I ran out of crtcs, but I wanted another monitor. I widened a virtual display, and drew the left portion of it on one monitor, like regular. Then I had a crown job that would copy chunks of it into the frame buffer of a USB to DVI-d adapter. It could do 5 fps redrawing the whole screen, but I chose things to put there where it wouldn’t matter too much. The only painful thing was arranging the windows on that monitor, with the mouse updating very infrequently, and routinely being drawn 2 or more places in the frame buffer.

Have you tried turning them off, then turning them on again?

I think we’re still headed up the peak of inflated expectations. Quantum computing may be better at a category of problems that do a significant amount of math on a small amount of data. Traditional computing is likely to stay better at anything that requires a large amount of input data, or a large amount of output data, or only uses a small amount of math to transform the inputs to the outputs.

Anything you do with SQL, spreadsheets, images, music and video, and basically anything involved in rendering is pretty much untouchable. On the other hand, a limited number of use cases (cryptography, cryptocurrencies, maybe even AI/ML) might be much cheaper and fasrer with a quantum computer. There are possible military applications, so countries with big militaries are spending until they know whether that’s a weakness or not. If it turns out they can’t do any of the things that looked possible from the expectation peak, the whole industry will fizzle.

As for my opinion, comparing QC to early silicon computers is very misleading, because early computers improved by becoming way smaller. QC is far closer to the minimum possible size already, so there won’t be a comparable, “then grow the circuit size by a factor of ten million” step. I think they probably can’t do anything world shaking.

You can buy high (97-99) CRI LEDs for things like the film industry, where it really does matter. They are very expensive, but can pay for themselves with longer service life, and lower power draw for long term installations.

The CRI on regular LED bulbs was climbing for a long time, but it seems as though 90ish is “good enough” most of the time.

You can just issue new certificates one per year, and otherwise keep your personal root CA encrypted. If someone is into your system to the point they can get the key as you use it, there are bigger things to worry about than them impersonating your own services to you.

A lot of businesses use the last 4 digits separately for some purposes, which means that even if it’s salted, you are only getting 110,000 total options, which is trivial to run through.

Modern operating systems have made it take very little knowledge to connect to WiFi and browse the internet. If you want to use your computer for more than that, it can still take a longer learning process. I download 3D models for printing, and wanted an image for each model so I could find things more easily. In Linux, I can make such images with only about a hundred characters in the terminal. In Windows, I would either need to learn powershell, or make an image from each file by hand.

The way I understand “learning Linux” these days is reimagining what a computer can do for you to include the rich powers of open source software, so that when you have a problem that computers are very good at, you recognize that there’s an obvious solution on Linux that Windows doesn’t have.

Don’t joke about this, the college professors will hear you.

He only believes in the first 22 words of the first amendment. If you want to speak about what he has done, or (far worse) gather with others that share your beliefs to speak extra loud… straight to jail.

In 2003 (or thereabouts) I was a paying user of an Apple music product. They deliberately broke the way that I used their product, then once someone found a workaround, they broke that, too.

I tried to be their customer, and they kicked me out for not using Windows or MacOS. Now I’m emotionally invested in not giving them any money, ever.

I’d describe it as sort of 3 layers. The first is practical/everyday things, which are mostly much nicer than being alone, but require attentiveness and communication (learn what your SO doesn’t like doing, and do it. Learn what things are work together projects, and what things are stay out of my way type things for each of you, probably other aspects too) - but once you know how to take care of each other, almost everything is less work, takes less time, and costs less money. Cooking, laundry, cleaning, gardening, repairing things, painting the house are all improved. Decorating and having guests over are harder, at least for me. You have to not fall into the trap of taking the things they do for granted, even when those things are routine.

The second layer I’d describe is lust/romance, which is sort of easier, except that you must avoid letting things coast too long. You have to dedicate time and effort to discovering new things about each other, and new things you enjoy together. You should still be dating, no matter how long it’s been, and ideally you should both be planning things most of the time. In my relationship, this is usually 1-2 things per month, each.

The final layer is the emotional/support layer. Almost any time, my wife can seek comfort and support from me in a variety of ways for all kinds of things, and I get the same from her. All the big problems in life are easier when you can share them, so here the benefits are huge. This is the only thing I got basically none of from having roommates or a best friend, or dating. For my situation, there’s basically no downside to this.

This and systemctl cat $unit are my favorites.

The problem when photon containment breaks like this is that we can never be 100% sure which photons were SUPPOSED to be there, and which ones leaked out. We’ll need a dedicated team of particle physicists with very small tweazers to have any hope of sorting out this mess.

What we have done is invented massive, automatic, no holds barred pattern recognition machines. LLMs use detected patterns in text to respond to questions. Image recognition is pattern recognition, with some of those patterns named things (like “cat”, or “book”). Image generation is a little different, but basically just flips the image recognition on its head, and edits images to look more like the patterns that it was taught to recognize.

This can all do some cool stuff. There are some very helpful outcomes. It’s also (automatically, ruthlessly, and unknowingly) internalizing biases, preferences, attitudes and behaviors from the billion plus humans on the internet, and perpetuating them in all sorts of ways, some of which we don’t even know to look for.

This makes its potential applications in medicine rather terrifying. Do thousands of doctors all think women are lying about their symptoms? Well, now your AI does too. Do thousands of doctors suggest more expensive treatments for some groups, and less expensive for others? AI can find that pattern.

This is also true in law (I know there’s supposed to be no systemic bias in our court systems, but AI can find those patterns, too), engineering (any guesses how human engineers change their safety practices based on the area a bridge or dam will be installed in? AI will find out for us), etc, etc.

The thing that makes AI bad for some use cases is that it never knows which patterns it is supposed to find, and which ones it isn’t supposed to find. Until we have better tools to tell it not to notice some of these things, and to scrub away a lot of the randomness that’s left behind inside popular models, there’s severe constraints on what it should be doing.

Until academics can wrap their heads around other people having different life experience, morals, values, and preferences, they’ll continue talking right past this group. “You’re very insulted, I checked by not talking to any of you.” isn’t going to convince anyone, ever.

Yeah, but then you have to limit your fashion selection! Imagine restricting yourself to wearing a hat over some silly fear of death.

“You wouldn’t put on a tricorn hat, would you?”

I actually would, if I could find a nice one…

“…and leave your job to sail the seas?”

… That’s an option? I didn’t even consider-

“And you certainly wouldn’t drink rum, and fire cannons, and carry a saber and tell silly parrot related puns.”

buys a tricorn hat

I’m an extremely wealthy arabic numeral, and all my wealth is tied up in high quality French made cookware. If you pay shipping, I’ll deliver a truckload of cookware to your commercial warehouse facility, and you can keep one pallet as payment.

I accept Steam gift cards, Bitcoins, and pork belly futures.

My great uncle said he hoped for a quiet death.

If you can prompt it, “Write a book about Harry Potter” and get a book about a boy wizard back, that’s almost certainly legally wrong. If you prompt it with 90% of an article, and it writes a pretty similar final 10%… not so much. Until full conversations are available, I don’t really trust either of these parties, especially in the context of a lawsuit.