization after you buy the product than focusing on the product per se.

right now I have the same feeling; some time ago I felt that entering the iPhone "mindset" made sense as you could gain in ease of use by sacrificing some "control".

this is a fair point. I am referring to more "objective" things, if anything can be, in design. Let's take as an example the alt+tab behaviour with multiple virtual desktops. In GNOME, as it is in Windows too by the way, alt+tab cycles inside the virtual desktop you're in, allowing for efficient matrix-like navigation, and allowing to split tasks between desktops. On Mac OS, alt+tab cycles on all your open programs, making you jump between desktops. To me, this is rather unintuitive. It could be habit, but there is a clear difference in result regardless of habits, and I think the most productive choice is the GNOME-Windows one, and the more "intuitive" one in the sense of what a user might expect out of a virtual desktop, that is, creating a new desktop with its own apps. Of course this is my impression and I am well free not to buy a Mac :)

I have been a long time Android fan because of the tinkering you could do more easily than Apple. Then I started appreciating some of the design decisions behind especially iPhone, and it's been almost 7 years of iPhone usage.

Recently I am starting to question some of the design decisions. Most native apps are bloated with functionalities, most of the time useless. Ads pop up everywhere, even before persistence; iCloud and backups are clearly designed to make you pay, the free space is useless.

I am not that sure my next phone will be an iPhone.

I have tried a recent Mac, and the system isn't intuitive at all. The first time I used GNOME, it was a breeze. Not the same with the MacBook system.

I agree, but also equating LLMs with intelligence is wrong.

I'm heuristically less prone to continue reading an article starting with a false dichotomy, that is between how you see things as an atheist vs as a person having faith.

I like reading, and I read a lot. Still, I don't think it's right that a public service encourages reading. People must be free to do what they want in their free time, and this gamification stuff smells of imposing values and habits.

I'm against this idea of indoctrination of the population by a public entity, no matter which is the habit. I'm also against private companies doing this, which governments should focus on regulating instead of copying them.

If reading books is valuable, just as I think it is, people will find its value by trying.

I don't agree.

The real value of MCPs lays in providing a controlled interface to models.

The benefits of control are multiple; models getting better means that, if necessary, they can go around the limitations, but generally their adherence to it is desired.

In order to understand why this is pushed, consider that maps through history rarely have been only a tool for the technician. Maps usually conveyed a lot of social information, take a look at medieval ones to understand the point.

This explains why the UN is making such an otherwise stupid resolution from a mathematical point of view.

We are in 2026: why not a rotating globe?

I remember clearly Apple fans making fun of Samsung when they did their foldable phone.

very cool, but no matter how I twist it, when zooming I zoom only on the testicles.

No one, but history tells us this isn't a problem. Publishers will still want to pay you in order to have the opportunity to be the first to the market with the copies, and this is what makes a lot of money under the assumption your work will make a lot of money. If the assumption is false, then no copyright will give you money, if anything will prevent you from the remote opportunity of freely made copies to circulate and become famous of their own; at which point, publishers would want to make a contract with you for your next work.

We are too much used to copyright that fail to see how we would be better without.

that's correct, I am against copyright in any form of sorts. I know this is unpopular, but I really can't think of a logical argument that justifies it (I have read plenty; luckily I have no decision making power). Copyright in my view is simply an obsolete concept that tries to coerce private property of scarce resources in the realm of ideas. But ideas aren't scarce, neither are digital copies. It's like private property of air.

I think the troubling mindset is that of who accuses strangers on the internet of misbehaving without knowing their opinions.

Software doesn't need any protection. People want protection.

this is bullshit, your data is protected by privacy laws and not copyright laws.

I don't agree. Free software would still be free even if copyright were to be abolished, if anything it would flourish further. That is because even proprietary software could be better integrated.

1) costs? 2) profits/costs?

it includes an anti-urination idea for outdoors, which may be worth noting.

There is a false dichotomy here. There are people who view code as "art", in the sense outlined here, and yet rely on LLMs for some tasks.