Switched to Typst and love it. I’d say I use LibreOffice much less because of Typst.

Same. LibreOffice and Latex

To be fair, there’s a lot of people arguing for D&D to be about Dungeons and Dragons. That implies that lots of people play it without neither Dungeons nor Dragons.

I would guess cities with declining populations would make it high up in the list.

I think there’s unavoidable costs to doing laundry.

But I try to minimize them by doing stuff like rolling my t-shirts instead of folding them.

Also, you mentioned UX design. Well, I do a bit of Lean, if you want to call it that. In particular, I minimize switching costs by focusing on one type of item at a time. For example, first I get all the boxers out of the pile of washed clothes. Then I check they’re not inside out. Then I roll them. And then I place them where they have to go.

I adopt a production line mindset. And it can become a game. How fast can I do it this time?

Good try, Bruno.

For those who have asked, I’m using my browser, and I’m using normal vanilla Lemmy.

I see you’re trying to solve social ills through these seven rules. I read your comments, and I noticed something that’s worth talking about. It might bring some clarity to our words.

I see your idea of freedom, and it very much sounds like negative freedom. This kind of freedom is not empirical or scientific. It is a-priori. In other words, you close your eyes and assume everyone is equally free.

The problem with this stance is that it is not empirical or scientific. A truly empirical ad scientific view of freedom is positive freedom. In it, your freedoms exist to the extent that you’re capable to be free.

Can’t talk? You’re less free than someone who can talk. Can’t learn? You’re less free than someone who can learn. Can’t bribe politicians? You’re less free than someone who can.

Positive freedom is also known as human development. And a society that takes human development seriously is a society that invests in their people.

I personally think adopting a pragmatic view of human development is better than assuming good rules will save us.

Another issue I noticed is that common sense is not the same everywhere. Some people are convinced they’re in the right while someone else thinks they’re in the wrong. That is why I prefer the clarity that scientific positive freedom or human development brings. It brings clarity. It’s less ambiguous.

Also, your rules sound a hell of a lot like one of the secular satanist groups. I wouldn’t be surprised if they inspired yours! I actually think they did.

Anyway, have a good one!

Identity is strange other times

This is me working late. Checklists become my only hope. That and breaking down the tasks into absurdly smaller tasks.

Mastodon adding email newsletters for people who don’t have accounts is just amazing. This is what good software should be like. This is what social media should be about. This is the way to connect people with people.

This is the opposite of building walls so that your customers can’t escape. This is the opposite of advertisers enshittifying your experience. This is the opposite of shady algorithms deciding how you should experience the world.

Man, I love the Fediverse. And it just keeps getting better.

Based on what you said, here are my reactions. Maybe they’re informative (or maybe not!):

• Loci/skills: this adds cognitive load compared to having minimal stats, like in Cairn. It’s also more cognitive load than something like Shadowdark’s no skills (since there are no skill checks).
• More options for combat and better combat than 5e: When I hear this I think this might mean crunchy combat. And that means more cognitive load.

I want to clarify that having complicated systems is not negative by itself. Cognitive load is relative to what people learn. If players are willing to learn a system well, then complicated games could be exactly what they want to play.

But I’ve had new players think Nimble is too complicated, when it seems trivial to me. That is why I favor systems that are even simpler than Nimble: Knave 2e, Cairn, Shadowdark…

What kinds of behaviors do you want to reinforce? What do you want less of? Is it possible to get more of the good stuff and less of the bad stuff in your current context?

If yes, try it.

If no, I think this is a matter of acceptance. It’s really unfortunate.

If it is real, I suppose this can be a way of establishing an in-group, similar to the charts that used to exist in Microsoft to know who was high up in the hierarchy.

The seating chart could also be a way of having Trump try to rub on some of the ethos that AI companies supposedly have.

So maybe it’s about

• companies showing how close they are to political power and
• Trump showing how close he is to some kind of intelligence (artificial, in this case).

That’s a dope wood carving of a turtle

Taken offline? As in having an offline backup?

You and I both want people to learn. You and I both see AI as an obstacle to learning. We just see things slightly differently.

LLMs are bad for education because they oversimplify.

I actually think this is not the main reason AI is awful for learning. The gravest problem, in my opinion, is the illusion of competence or the illusion of learning that it brings. This phenomenon is very well documented in the learning literature, well before LLMs were a thing. But LLMs amplify it.

Just take a look at PISA results. Students do poorly because they use LLMs and they never properly understood the content.

However, the education literature also paints a clear picture: after someone learns the basics, they’re ready for other kinds of activities. In fact, if someone already understood thing and yet they still go over the same thing over and over, they stop learning. This is called the expertise reversal effect. So the alternative is to move on to other stuff.

I’m not arguing for having AI in the classroom. I’m just thinking of the implications of a well-researched theory: cognitive load theory. From that point of view, students that already learned the basics can then look at LLM slop and see its deficiencies. They can now plan an activity with an LLM and see how it nails some stuff and falls apart in other stuff. In that case, and only in that case, LLMs can improve learning in the same way that looking at your friend’s essays can improve yours.

But, again, I’m not arguing for AI in the classroom. I think the world would be better off with a blanket AI ban in education. I think this is similar to how nicotine actually has some positive effects, but the bad outweighs the good by so much that it’s much better to ban it.

Having a verbose wiki that is incomprehensible to most people is good because it filters out people who don’t understand

Maybe.

I guess here I ask: what’s the goal? What do we want more of? What do we want less of?

If our only policy is “out wiki should be incomprehensible to most*”, I’m not sure we’ll have more people in the world who understand the wiki. If, instead, we think “our wiki should be as accessible as possible”, then we may find ways of teaching people.

• Edit: better characterize JettuhGlowie’s stance

To make long-term storage possible.

To do work now to save time later.

Finally someone gets how to flatter me

PISA results agree with you