This sounds terribly convoluted compared to turning on mouse mode and selecting the text with your mouse. It should copy immediately after you release the button, and you should be able to paste with your standard shortcut if you set up tmux to use the clipboard of your choice.
Mouse-driven flows are always a little more intuitive and discoverable, but keyboard shortcuts are more precise and can be lightning fast once you have muscle memory.
Listed the way the parent does it seems very complicated, but if you have the sequence memorized and trained it can be executed very quickly and without moving your hands from the keyboard.
> The fact that people agree to it and are paid,” Chomsky replied, “is about as convincing as the fact that we should be in favor of sweat-shops in China where women are locked into a factory and work fifteen hours a day and the factory burns down and they all die. Yeah, they were paid and they consented, but that doesn’t make me in favor of it.
Is there a theoretical abstraction in which pornography and the pornography industry isn’t degrading and abusive to women? Maybe. But the amount of degradation and abuse in the real pornography industry is pretty good evidence that theory and practice aren’t syncing up.
As a formerly sex-positive liberal man, reading Andrea Dworkin’s “Right Wing Women” was revelatory.
The key difference between laws against sweat-shops and pornography is that we sweat-shops are defined by measurable traits that is not based on a moral value about the work being done. We do not have a law against work places in china. We don't have law against the type of industries those work places do. What the law is defines is the hours of work being done, if people are working under the threat of violence, and the wages, and the work safety standards.
We could make a work regulations that forbids any work that has the same level of health risk as in the pornography industry. We could forbid work which workers would not volunteer do unless being paid. We could make regulations that forbid industries that has the same level of human trafficking and slavery as the porn industry. We could mix and match. As long it does not use the word "sex" or "naked" or any other word which would be proxy to the moral view about pornography, it would be a regular work regulation that can be discussed as other work regulations.
If anyone has any hints on getting qutebrowser to not suck up battery and CPU on macOS Big Sur it would be much appreciated. Maybe things will smooth out in 2.0?
Some of those issues might be caused by the underlying QtWebEngine. For others, qutebrowser might be responsible (I'm mainly thinking of https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/issues/5376 which might be relevant).
In my day-to-day work, I only use Linux - so the Windows/macOS releases are pretty much "best effort" I'm afraid, until someone steps up to fix platform-specific issues there.
"A battery is a collection of Hoon expressions and the head of a core."
This is what GP is talking about. Reading through the tutorial, it made some sense. I could probably code in this language with a bit more reading and practice. But the choice of deliberately obfuscating terminology makes it read like a joke or an esoteric language (languages not meant for real use but as puzzles, challenges, maybe for code golfing).
I mean, half the time they explain these things with analogies. A gate is a function, they say it nearly every time the term comes up. So why call it a gate?
EDIT:
When I was at GA Tech (now many years ago) we had access to a set of servers, "acme" (acmex, acmey, and acmez if I recall correctly). Each semester we had a limited amount of access to computational resources on these servers, measured in "bananas". We had plenty to do things like access mail, newsgroups, maybe do basic programming assignments. But anything resource intensive or really long running ate up your bananas and you'd have to request more (no cost, it was a limit to keep people from abusing shared resources).
This was absolutely fine, and a bit humorous. "I can't run that, I don't have enough bananas." But if I were rolling out a product to universities across the country to manage access to their systems I would not use "bananas" as a term. Within the GT community it had a shared meaning, but outside it made us sound like asylum escapees (perhaps an accurate description of us). "bananas" communicates nothing to users on its own, just like "gate" and "battery" communicate nothing to anyone familiar with other programming languages.
As someone with a good amount of hoon knowledge, I'd say there are definitely some cases where new terminology does more harm than good, but in other cases simply using the name of a similar concept in other languages would hide complexities or differences that the learner will need to know eventually
I'm a non-programmer who is just skilled enough with computers to do some damage. Completely clueless about mathematical and information theory concepts, etc. Here's my measly two cents:
I've been running my own Urbit for a few years that I've connected to broader communities, and have found it to be a really exciting and fun platform. It feels like when I first found Usenet and MUDs as a teen in the 90s, except people are nicer. What I understand about its essential purpose sounds great — a decentralized identity that I own and can make communities with.
I am mostly a tech outsider, but I find it strange to see such a normally open-minded community (hackers) shut it down with such vehemence whenever it comes up
Less vehement, more resigned, I think. It isn't about the platform as an application. It's about the platform as a development platform.
The glyphs, the whimsical naming, Hoon itself. Overall, I tried and I just couldn't do it. If it isn't clear, I'm not disparaging the thing, I'm disparaging the (thing, me) tuple.
Given how aggressively they've pivoted their communications away from the esotericism, I get the impression that they're pretty cognizant of this. They seemingly have their fundamental platform somewhat pinned down, given their release of OS1. I've got my fingers crossed that as they increase accessibility on the frontend, they'll also be working to make the dev experience friendlier to those of us who didn't buy into the cultishness of Urbit early on.
> it strange to see such a normally open-minded community (hackers) shut it down with such vehemence whenever it comes up
It isn't really that strange, Urbit is the antithesis of the hacker mindset in multiple ways. Hackers value free exchange of information; Urbit is deliberately obscuratinist. Hackers tend to lean libertarian; Yarvin is an out-and-proud authoritarian and Urbit is explicitly designed around that ethos.
I gave it a go a couple of years ago, and couldn't figure out a single thing. Like, not only did I not achieve "hello world", I never managed to figure out if "hello world" is a meaningful thing you can even attempt.
Maybe it's different now, but I cannot fathom a programming novice making any kind of sense out of urbit.
Hmm. Elsewhere in this thread, centimeter was talking about "extreme arcanity" to keep out "entryist parasites". I'm not sure I can reconcile your two viewpoints. ("Welcoming after you prove that you're not an entryist parasite" is the best I can come up with, but I'm not sure it's very believable...)
I don't know who "centimeter" is and never claimed to agree with their viewpoints, so I'm not sure what the other viewpoint is that you're referring to.
The Chinese language looks extremely arcane to me, but that doesn't make it so. Quantum computing is pretty arcane-seeming too. Urbit probably seems arcane to those that know nothing about and haven't invested the time to learn. Fortunately, the docs are very good[1] and updated frequently[2]. They're also publicly available and lots of people[3] are working pretty hard to make them understandable.
Urbit is really welcoming to everyone, should they take a moment to ask about it. Here's[4] where you can find out how to get in and get set up. Here's a place where, earlier today, I offered a free planet to someone that asked[5]. And here's[6] what ended up happening.
The other viewpoint is centimeters; I had thought that I made that clear.
You say the community is welcoming. centimeter says that they're using deliberate obscurity to keep people away. You aren't responsible for centimeter's views, and don't agree with them, but they clearly are a different view on what the community is like toward outsiders.
But I should have been more clear. "Reconcile" isn't the only possibility; the other is that (at least) one of you are wrong. And I'm leaning against "reconcile" as being possible...
The title is misleading—Cell Signaling Technologies is a company. This appears to be Digizyme’s portfolio of work they have done for their client, Cell Signaling Technologies.
