froogie
So for example rather than having to use Wikipedia's or Stack Overflow's search bar to find something, it's just Ctrl+t and "!w <term>" or "!gi <term>".
On Windows this is quite 50-50 -- you're likely holding the mouse anyway. On Unix machines with more keyboard-oriented UI, with say a tiling WM, things like bangs at browser address bar are a godsent. Of course it is nice on mobile too -- direct queries rather than hoppping around using clumsy touchscreen.
There are likely browser extensions for this though, but none of them set DDG as their default search engine -- so just doing that manually also gives you the bangs so in my book DDG wins here ;)
Anyone feeling honest resonance with your words should read the book. I can't put it in other words.
Suppose they did this. Now, that the vulnerabilities are public, Intel takes the fall. Oopsie, huh?
Had we not had alcohol in the first place, we'd likely have other things a-ok'd, and alcohol would be treated by its merits compared to other recreational substances. By all reason it would be illegal far before many other substances.
Personally I am conflicted: on one hand we can see that the more we let people to have certain drugs, the less functional they are as human beings. On the other hand, if above point was really important, it would make sense to try to let people have the least harmful of these substances, so that, on average, the damage caused by their consumption is lower.
A growing part of me thinks that drug policies aren't as much about preventing harms as it seems to be about "playing games". We could do better all around the world. But things move slowly, so slowly. Stigmas hold, people fall to the soothing lull of prejudice and simplistic arguments.
This is all just business as usual.
But sure, what you describe has a name, RAS syndrome.
Now lots of it is stationary thinking, whereas in the past practically all of it has been mobile gathering, hunting and building (if not just preparing for, and waging a war). Those who can't partake in those activities do other beneficial things. Refine resources, raise and teach children etc.
Is it not so that we humans can sustain better productivity over time in physical work than we can in mental work? It seems to be a fact, that physical activities stimulate mental ones. When you walk outdoors, your mind is more creative than when you sit still inside a building. Is it because of brain getting more oxygen? Is it because of psychological processes inside our brain react to different environments differently? Probably both, and then some.
I think there is more to things like ecopsychology[1] we tend to overlook. And understandably so -- from a profit-seeking perspective plants and animals are perhaps the last thing to seek help from to productivity problems within society, or a company.
It is all too easy to also dismiss it as mere idealistic hippery. I think if we were taught to explore this angle, some things we like to live in denial of would be laughably obvious to us.
You can think of religions as an example, and as an attempt to solve these problems, with all the problems that entails, of course.
What makes you convinced, if not the infinity of time, that conflict is inevitable? To me it is clear that as species due to our cultural development and understanding (which our societies represent) has increased dramatically over the last few thousand years. Similarly, our conception of our own social group (the "us") has grown dramatically, to the point that we today may identify ourselves as parts of multiple, independent social groups. Unlike not long ago, these groups need not be local, they can span countries or continents.
Because technological development leads to globalization of the species, our social groups start covering the whole planet.
If this development continues, is it not inevitable that we will at some point get de facto global entity which governs us i.e. world government? It would be the natural next step.
What would be the responsible social action to deal with global issues like global warming and to return to sustainable resource use?
We can not, as species, decentralize our decision making to independent self-interested groups i.e. nations much longer. Our consumption of resources is neither sustainable nor responsible. What wisdom is it to leave a barren earth for our children to inherit?
The history of our species is full of that scenario happening. In the grand scheme of things every war fought ever is a variation of that.
Not all of us are ideal, and most of us act in chaotic and irrational ways. Usually we don't see it or care much about it, unless we see it in others and we think its something to look down to.
Among us there are individuals who are suspectible to thoughts and ideas, which if presnted correctly, can alter and sway their values, identity, beliefs and behavior.
How do we defend a social group, which inherently has individuals as described above in them, from a info-social attack against our group cohesion? Because education can never be a perfect solution due to human factors. We are all different and respond differently to different ideas and content presented to us. Furthermore, some of us are naive and gullible by their nature, while others are careful and reserved, even paranoid.
How do you defend against an adversary which optimally targets crafted (often truthless) messages at receptive subgroups of different personalities, backgrounds etc.?
Think of social networks, content in apps, ads, blogs, HN/reddit/etc comments, ....
If you haven't smoked from dawn till dusk day in day out, you can't really say people can achieve responsibility with it.
What I am saying is not to disagree, but to state that if you're a person who ends up smoking 12-16 times a day, there isn't much willpower left to handle anything but immediate responsibilities.
You may not use much, and you may not notice how your pot use affects you. But of you ever end up using more regularly, more pot per unit of time, do not fool yourself and believe it doesn't have its adverse effects.
But if you do really think that pot doesn't really impede your motivation, drive, social life etc., then show yourself. Quit for a while, if you can. If you've been deep enough into the hole, coming out will feel like a constant mental overdrive. I've heard it feels kind of like similar bliss people say they might get from meditation, or if you were under very mild psychedelics. Ideas, people, arts, everything feel more innately interesting. As if depression lifts, and the whole experience of being feels more vibrant or vivid. And slowly but surely it all fades away, if you go back to regular smoking.
Yeah, anecdotes from some other life.
How else do you solve the problem of unwanted ideas spreading around? Serious question, as this is a constant challenge for every social group anywhere.
The same company behind this patent of course.
Its saddening. Like wtf now.
Amazing what people can pull off.
To me it seems as if sizable chunk of people believe in nonsense, and the nonsensical beliefs and actions based on such beliefs are detrimental not only to the people holding such beliefs, but every single living entity on this planet, future generations included.
How is that acceptable? With what right do the people holding these beliefs keep acting the way they do?
It is the reaponsibility of the rest of us to stop this madness as soon as possible. It is the responsibility we as species hold to our ancestors and future generations.
If it is all in vain for you. Fine. But please do consider other living organisms as as important as you, for you are one of us. We are in this together.
But what if one used optimizations like lookup tables and trigonometric approximations instead? Could they end up costing less cycles than three rands? Maybe not LUTs, maybe other trickery someone knows of?
And what about the cost of those three rands? Could one use a fast xorshift with good enough results here? Does one even need thee random vectors? Maybe two + modulo trickery will do?
These days Russians largely run the American conspiracy theorist scene, including people like Alex Jones and networks of similar influencers and their affiliates. One might word this in milder terms as American conspiracy theorist scene being in bed with Russia (or rather, has been infiltrated by Russian operatives long time ago). Its all the same however, it works to weaken US' presence, role and status from within. And these people call themselves patriots? Talk about pinnacle of absurdity, considering the importance of true patriotism during times like these.