queerlilhayseed

I want to give Obsidian a real try. I have seen it around but never used it, because it seems really complicated to operate and I haven't felt like I have the brainpower to really get my head around it, but it looks interesting. Do you use the concept graph and all the other stuff or do you use it more as a plain old editor?

the realpolitik is in Corrections

IME:

I like using commit messages as a a little built-in editor's log; I'm hopeful that in time I'll be able to review the history on a particular poem and see something interesting about the types of edits or editorial choices I make over time. I have a really hard time writing good commit messages for poetry as opposed to code, a lot of the times it's "changed word choice in XXX" or something like that but I want to improve on that. Not really sure what a "good" poetry commit message is but I figure I'll know it when I see it. Or maybe I'll just see a natural trend as my writing matures. But now that the poems are in git, git is part of the medium and the commits are part of the art, and I want to be thoughtful about them. I've always wanted to see the commit history for novels I've read and, if I ever publish my own work (and if I'm brave enough) I want to publish my git repo alongside the finished work.

I'm beginning to suspect Stamets isn't even a real doctor.

Do you use the LibreOffice GUI to edit the documents? if so can you diff in the editor or do you use something else? LO feels heavy for what I'm doing but if it has an easy path to diff the current text with the current commit and/or review the document's git history... that would be cool.

I have yet to ascend to the plane of full-time CLI editor use, at least for writing natural language I'm still hooked on the GUI for two reasons: one, I'm still faster at using the mouse to seek to where I want to start an edit, and two, I like visually diffing the current section of whatever I'm editing with previous versions. The former I know I could be faster if I practiced at it because I've seen people blaze through edits in vim, the latter I'm not sure how I would accomplish in vim.

That's fair. I'm generally in favor of automating cars given how horrifically bad humans are at operating them, I just don't trust the free market to decide how low the odds need to be before the button can be put on the market.

Concerning that researchers are giving their subjects full-strength memes like this and telling them they're placebos. Hard to believe an IRB cleared this post.

Someone offers you a button. If you push it, you get a driverless taxi ride for $20 but there's a small chance that a random person in your city dies. Do you push the button?

I haven't used Sublime in years, might give it another go. my source is all .md files even though hardly any of them have any markdown formatting besides the occasional bulleted list, but I like having the option to do some light formatting if I want. I think what I'll most likely do is find (or in the most dire case, make) plugins for whatever editor I land on to make writing easier. The problem I tend to face is that most editors have too many features and options and they are built for a slightly different purpose (writing code vs writing prose) which makes them just different enough to be irritating.

If each over-universe is capable of simulating multiple under-universes, I would think that being toward the fringe is way more likely than being toward the root. Maybe we're in one of the younger universes where life hasn't evolved to the point where it's simulating universes complex enough to generate intelligent life for a hobby. Or maybe others in this universe have and Earth is just a backwater.

I don't think it's as simple as the teapot. We can already simulate tiny "universes" with computers that have internally consistent rules, and there's no reason to think those simulations couldn't get more sophisticated as we harness more computing power, which I think puts an interesting lens on the "why are we here?" question. I don't think there's evidence to believe that we are in a simulation, but I think there are reasons why it's an interesting question to wrestle with that "What about a giant floating teapot?" doesn't share.