Are you or people around you do that for hours every night? Is this a deliberate activity, or are you including random quick glances? How often is yours or people's around you sky watching experience actually negatively affected by satellites?
Sun rises and downs is not affected by satellites, due to overwhelming brightness difference. For casual stargazers, light pollution is much more of an obstacle than the satellites. Plus, for half a day on average, the stars not available at all, unlike Starlink or other satellite services
I'm not a Starlink user either, I do like to look at the sky with naked eyes and telescopes, but I do not share the sentiment that it's imperative to keep it "pure" for the sake of whatever. Also, a personal anecdote, satellite spotting is quite fun :)
The divide between the "blue" and "red" sides lies in the conception of which button kills. The blues think that the red button kills the blues. The reds think that blue button kills the blues. I'm inclined to side with the latter
By picking red you didn't contribute to anything at all, this button does absolutely nothing in practice. If you remove the red button, leaving the choice between pressing blue and not participating at all, the choice to not participate seems quite obvious. The red button adds some "weight" to the decision, but it's materially the same
This document defines a scheme for "AI-adressable" resources without much care about definition of "AI-addressesable" or even the properties of such resources, that require a dedicated protocol.
I get very strong "E = mc^2 + AI" vibes from it, just shoehorning the coveted letters everywhere
You said it yourself - "sugary drinks... tend towards unfavorable consequences". The change happens as the outcome of the desire, not "in the process of the pursuing it".
After listening to a certain science fiction podcast and playing through a certain space puzzle game, I think I've got a bit of a soft spot for tiny worlds, especially a world this charming! Good work
Typst is fantastic and I recommend to dive into it to see how much value it offers. To me personally, the biggest strength is the ergonomics of both the tooling and the language, and how ergonomics persist even between documents of various complexity. Writing a paper in LaTeX is nice, but making something like a CV takes some patience. Meanwhile, in typst it was quick to get started and go all the way to building resumes, character sheets, and I know of at least one occurrence of implementing symbolic math in typst language. It's not without quirks, but still, very solid alternative
I maintained my CV in Latex for years (originally got started on this due to the fear of MS Word) and recently tried out Typst. I agree with you that it's quite simple to get started with. Also, I had to maintain a Ubuntu based Docker image with everything needed for the build.
Also if anyone is looking for a little help in getting started, LLMs are pretty decent at converting (and I forget which one I used).
My CV is still in LaTeX which gives me the opportunity to procrastinate updating it (rather than actually applying for jobs) because of all of the tweaking I do.
If nothing else, typist is going go give me more opportunities to procrastinate! Nice.
All I've done in Typst is my CV, I saw it here a while back and thought it'd be a nice use case.
It took about a day to get my head round the language an another to get it looking like I wanted. It's pretty simple, but I found it easy to run up and maintain.
I would argue that the second screenshot with redesigned Lighthouse is slightly worse that the "old" design
- the vertical ruler between the sidebar and the content is gone, making page structure less pronounced
- the redesigned dropdown menu has no borders or shadows and blends with the primary background
- the redesigned dropdown menu lost the little dot which highlighted currently selected option, replacing it with a folder icon, but now it's not useful, because it's the same folder icon for each option
- the old design had really nice and noticeable "Add URL" button. I suppose, it was removed in favor of the "plus" button in the sidebar, but it's not nearly as noticeable and without the label it's not clear what it actually does
Sure, the issues in the old version are valid, but I think the redesign introduced more severe usability issues instead of mostly aesthetic issues
It's also far more difficult to read the numbers relating to the items in the drop down menu. You have to make an effort to track to the right with your eyes to make sure you are in the same row, whereas before the number was right next to the item. There is no need to have the numbers aligned because they are not for comparison.
reply