> ... because I abandoned KDE due to the KDE 4 disaster.
I totally hated that whole mess. It almost ruined KDE for me. The real disaster there wasn't that KDE released v4 prematurely, but that they didn't make it crystal clear to the distro maintainers (and end-users) that it was not ready for "prime time" use yet (it was basically "pre-release"/alpha quality), and the major distros of the time jumped on making it the default (forced it on everyone) when it was still basically utterly broken compared to the prior versions of KDE (which had become overall quite solid and reliable by that point).
It's all post-hoc rationalisation. They got caught in their own hype and released low-quality code. They fucked up, that's all, and it's a bit embarrassing that they won't admit it.
Yet... Not long ago Anthropic was threatening to ban users for "abusing" Claude, so surely it's only a matter of time before they start involving H.R. departments and other "legal channels" in their AI psychosis.
> When is superdupermegaintelligence going to be announced?
Isn't it already here? Infallible God-King Trump and all his ultra-genius tech-bro buddies delivered superintellgence already, and due to exponential growth it should already exist by this time, no? By this time next week it will have solved all problems and made humans obsolete.
> Ever since I mapped scroll lock to "compose" on my keyboard, I've had fun typing all sorts of characters :)
I've used <Caps-Lock> as <compose> key for ages now, and <Scroll-Lock> as push-to-talk microphone activation key, since I never use either of those keys for their actual purpose anyhow. Is nice being able to easily type emdash and umlauts and such (as well as several common emoji and a bunch of other useful stuff) on a US keyboard.
> What in that article made you think the psychologist didn't know parents track their children?
My own thought when reading that was that the psychologist was aghast at the extent of the tracking of that particular app, not by the idea of parental tracking in general.
They should learn how to handle reality before being inundated with an endless overwhelming deluge of unreality, outright bullshit, and lies. Kudos to you for giving them that chance.
In a world where heroin is normalized, it might be a good idea
A similar question as the European vs American approach to handling alcohol. In Europe (vast oversimplification incoming, big continent with lots of cultures and jurisdictions) it's normal to drink beer the first time by 14, in the presence of your parents, and are typically able to buy it freely at around 16. In the US (oversimplification incoming) you typically have your first experience with alcohol in secret, or binge-drinking once you are 21 and free from your parents. The European version typically results in more alcohol being consumed, but in healthier habits
One crux is that this only works if the parents are actually using alcohol/social media in a healthy way. A heroin addict can't teach their children how to responsibly use heroin
> In Europe (vast oversimplification incoming, big continent with lots of cultures and jurisdictions) it's normal to drink beer the first time by 14, in the presence of your parents, and are typically able to buy it freely at around 16.
You did disclaim about this, but my understanding is that most European countries no longer allow you to buy alcohol before you’re 18 (but with some major exceptions like Germany and Belgium). Culturally, you are however quite spot on.
Well, it’s like epsilon-delta proofs in maths, isn’t it? For any acceptable amount of harm (epsilon), you can find some upper limit on consumption (delta) that causes harm below that threshold based on our current experimental data. Presumably, most people won’t care if epsilon is small enough, for example smaller than the risk of getting cancer from a walk in the park without sunscreen on.
If I understand correctly, «group 1» says nothing about the probability of getting cancer from exposure, except that we have sufficient data to be sure it must be nonzero?
(FWIW, I don’t drink myself, but I don’t consider cancer risk a motivating reason here.)
My point is that most everything comes with risks and we trade them off with our desires or needs. The recent push to evangelise that there’s “no safe amount of alcohol” is rather silly in the light of that. There’s no “safe” amount of driving or cycling either but we do them anyway because they satisfy our desires and we judge those to be worth the risk. Alcohol (as long as one is not addicted) is the same.
My point is stair climbing isn't a relevant comparison. It's often required, and usually an activity that improves ones health. Alcohol--even in moderation--appears to have only negative health effects and is entirely optional.
It’s a slightly tongue-in-cheek example, sure but the question isn’t whether something is required, only if there’s a “safe” amount of it and I’m trying to say that this isn’t a good question because there’s no way to determine what that means in practice. People traditionally drink alcohol in groups and can strengthen their relationships, which is worth something of value. Sure, it’s not the only way to do that, but to each their own.
A lot of the information is from back in the time where opium was legal but most people are not very receptive to opioids. They feel sick and tripping balls and would
not repeat the experience if offered.
It is a very particular kind of person who gets addicted right away.
Of course, in a social context where consumption is expected, many more may reach the point where they keep consuming in order to stave off withdrawal.
I've known the phrase "meatspace" for decades now as an "opposite" of "cyberspace" from some of the CyberPunk Sci-Fi of my childhood, though I cannot at this moment name any specific novels it might originate from. It's not a terribly new term, although it may have only recently gained common enough usage as to seem new to those who hadn't heard it before.
> I don’t get the idea of saying one thing while the audience reads something else. It seems like a sure recipe for confusion.
If one does this, it should be because the slide is a list of short bullet-point talking-points, and the speaker is going through them one by one explaining them in more detail.
> I usually put almost no prose-type text on my presentations. Figures, captions for figures, equations, variable definitions, small code snippets, those are ok.
This is honestly the type of stuff I always found most helpful in a slide-deck presentation. Information that enhances what the speaker is saying.
You probably want Trinity DE then. It's literally KDE 3, forked and maintained.
reply