So I have to spend more time configuring an advanced Window Manager for smart-maximize and smart-snag-to-edge-of-fake-screen then simply just using 3 monitors??
The point isn't about safety* (motorcycle helmets make bicycle helmets look like toys) but about getting to the root of the problem which many ignore or just outright conflate.
1. To argue for an ideology without having the honesty to list all of that's strengths and weaknesses AND also list the polar opposite point of view's strengths and weaknesses AS WELL is just trading one form of ignorance for another. Proselytizing one point of view without also listing ALL the pro's and con's is cargo-cult thinking.
An intelligent person is able to analyze all the reasons they think they "need" a helmet (even if they don't agree with them) and understand the tradeoffs they are making. i.e. For every argument about why X is needed/good, there are at least 2 other ideals that are also compromised along the way. There is a cliche for a reason: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
2. It is about having and building proactive awareness (aka mediation) vs reactive symptoms; the latter tends to encourages sloppy thinking, a false sense of security, fear-based thinking, undermine personal choice, and (counterintuitively!?!?) tends to have higher risks. (Glad to see it wasn't in your case. Experience can be a tough teacher.)
That is what I am arguing for; not some delusional ideology taken to an extreme that ignores all the issues. I am neither for nor against bike laws; every person should decide for themselves what level of truth they wish to live.The greatest fallacy that exists is: "Thinking One Man's Truth Applies To Everyone."
* For every person arguing that we need "laws" to "protect" us I would argue that is a myopic view. The safety argument is partially bullshit else pedestrians and drivers would be required to wear helmets too. Oh wait...
/sarcasm I have a great idea! Let's call everyone who doesn't proselytizeThe Church of Bike Helmetsideology "idjits" to get them to convert to our religion!
Let us also stick our head in the sand and propagate myths TEDx Copenhagen - Mikael Colville-Andersen - Why We Shouldn't Bike with a Helmet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07o-TASvIxY
Let us also ignore the context for when seatbelts are NOT required such as when a person has been certified with a phobia of seat belts, non-front seat passengers of a motor home, etc.
How can I not possibly win!?/sarcasm
-- FecesBook, noun: Website where everyone posts dumb shit that no ones gives a crap about; aka FazeBook, FagBook, FartBook, etc.
> You missed the bit where I said 'in principle' and 'emulate'. B
Uh, why do you think I provided a counter-example of maximizing a window.
Emulation != Original. In this case it is a poor copy of the original.
Re:Why not just multiple monitors.
on
4K Is For Programmers
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
> There are in principle NO advantages to a multiple monitor setup. In principle you could essentially emulate multiple monitors with one big display. In fact it's better to have a single big display
I use 3 monitors for development on Linux:
27" @ 1920x1080 via HDMI
24" @ 1080x1920 via Dual-Link DVI (NOT a typo, monitor has been rotated 90 degrees), and
27" @ 2560x1440 via DisplayPort
My total horizontal resolution is 5560
When I click maximize on my rotated 24" 1080x1920 I don't have to worry about it accidentally wasting space on the ENTIRE workspace.
Uhm, sorry, but you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
Trolls and ACs./sarcasm Oh wait... "They have this illusion that they are two separate groups of people. The fact is that they are a single bunch of idiots."
To paraphrase Robert Monroe: "Change is the only constant. Fast change is called revolution, slow change evolution."
The inexperienced young want change because of some cool new feature X, Y, and Z. The experienced older want stability because they know the wisdom of "Don't fix what isn't broken!"
Businesses typically want stability because why would they pay someone again to re-write, refind bugs, re-test, and re-fix bugs, when the old version worked before?
The only reason to *really* change an API is because of security issues, aka how Microsoft "extended" legagy C API's to 'safe' versions such as: scanf vs scanf_s, etc.
Holy Shit. Cognitive dissonance much??Yeah, Let's let's ignore the Context of how the billionaire became rich and how the homeless man became destitute. Let's steal a portion from the 4.0 GPA student because he worked hard and give it to the 1.0 GPA student even though he didn't work hard because of a bullshit "Life is unfair!" rhetoric. Somebody call the whambulance!
--> How about focusing on the cause instead of treating the symptom. <--
You are ignorant about Life because you don't understand Death:
LIFE IS 100% FAIR.
It is only your perception that makes it seem unfair.
> It is fascinating that we continue to find artifacts from the ancient world that show far more sophistication that people today generally realize.
Uh, not to be condescending, but try reading more.:-)
"The easiest form of parochialism to fall into is to assume that we are smarter than the past generations, that our thinking is necessarily more sophisticated. This may be true in science and technology, but not necessarily so in wisdom."
Agreed! Price is exactly one of the issues. You can *still* buy the WRT54GL for $50 from NewEgg.
Flash Tomato by Shibby (http://tomato.groov.pl/) or DD-WRT and you got a very nice router that just works.
I paid $200 each to "upgrade" to 2x Asus RT-N66U and its Wifi abilities are crap. The default firmware doesn't let you Port Trigger a port range, only a single port. The range is garbage too. At least with Tomato you have control over the antenna strength, lots of options for tweaking, etc.
Paying $300 is nonsense when there are cheaper routers out there that allow you to run custom firmware.
> I'm certain in my disbelief in gods, and also that absolutely no gods exist > I do know for a fact that no gods can exist.
So which is it? You are certain or know for a fact??
The definition of Agnostic is: One who lacks experiential knowledge. The definition of Gnostic is: One how has experiential knowledge.
You do not know God because you failed the 0th lesson: Know Thyself
As as wise man once said:
"How can you know God if you don't know yourself? I say forget about God and instead learn to Know Thyself In the process you will come to Know God"
Your definition of God is incomplete. One of the best definitions of "God" is: All There Is. That is, There is nothing BUT God..
As a Mystic you are ignorant about life because you do not understand death; you will be in for a very rude awakening when you die when you are once again aware of your super-conscious (which many people mislabel subconscious, or "Higher Self", or "Soul".)
> The philosophical concept of a higher intelligence should not be conflated with the term "god".
No wonder you are confused. There are 7 levels of consciousness. The highest is The One, The Source, The Creator, God, Allah, Nirankar, Yahweh, YHWH, YHVH, Jehovah, The Tao that INCLUDES the many (lower) levels, one of which is Man's.
> Despotic Tyrants are not gods. The old gods are false,
In every holy text / scripture IF you are unable to understand the difference between the:
a) literal,
b) allegory
c) spiritual then you have simply tossed the baby out with the bath water. No wonder you remain ignorant about the true purpose of religion! At their core EVERY religion teaches the same core spiritual truths:
- You have a relationship with God, - You have a relationship with your fellow man, - The highest form of relation is the Golden Rule: Love - Almost everything after that is dogma, ritual, creed, tradition, etc., custom tailored for those like-minded people; those usually ends up dividing people instead of people celebrating their own path.
> What if the Christians are right, and I am wrong? Stop falling for the fallacy of duality. It is archaic thinking.
EVERY religion is BOTH Right AND Wrong. It is right when it brings you closer to God. (Unity) It is wrong when it teaches when there is only way to know God. (Separation)
Truth is INCLUSIVE, not exclusive. One Truth does NOT negate another Truth
The difference between Religion and Spirituality is this: Religion is one man telling another man what he must do to know God. Spirituality is one man telling another man what he could do to know God.
Atheism is a very spiritual Path. But it is not the only Path.
When are we going to stop allowing greed to dictate our "news" ? How long will we allow the media to profit from sensationalism instead of acting with integrity?
Slashdot Mirror
So I have to spend more time configuring an advanced Window Manager for smart-maximize and smart-snag-to-edge-of-fake-screen then simply just using 3 monitors??
The point isn't about safety* (motorcycle helmets make bicycle helmets look like toys) but about getting to the root of the problem which many ignore or just outright conflate.
1. To argue for an ideology without having the honesty to list all of that's strengths and weaknesses AND also list the polar opposite point of view's strengths and weaknesses AS WELL is just trading one form of ignorance for another. Proselytizing one point of view without also listing ALL the pro's and con's is cargo-cult thinking.
An intelligent person is able to analyze all the reasons they think they "need" a helmet (even if they don't agree with them) and understand the tradeoffs they are making. i.e. For every argument about why X is needed/good, there are at least 2 other ideals that are also compromised along the way. There is a cliche for a reason: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
2. It is about having and building proactive awareness (aka mediation) vs reactive symptoms; the latter tends to encourages sloppy thinking, a false sense of security, fear-based thinking, undermine personal choice, and (counterintuitively!?!?) tends to have higher risks. (Glad to see it wasn't in your case. Experience can be a tough teacher.)
That is what I am arguing for; not some delusional ideology taken to an extreme that ignores all the issues. I am neither for nor against bike laws; every person should decide for themselves what level of truth they wish to live. The greatest fallacy that exists is: "Thinking One Man's Truth Applies To Everyone ."
* For every person arguing that we need "laws" to "protect" us I would argue that is a myopic view. The safety argument is partially bullshit else pedestrians and drivers would be required to wear helmets too. Oh wait ...
TEDxCopenhagen - Mikael Colville-Andersen - Why We Shouldn't Bike with a Helmet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07o-TASvIxY
/sarcasm I have a great idea! Let's call everyone who doesn't proselytize The Church of Bike Helmets ideology "idjits" to get them to convert to our religion!
Let us also ignore the data:
http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets.html
Let us also stick our head in the sand and propagate myths
TEDx Copenhagen - Mikael Colville-Andersen - Why We Shouldn't Bike with a Helmet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07o-TASvIxY
Let us also ignore the context for when seatbelts are NOT required such as when a person has been certified with a phobia of seat belts, non-front seat passengers of a motor home, etc.
How can I not possibly win!? /sarcasm
--
FecesBook, noun: Website where everyone posts dumb shit that no ones gives a crap about; aka FazeBook, FagBook, FartBook, etc.
So with your single data point point you are going to proselytize your ideology??
You seem to be ignoring the data:
http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets.html
Helmets are treating the symptom of being unaware instead of focusing on the cause for why you even had an accident in the first place.
/sarcasm Just like dark matter, and dark energy. Oh wait ...
You do realize everyone has Faith, right?
If you didn't have faith in your beliefs then why do you have them in the first place? You have personally proven all your beliefs??
Faith is not the Atheist's F word contrary to what some believe.
--
"FecesBook, noun, online place: Where everyone posts dumb shit that almost no ones gives a crap about."
> You missed the bit where I said 'in principle' and 'emulate'. B
Uh, why do you think I provided a counter-example of maximizing a window.
Emulation != Original. In this case it is a poor copy of the original.
> There are in principle NO advantages to a multiple monitor setup. In principle you could essentially emulate multiple monitors with one big display. In fact it's better to have a single big display
I use 3 monitors for development on Linux:
27" @ 1920x1080 via HDMI
24" @ 1080x1920 via Dual-Link DVI (NOT a typo, monitor has been rotated 90 degrees), and
27" @ 2560x1440 via DisplayPort
My total horizontal resolution is 5560
When I click maximize on my rotated 24" 1080x1920 I don't have to worry about it accidentally wasting space on the ENTIRE workspace.
Uhm, sorry, but you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
> Who's left ? :)
Trolls and ACs. /sarcasm Oh wait ... "They have this illusion that they are two separate groups of people. The fact is that they are a single bunch of idiots."
Hey quit hitting me with that ban hammer ;-)
Very nice post! If I may summarize:
To paraphrase Robert Monroe: "Change is the only constant. Fast change is called revolution, slow change evolution."
The inexperienced young want change because of some cool new feature X, Y, and Z.
The experienced older want stability because they know the wisdom of "Don't fix what isn't broken!"
Businesses typically want stability because why would they pay someone again to re-write, refind bugs, re-test, and re-fix bugs, when the old version worked before?
The only reason to *really* change an API is because of security issues, aka how Microsoft "extended" legagy C API's to 'safe' versions such as: scanf vs scanf_s, etc.
Holy Shit. Cognitive dissonance much??Yeah, Let's let's ignore the Context of how the billionaire became rich and how the homeless man became destitute. Let's steal a portion from the 4.0 GPA student because he worked hard and give it to the 1.0 GPA student even though he didn't work hard because of a bullshit "Life is unfair!" rhetoric. Somebody call the whambulance!
--> How about focusing on the cause instead of treating the symptom. <--
You are ignorant about Life because you don't understand Death:
LIFE IS 100% FAIR.
It is only your perception that makes it seem unfair.
--
"Only cowards censor"
> It is fascinating that we continue to find artifacts from the ancient world that show far more sophistication that people today generally realize.
Uh, not to be condescending, but try reading more. :-)
"The easiest form of parochialism to fall into is to assume that we are smarter than the past generations, that our thinking is necessarily more sophisticated. This may be true in science and technology, but not necessarily so in wisdom."
That quote is from the introduction to this brilliant essay: "Macaulay on Copyright"
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/4/25/1345/03329
Agreed! Price is exactly one of the issues. You can *still* buy the WRT54GL for $50 from NewEgg.
Flash Tomato by Shibby (http://tomato.groov.pl/) or DD-WRT and you got a very nice router that just works.
I paid $200 each to "upgrade" to 2x Asus RT-N66U and its Wifi abilities are crap. The default firmware doesn't let you Port Trigger a port range, only a single port. The range is garbage too. At least with Tomato you have control over the antenna strength, lots of options for tweaking, etc.
Paying $300 is nonsense when there are cheaper routers out there that allow you to run custom firmware.
> I don't see how the DEFLATE codec used by, say, PNG can be parallelized.
That's because deflate is a crappy compression codec.
Try a compression algorithm like lz4 which is a) lossless, b) multi-core, and c) fast
http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
> Speaking about evolution specifically ...
Uh, you DO realize there is no such thing as "junk DNA". It ALL serves a purpose.
You are only seeing the physical half; you are completely missing the non-physical side.
Science will continue to be blind while it is unable to add Consciousness to its equations.
There are 2 great documentaries:
* The Primacy of Consciousness - Peter Russell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d4ugppcRUE
* The Quantum Activist - Amit Goswami
http://www.quantumactivist.com/
> Believing evolution did not create all species is denying the overwhelming
Evolution is a process NOT the Source (or cause.)
Evolution is not the Source of consciousness. Evolution is a tool that consciousness uses! THAT is why Darwinism is junk science.
People keep conflating Cause with Process when nothing could be further from the truth.
> Scientific theories aren't proven, they are confirmed through amassing sufficient supporting evidence.
Or more verbose:
Science is about rejecting falsehood.
Spirituality is about including truth.
The goal is the same: Truth, but the process of how one goes about it is different.
> Huge problem mixing "science" and "religion" is that for many, religion is about "faith" and science is about reason.
Uh, you DO realize everyone has Faith right?
--> If you didn't have faith in your beliefs you wouldn't have them in the first place.
> I'm certain in my disbelief in gods, and also that absolutely no gods exist
> I do know for a fact that no gods can exist.
So which is it? You are certain or know for a fact??
The definition of Agnostic is: One who lacks experiential knowledge.
The definition of Gnostic is: One how has experiential knowledge.
You do not know God because you failed the 0th lesson: Know Thyself
As as wise man once said:
Your definition of God is incomplete. One of the best definitions of "God" is:
All There Is.
That is,
There is nothing BUT God..
As a Mystic you are ignorant about life because you do not understand death; you will be in for a very rude awakening when you die when you are once again aware of your super-conscious (which many people mislabel subconscious, or "Higher Self", or "Soul".)
> The philosophical concept of a higher intelligence should not be conflated with the term "god".
No wonder you are confused. There are 7 levels of consciousness. The highest is The One, The Source, The Creator, God, Allah, Nirankar, Yahweh, YHWH, YHVH, Jehovah, The Tao that INCLUDES the many (lower) levels, one of which is Man's.
> Despotic Tyrants are not gods. The old gods are false,
In every holy text / scripture IF you are unable to understand the difference between the:
a) literal,
b) allegory
c) spiritual
then you have simply tossed the baby out with the bath water. No wonder you remain ignorant about the true purpose of religion! At their core EVERY religion teaches the same core spiritual truths:
- You have a relationship with God,
- You have a relationship with your fellow man,
- The highest form of relation is the Golden Rule: Love
- Almost everything after that is dogma, ritual, creed, tradition, etc., custom tailored for those like-minded people; those usually ends up dividing people instead of people celebrating their own path.
> What if the Christians are right, and I am wrong?
Stop falling for the fallacy of duality. It is archaic thinking.
EVERY religion is BOTH Right AND Wrong.
It is right when it brings you closer to God. (Unity)
It is wrong when it teaches when there is only way to know God. (Separation)
Truth is INCLUSIVE, not exclusive.
One Truth does NOT negate another Truth
The difference between Religion and Spirituality is this:
Religion is one man telling another man what he must do to know God.
Spirituality is one man telling another man what he could do to know God.
Atheism is a very spiritual Path.
But it is not the only Path.
Your 3rd is an incorrect one and you missed the 4th one.
3. Agnostic = I have NO KNOWLEDGE
4 Gnostic/Mystic = I HAVE knowledge about God.
The 'a' means 'without'.
Gnostic = Experiential knowledge in contradistinction from Intellectual knowledge.
Q. How does Science do it?
There are a number of solutions:
- Remove money (profit) from the news.
- Hold the media accountable to actions that are contrary to the greater good.
i.e. Charlie Brooker's Newswipe 25/03/09
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4
- Allow an independent organization the authority to audit the media for sensationalism, and fine them.
- Name and Shame / Peer Pressure
i.e. Scroll down to "7. The Harvard Man"
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-america-lost-the-war-on-drugs-20110324?print=true
When are we going to stop allowing greed to dictate our "news" ?
How long will we allow the media to profit from sensationalism instead of acting with integrity?
> but spying on foreign governments is what the NSA is supposed to do.
You do realize there is an option from living in fear, right?
> I'd say that makes him a naive idealist, at best.
Oh wait, that's right, it is easier to criticize (destroy) then to create.
... and the solution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73_ds1xQmD4
When are people going to start demanding Authority AND Accountability instead of sound-bite entertainment?
--
Success is not only the destination (end-goal) but also involves the journey (of hard word along the way.)
Ha! Yup! Great link ... forgot to link that one. Thanks!
3 words:
Only cowards censor.