palordrolap

Yeah. Right Control should be where Fn is for sure.

And as an ISO keyboard user, I need my right Shift key, so that Control has to be a Shift instead. On ISO, left Shift is small and right is large. For that and other reasons I use the right one way more than the left. And if that’s not possible for deep technical reasons, hard-wire it to the left one bypassing all of the trouble. It wouldn’t be the first time a keyboard did something like that.

… and what do you know, there’s a even little space there with no key where they could put the Fn key omitted by those changes.

Everything else I could deal with. Even the otherwise US layout. It’s been a while since I used one, but occasionally there’s a hiccup and I’ll reach for double quote or at-sign in the opposite places, so that muscle memory is still there, maybe waiting for mangling into typing on something like this.

As it stands, it doesn’t look like there is one. It appears to be a recreational mathematical toy for the creator to learn things more than it is for others to play with. It’s kind of neat nonetheless.

I think I might have made different choices for the reversal calculations, but I haven’t really thought about how I’d implement those choices, nor about nigh-insurmountable edge cases, and I’m only vaguely thinking about the “c = a OP b” case, not anything more extreme. The creator may have wanted to make the same choices but found themselves forced down a different path.

Verbatim from the creator: “it is imperfect”.

I seem to remember a story about how something - a neural net, or an early reinforced learning experiment - ended up accidentally exploiting a physics bug in a chip to achieve a result that should have gone through the chip’s expected circuitry instead.

It was specific to that one particular chip, and swapping it out for another supposedly identical chip caused the calculation, or simulation, or whatever that was running on the larger system, to fail.

That is, it wasn’t supposed to be exploiting physics glitches but that’s what happened.

… I think I found it. It happened all the way back in the 1990s if this story is to be believed: https://www.damninteresting.com/on-the-origin-of-circuits/

In before Microsoft break out the FUD tactics and a year or two of cheap licenses.

Sigh. At this rate I can see a day where I end up switching to WebKitGTK’s MiniBrowser as my main rather than having it as a “secret” backup.

in America

And you can almost cross out “with monopolies” too because there’s a lot of tacit price-fixing in industries where there is competition.

Well, no, it wouldn’t. The bods that make these decisions still live like it’s 1950 and dream of an authoritarian future of masters and slaves.

What good is The Google or The AI when you’re sipping champagne up an ivory tower or out on the ocean being waited on hand and foot on a gleaming yacht?

So, there was this TV experiment where they served soup to a well-known scientist*, but, with his agreement, they stirred it first with an unused - and I stress unused - toilet brush.

He couldn’t bring himself to eat it.

Metaphorically speaking, our world is full of amazing things but they’re all stirred by clean toilet brushes. Sometimes, it’s worse than that and they’re used.

Do not want.

* Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, he was later cancelled for being old and out of touch on women’s issues among other things, which is kind of an example of this same trope when you think about it. His opinions and reactions on soup and food disgust aren’t linked to any of that but you might be tempted to ignore the result because of it.

But then, that puts him in the same category as Louis CK and that’s what I’m responding to. Food for thought.

Fun fact: “Aluminium” is the international / official spelling. But where Brits have to take the L, or rather the F, is with “Sulphur”, because the international / official spelling of that is “Sulfur”. The others aren’t wrong, but they’re not the standard.

Anyway, I wonder if the international spelling has anything to do with it. Or maybe it just follows better from Chromium.

Looks like DDR6 is due in 2027, so DDR5 prices will start to fall in 2-3 years when all the AI bros move over to DDR6 instead.

It might be sooner, but that would mean the AI bubble popped.

Meanwhile, here I am on a PC that’s less than two years old with DDR4 in it. Works fine for my needs.

On the one hand, the PDF editing feature could be useful, but on the other, it’s a sign of yet more feature creep and I don’t know whether I’m justified in feeling concerned about it.

Oh! This must be the guy who was called out on that exact thing and it gave him serious pause before he was able to jump-start the bullsh-tting part of his brain.

In before someone wants to reboot a server and the hypervisor is unresponsive.

There’s an ancient rule along the lines of “If a new invention can be used for sexual purposes, then it will be used for sexual purposes.”

Internet Rules 34 and 35 are descendents of this rule.

People who don’t know are due a rude awakening.

Are you sure? They’re both unvoiced th, which is what thorn is for if you intend to distinguish.

I can’t tell whether Old English used eth for those words early on - though the unvoiced quality in modern English makes that seem unlikely. Did we also devoice them? Eth died out fairly quickly in favour of thorn in all cases, voiced or not. Possibly because its name is “eþ” not “eð”. It doesn’t even use itself. (Though, ironically, ‘w’ also doesn’t and it replaced ƿynn, which does.)

There was another commenter - actually might have been the same guy, I’m not all that sure - who did use eth for voiced instances, to similar controversial effect in comment sections.

We have a diacritic in English text already. Rather than above or below, it goes to the right of the letter it modifies and looks an awful lot like a letter h.

And if you don’t quite buy that, remember that a lot of diacritics started life as letters that were eventually moved above a preceding letter and then simplified. The tilde on ñ was an n itself; the ring on å was another a; and in at least some cases the umlaut was an e.

Modifying-h may only be stuck where it is because technology did away with the need for economical scribes before they had a chance to start messing with it.

Hahaha, that’s not dystopian at all, hahahaha.

Well that’s good to know at least. Still not sure I would have opted for that name, but then, these are clearly the games of sharper minds than mine.

That name puts me in mind of things like “Stormfront” and “National Front”, if not also things like 4chan / 8kun.

…but that might be the point?? If so, I can’t tell if it’s a joke or serious. Disturbing.

You are […] implying that people of (generally) Asian religions need to change their iconography

That is not and was not my intent, and I was less sure of yours until just now. (This may be reading (in)comprehension on my part, to which I’ll be happy to admit fault.)

So, let me make sure I’m understanding you. Are you saying that you think that any and all gains from bigoted or unethical sources should be thrown away and that we should have nothing to do with them?

I understand why people would be extremely uncomfortable with some of these and I even think that where we can, we should avoid them, but we can’t get rid of everything.

If we must insist on everything then the whole of humanity needs to get in the sea because we’re all products of humanity’s inhumanity if you go back far enough. In many cases, it’s not that far.

If we say “nothing” then we give way to terrible people and let them have free reign.

So tell me. Where is the line? I still think that’s a fairly difficult question, even if you don’t.