Übercomplicated

For a long time I used a super customized zsh setup. It was, unfortunately, crazy slow and regularly broke on updates. It had precisely all the features and behavior I wanted though. Like you say, zsh is very customizable.

Then I switched to tiling window managers and with that to the alacritty terminal. This made me value start up times and performance, as I was constantly opening and closing terminals. So I spent a ridiculous amount of time optimizing my zsh config to be as fast as possible. This is also what I used for a long time before correcting my ways.

When that device, my work laptop, failed, I had to set up my desktop for work. This involved setting up zsh, which I quickly realized was a lot of work. So, on a whim, I installed fish.

Oh my god. Not only did fish have nearly all the features I wanted out of the box, but it was easy to add plugins (customizations) in a performant way. Fish even had default behavior I didn’t know I needed. And most importantly: it was crazy fast!

Since then I have never left fish. It is so much better than anything I had imagined. At this point I use way more default features as well, so I pretty much only add the tide prompt and zoxide. I also have a functions and abbreviations folder which is essentially my zsh alias collection.

The crazy part is really how much faster it is though. I really, really love it. And now they’re rewriting it in Rust as well!

Ah, a fellow Melinda’s enjoyer! I love they’re Ghost Pepper sauce in particular (though it’s fairly mild for a Ghost Pepper sauce). My only complaint with Melinda’s, is that they consistently use too much carrot in their sauces. But otherwise they’re really great!

Edit: my bad, seems like I misunderstood. PopOS used/is still using GNOME and has a Auto-Tiling plugin that behaves like i3wm (?). I guess this is what OP is talking about!

Not entirely sure what you mean. PopOS, developed by System76, uses the Cosmic DE, which is itself also developed by System76.

River is a dynamic tiling WM which is known for it’s customizability among Wayland WMs, as it doesn’t distinguish itself with it’s “layout generator” (though it does come with a very basic one), but instead let’s the user write their own or use an existing, third-party one. This way you can achieve essentially any dynamic tiling behavior with River.

How does PopOS use a system like that? Or do you mean that Cosmic is DWM-style, i.e., dynamic and with tags?

I do agree that River is wonderful though!

I’ve had good experiences with Acer with previous laptops, so that was probably a good choice. Best of luck to your kid!

I’m really happy with my ASUS Zenbook 14 (16GB memory, 512GB SSD, Intel Core Ultra 7 255H), which I got for $700, in case you’re still looking for a recommendation. Absolutely worth it IMO, though I’m running Linux, so the Copilot key is mapped to the compose key.

Out of curiosity, could you link a source vis-a-vis AI’s water consumption?

On that note also:

• Alacritty: a minimalist Wayland GPU-accelerated terminal. Claims to be the fast currently available terminal. Also the coolest name ever. This is what I personally use, in combination with tmux.
• Kitty: a more feature rich alternative, also Wayland, GPU-accelerated, and on par with alacritty for speed. Actually starts up a little faster but uses up more resources and sacrifices in other performance metrics (in my experience).
• Foot: another minimalist Wayland alternative, but this time CPU driven. Despite this, the performance is still on par with the others. I think this is especially good for laptops and such that run on integrated graphics.

I should say I’m pretty biased because I’ve been using vim since highschool, but the post seems a little crazy. I’m almost wondering it it’s parody…

His palpable hatred towards vim in particular seems irrational though. Felt like much ado about nothing to me. I might be missing something though?

I think it’s pretty much on par with Spotify. Classical recordings take a hit, not in availability, but simply because it’s more difficult to search for them. There’s also some very, very obscure music I did lose. But where talking like my second cousin once removed released something with ~2 monthly listeners level obscure.

Apart from that, depending on your experience the audio quality is perceivably better than Spotify and Tidal Connect works flawlessly. I’m on a family plan, and everyone seems to be happy. I quite like the algorithm as well, almost more than the Spotify one.

Admittedly, I’ve had great experiences with Enterprise in the US. It blows my mind how expensive it is, but I’ve never had any issues like what OP posted.

What do you mean? The article just points out that the show’s demographic may somewhat overlap with, for example, Rogan’s demographic:

The show’s core demographic—predominantly men aged 18 to 49—overlaps meaningfully with the audiences of figures like Joe Rogan and, to a lesser extent, Andrew Tate.

They are not saying that Rogan listeners also watch South Park, or that South Park is republican. The article is just pointing out that this demographic of men aged between 18 and 49 overlaps with “Joe Rogan[’s] and, to a lesser extent, Andrew Tate[’s demographic].”

They even frame this as a potential advantage, saying that

South Park holds a rare cultural position in that it can potentially speak directly to groups adjacent to the MAGA movement without preaching, pandering, or being immediately dismissed [emphasis added].

I don’t know about you, but it didn’t feel like it was calling South Park fans like us Joe Rogan listeners. It felt more like the article was pointing out that some, maybe even a majority, of fans could also be Rogan fans, which would make the audiences that South Park reaches with this anti-Trump episode especially influential.

Idk; I certainly didn’t feel offended or anything like that, but I might be misunderstanding you here.

Now this I want to know!

*is a skinny marathon runner*

I am so fucking angry. Fuck Alabama.

Deutsch ≠ English

Schau mal nach, in welcher Sprache die Wikiseite ist…

Yay, a fellow neurodivergent person. And yet both of us are still human. FYI, referring to yourself as non-human (indirectly) alienates you (a very fitting word here) from everyone reading your comment. Saying “[y]ou people are seriously weird” does as well. You had no way of knowing that I am not autistic. You were lucky; I am in the 99th percentile of dyslexics and not autistic at all (to my knowledge, though the conditions rarely come together). But that is a presumption you made nevertheless.

I’m saying this because you have explicitly mentioned being autistic, and I have many a autistic friend who struggles to read social stuff: alienating yourself like that makes it seem like you think you are better than everyone else (which you may; I don’t know), which in turn makes you seem extremely arrogant. Keep in mind that you are only talking to people here through the lens of social media. You do not actually know any of us, and it is dangerous to judge people you do not know. Diplomacy in cases like this calls for decorum and decency: presume the best about people. Your comments make it seem as if this is not what you are doing.

Now that I know you are autistic, I see your comments in a different light. I will presume that you are not a spoiled rich person — which you very much seemed like due to the aforementioned reasons. But, presuming that you are not a sociopath, please keep in mind that other people around you are different and care about different things than you (maybe in part, though not necessarily, due to not being autistic). That doesn’t mean that they are invalid or should feel bad about having different priorities. Please respect that, and don’t fall into the “no one else understands” bubble, which I know all too well. (I, like probably you as well, did not have a good time in high school. Or really any school.) That bubble inevitably makes other people hate you and can thus also make your life rather unpleasant.

This may be unwelcome advice, but I urge you to think about how to discuss topics like this diplomatically, without offending or being overly harsh to people. You have made a few enemies with your comments (just look at the downvotes). That can be a burden.

No, actually I’m not. I have a nice 2.0 system as well for listening to music. The 5.1.4 system is in my living room with my TV. The 2.0 system is in my bedroom where I can chill out on my bed while listening. I also have a nice set of headphones with a separate DAC for listening to music.

Interesting. See, I don’t want to spend a few thousand on good bookshelf or tower speakers and then spend a few thousand again on a surround system. Especially when a surround system has no real benefit over good stereo speakers (as I mention in a different comment). I would rather either save the money or spend that money on a better stereo system. But you seem to have no issues with spending large amounts of money on several different audio systems. The thing is, most people do. Most people would — if they are going to spend quite a bit of money on speakers in the first place — rather spend that money on one set of speakers. Not several. And it so happens to be that stereo speakers are generally quite a bit more flexible and quite a bit better value than surround systems. But you do you.

<satire>

Headphones also work with binaural recordings, and thus will give you the best possible sound stage and 3D audio, far superior to any multichannel speaker system. It will also give you a more accurate frequency response, and be closer to “what the artist intended.” So you should probably switch to that. I can recommend the Sennheiser HD 800S for sound stage, since that is something you seem to care particularly much about.

I would recommend you get a treated room, though, if you’re taking audio seriously. Or really just a whole new building, with sound insulation in the walls; that’s the only good way to do it. Property is quite cheap nowadays, and you don’t need to get nice land anyway. Building costs aren’t too bad either. Get a farm somewhere out in the country, rebuild with proper insulation — maybe even add an anechoic chamber for good measure.

And you’ll need a Class A amp, a discrete multibit DAC for proper dynamic range, a good DDC to avoid jitter, a better streamer since your TV audio is probably crap… and have you taken measurements of your room’s reflections to ensure that spatialization and crosstalk aren’t issues? Have you checked for signal jitter for all of your system clocks? Are you using I²S for audio transmissions? Otherwise, you aren’t getting proper spatialization and experiencing the movie properly. And you’ll want silver speaker cables too, to avoid distortion and noise. Otherwise you just aren’t getting the real experience. Truly a disrespect to the artist. Why would you even bother watching a movie or listening without silver speaker cables and I²S data transmission.

</satire>

In all seriousness, I frankly think that what you are saying is a little pretentious. Actually very pretentious. You are, in effect, gatekeeping movies and the enjoyment of said movies. One doesn’t need the perfect setup to still enjoy something; though, judging by your previous comments, you do, which I don’t envy. I’m an audiophile and have spent more money on headphones, amps, DDCs, DACs, room treatment, etc. than I am willing to admit.

I did not, however, grow up with money and I don’t have a particularly high-paying job right now either. I have just been willing to give up a lot in life in favor of audio quality. HiFi brings me joy. Somewhere inside of my heart, I feel similarly to you about audio for music. When someone listens to a album I particularly love on a crappy car system or airpods, or — god forbid — JBL headphones (my arch enemy), it hurts me a little on the inside. But I also understand that not everyone is willing to spend as much money on HiFi as I do (I spend more on HiFi than on cycling, which is a crazy expensive hobby). And I think that they should still be able to enjoy what they choose to listen to on whatever it is that they were able to afford (or where tricked into buying by marketing staff and sales).

I think that is analogues to what you describe with movies. I think that people should be allowed to still enjoy what they watch on whatever they were able to afford. And I frankly think it is poor-shaming and discriminatory for people like you to insist that what ordinary people are doing is invalid. I still recommend music to my friends and family, despite knowing that they are listening to it on $20 earbuds and can’t hear anything below 150 Hz.

(I am actually currently traveling and only have $20 IEMs I bought out of curiosity with me. They really, really suck. But… somehow — and I really don’t know how this is possible — I am still enjoying my music library. Inexplicable… I guess, give me the choice to never listen to music again or only listen on crappy IEMs, and I would pick the IEMs… not so sure about you.)

It would be okay to mention that whoever you are talking to might enjoy the movie more with DTS:X, and that they should see it in the cinema if they can, but I don’t think it is okay to force that onto people. All you are doing is hurting people and making them feel bad about how they watch the movies they love. Let them love those movies and please don’t try to ruin their experience. Live and let live.

Clearly, though, we are very different people. We disagree on a fundamental level. I think it best to end this conversation here.

you humans

Errrrr. Are you not human? Has this all been a satire of rich obnoxious spoiled people who don’t even consider themselves human anymore? Are you Elon Musk?

That is a non-answer. You argued that it is “simply pointless” to watch a movie in the same setting I did.

I disagree. I very much enjoyed the experience, ergo it was not pointless: it brought me pleasure.

I was just pointing out that it is indeed possible for people (maybe not you, but other people) to enjoy movies without the luxuries that you afford yourself. You asked a question (“why even bother watching a movie like that”) and I answered.

I also ask that you take into consideration that not everyone can afford to watch a movie with the luxuries you describe. That is ok too. Please don’t gatekeep watching movies is all I ask.

You misunderstand me. My principal point is that any 2.0/2.1 (i.e., stereo) setup will always be better than the surround sound system of equal price.

That axiom only starts changing when talking about exceedingly expensive setups (e.g., spending 10k on a custom Elac or KEF system). Until then, a stereo system will have better value 99% of the time.

As for my comment on spending money on speakers I would only use for movies: surround sound only has a real advantage for movies, for other activities stereo speakers of the same price will undisputedly be better. I would hate to spend 3k on a surround system, when I’ll use my 3k stereo system for most of my listening anyway (this is an example).

But I see that we have very different values (and likely different budgets) when it comes to audio.

Ah, I had been thinking that the parent would decide. But of course, how naive of me lol