Every color that we see is created by different types of receptors being stimulated together. A linear combination of three of these types.

What are you referring to as linear? AFAIK human perception is very much non-linear, which is why we have color spaces like OKLAB.

All jokes aside, good for you!

Because I pointed this out, yet you doubled (and later tripled) down on your interpretation, and you still haven’t edited your initial comment.

Sure, but OC didn’t give any indication that’s the case. They shared something very personal and made themselves vulnerable. You chose to interpret it as a political message (and if I may say, you interpreted it deliberately in a really unlikely way - especially this long after the pandemic, and consequently wearing masks, have been out of the publics mind) and responded in a very passive-aggressive way, instead of just asking. That’s a really shitty thing to do.

No, they most likely aren’t. Since they’re explicitly talking about “dropping their facade” and “finding their true self”, they’re most likely talking about autistic masking - you know, the kind of masking where you put on a facade and not behave like your true self.

At best your comments are unrelated rants, at worst you’re coming off like a real jerk right now.

Wait, no more blue-face blastoff? You stopped doing the strokey chokey? No more two-neck squeeze?

I’m pretty sure they weren’t talking about masks in the medical sense, so this is honestly a really inappropriate response.

There’s a difference between something having an optional internet connection, and something requiring one. I can control my smart home through the internet, but when the internet connection breaks and I’m at home, I can still control it.

(different person here)

I can’t give a satisfying explanation, but I can really recommend 3Blue1Brown on YT for great motivations for such things. He presents these topics in ways that make you want to understand them. I’m not sure which videos approach imaginary numbers - there might be standalone ones, but it definitely comes up in his explanation of the Fourier transformation.

Didn’t they require one of these bigger upgrades to still get security updates? I thought I read something about 23H2 (or similar) not getting updates anymore.

“Whoopsie, we turned it on for everyone by accident after an update! We made a fucky wucky!”

I’m sorry, that sucks. As cliche as it sounds, when I was stuck in a similar rut, the biggest positive influence was to try and go outside regularly. Even if it’s just walking through nature for a couple of minutes every other day, it really helped my energy levels and mood.

Stay strong! I hope you find something better.

That shit was fire! I learned a bunch of art stuff from it, often I’d make something based on what they show and give it to my grandparents. Awesome stuff.

Though this would have been much easier with streaming - back then I had to try and remember all the important details on first watch, which almost never worked!

All “atomic” distros I’ve encountered allow booting into previous versions, so this is simply not an issue.

You are technically correct about “atomic” and “immutable”, but you’re missing that e.g. the Fedora images use the wording “atomic” to refer to their update procedure, and they implement this using an immutable system. Nobody here is misusing these terms, because they are both applicable in this context.

On a dev station, it’s a nightmare.

I’ve been very happy with it on my dev stations, definitely hasn’t been a nightmare!

Nah, I heavily disagree. It’s amazing for developers too, and they are explicitly part of the target demographic - not just of the normal variants, there’s even special developer-targeted images like Aurora.

I especially like the casual swipe at GNOME, they deserve it!

Don’t ever make the mistake of giving your phone number to a US company. I did that when I started my new job and didn’t have a company phone number yet, since then I’ve been getting daily spam.

The information you use is only related to the last object the light interacted with, not the light itself (with the small exception being the “brightness” - that has nothing to do with the object).

This is obviously false, otherwise all objects would look the same under any color of light - yet they don’t. This example actually shows that it is only the light itself that matters, because it has the information of the objects it interacted with during its lifetime!

No one claims to hear the air in their ears rather than the violin that is being played nearby. That’s just not what the word “hear” means.

But everyone would agree that we’re hearing the sound waves produced by the violin. Again, a great example counter to your point, as the equivalent to a sound wave is the photon.