Ever since the invention of the printing press, every new communication technology has reduced the effort needed to widely disseminate information-- and misinformation! So you could say this is nothing new. On the other hand, this is remarkably little effort.
Marked me down? That was a joke about how quotes are misattributed on the internet. (I am the following person) But if you are good at your job because you see faults before humour and it happens as a personal trait, then good on you. Found another fault.
> Diversion.—When I have occasionally set myself to consider the different distractions of men, the pains and perils to which they expose themselves at court or in war, whence arise so many quarrels, passions, bold and often bad ventures, etc., I have discovered that all the unhappiness of men arises from one single fact, that they cannot stay quietly in their own chamber. A man who has enough to live on, if he knew how to stay with pleasure at home, would not leave it to go to sea or to besiege a town. A commission in the army would not be bought so dearly, but that it is found insufferable not to budge from the town; and men only seek conversation and entering games, because they cannot remain with pleasure at home.
> But on further consideration, when, after finding the cause of all our ills, I have sought to discover the reason of it, I have found that there is one very real reason, namely, the natural poverty of our feeble and mortal condition, so miserable that nothing can comfort us when we think of it closely.
> Whatever condition we picture to ourselves, if we muster all the good things which it is possible to possess, royalty is the finest position in the world. Yet, when we imagine a king attended with every pleasure he can feel, if he be without diversion, and be left to consider and reflect on what he is, this feeble happiness will not sustain him; he will necessarily fall into forebodings of dangers, of revolutions which may happen, and, finally, of death and inevitable disease; so that if he be without what is called diversion, he is unhappy, and more unhappy than the least of his subjects who plays and diverts himself.
> Hence it comes that play and the society of women, war, and high posts, are so sought after. Not that there is in fact any happiness in them, or that men imagine true bliss to consist in money won at play, or in the hare which they hunt; we would not take these as a gift. We do not seek that easy and peaceful lot which permits us to think of our unhappy condition, nor the dangers of war, nor the labour of office, but the bustle which averts these thoughts of ours, and amuses us.
> Reasons why we like the chase better than the quarry.
> Hence it comes that men so much love noise and stir; hence it comes that the prison is so horrible a punishment; hence it comes that the pleasure of solitude is a thing incomprehensible. And it is in fact the greatest source of happiness in the condition of kings, that men try incessantly to divert them, and to procure for them all kinds of pleasures.
> The king is surrounded by persons whose only thought is to divert the king, and to prevent his thinking of self. For he is unhappy, king though he be, if he think of himself.
> This is all that men have been able to discover to make themselves happy. And those who philosophise on the matter, and who think men unreasonable for spending a whole day in chasing a hare which they would not have bought, scarce know our nature. The hare in itself would not screen us from the sight of death and calamities; but the chase which turns away our attention from these, does screen us.
This collection of "Rabinisms" [1] (thanks to the Internet Archive for keeping it from being lost) can give you some of the flavor of the delightful experience that it was to take one of his classes. RIP.
[If P = NP,] then all of modern cryptography collapses. On this happy thought... (1998-11-24)
I'm one of those people who is just never wrong. I mean, not one of those people. I'm like everybody else. Nobody is ever wrong. (1998-12-08)
After all I said, put here the word "obvious". (1998-12-15)
I am going to show that in one round the probability of not reaching agreement is less or equal to 2. ... Yeah, we're establishing new ground in probability theory. (1998-12-17)
It's more than 10 years old. It's either classical or incorrect. (Fall 1998)
The article "FTFY Buddhist Ethics" [1] comes to a similar conclusion about the development of West Coast Buddhism but isn't on board with it. IMHO an interesting contrarian take.
Thank you for linking to this. Years ago I chanced upon this website, and it was my first experience of reading something about Buddhism that seemed to consciously strive for clarity, for intelligibility to an interested layperson, rather than for what I'll call "easy mysticism" for its own sake.
I have this problem despite adjusting my monitor height properly.
I consulted a practitioner (in Taiwan, so I'm not exactly sure how to describe her.) She directed me to do the following: stand on tiptoe closely against a flat wall where the ceiling is higher than I can reach on tiptoe. Keep forehead against the wall. Reach upwards, keeping the part of forearms nearest the wrist against the wall. Inhale and exhale, relaxing muscles and stretching to reach further and further upwards with fingertips. Do this for at least 30-45 seconds, relax, repeat a few times daily.
I am not good at sticking to the program but it does seem to be helping
"My current laptop is an aging X1 Carbon generation 7... A few months ago a few keys of the keyboard stopped working. I decided it was time to look for a replacement."
Isn't that like deciding to replace your bike because some of the cables are rusted? Like a new set of cables, a new keyboard is a small expense compared to a whole new laptop.
Like replacing bike cables, swapping in a new Carbon X7 keyboard might be slightly challenging for an amateur. iFixit calls the keyboard replacement "moderate" in difficulty [1] taking about an hour with a new keyboard running about a hundred bucks. But it would be a simple job for a repair shop. So it seems hard to justify the expense of a whole new one rather than just the new part.
Of course, sometimes you just want a new laptop, because the bike analogy breaks down a little: unlike bikes, newer ones are inherently faster.
Generation 7. I realize you acknowledged the hardware age, but it's really the difference in my own workflows and experience.
I'm still on a Gen 8 i7 (with 40 GB RAM, to boot) T480s. I take pretty good care of my machine, so it's still in superb physical shape.
But, given today's massive webapps and video calls while having my workspace programs open, I'm in Hell. A failing keyboard would probably push me to repurpose the current machine and upgrade as well (and still replace the keyboard for kicks).
If I wasn't strapped for cash, I would have bought an AMD Framework eons ago.
Your analogy won’t hold scrutiny with a competitive cyclist: newer bikes are also faster given the same rider, even if not as meaningfully as a new CPU.
And modern bikes do make with the need for cable replacement or breakage (hydro lines and electric shifting, while more expensive to service, also require much less of it).
Life tip: Noone appreciates and there's no utility in nitpicking analogies. They're never the actual point of the message and it's incredibly rude and socially inept to lock onto a side quest like that.
idk, the OP is all about the author misunderstanding what they bought. Hence a comment about bikes not understanding bikes deserves just as much scrutiny.
My own life tip: there are plenty of good analogies, so no need to choose use an example you are not familiar with.
With this comment you completely validate izacus (shaky) judgement call: when you write "a comment about bikes not understanding bikes" you are clearly more interested in being rude than pointing out a flaw in the analogy.
We all see that OP does understand bikes in the general sense, indeed the fact you are nitpicking instead of trying to explain one of the many fundamental difference means you think that as well.
To me, it suggests that analogies aren't as useful as we'd like them to be. Either the analogy is perfect, in which case nothing is any simpler, or it's imperfect, in which case you're now distracted by the differences.
They're not totally without value but I find that it's generally better to avoid a analogies. Look for some other route to make the point.
Analogies are a simplification. The problem is not that they can’t capture the whole thing in detail. But that they just don’t stand up to any adversity (because that isn’t what they are for). They are only good for explaining things, not for arguing.
They rely on the recipient going along with the analogy and trying to make it work, not trying to find problems with it. If someone understands the concept well enough to needle the analogy, they probably have a better understanding than the analogy can provide anyway, so it is fine to give it up.
In this case it is neither used for arguing, nor for explanation really, I think, but as a bit of rhetorical flair. The analogy is to an obviously stupid thing to do, throw away your bike because of some easy to fix cabling issue.
This puts me in mind of the words of George Bernard Shaw:
‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.'
And the world, people as a mob, will try its best to punish that person for daring to be different. The nail that sticks out gets beaten.
RMS is a flawed person, a stubborn unreasonable man with questionable traits. But dismissing his life's work as "said some decent things" is just ignorant revisionist history. We can acknowledge his flaws while respecting the work he did and the overall message, which changed the world for the better.
I am usually working with historical documents, where both Otsu and adaptive thresholding are frustratingly almost but not quite good enough. My go-to approach lately is "DeepOtsu" [1]. I like that it combines the best of both the traditional and deep learning worlds: a deep neural net enhances the image such that Otsu thresholding is likely to work well.
Bikes can work great for travelers aged from, say, 13 to 70 without much luggage. Not so great for travelers outside that age range, with more luggage, or with physical disabilities. I wonder what fraction of travelers falls into the latter category.
I agree standard bikes are a poor fit for luggage. There are cargo (e)bikes that can comfortably hold large bags (e.g. https://larryvsharry.com/products/ebullitt). They may make sense at major rail stations, but the logistics of keeping them in stock at the station would be hard, and of course this doesn't solve the infrastructure or physical disabilities/age problem.
While we're on that subject, there is a special place in hell for whoever decided to put stairs with the only backup option being the smallest, slowest lift known to man in St Pancras station. Such idiocy.
reply