Gotten anything positive out of interacting with other users?

You bet. All the time!

I feel belonging. In addition, whenever someone tells me they find what I say helpful, it feels great!

I think Lemmy also helps me calibrate my sensors that sense the world. I know what software’s doing well, what software’s not doing so well, and what software is complex.

Hey I like Gnome :((((((((((((

I get what you’re saying, in that we should take care of ourselves to have capable bodies and minds. However, consuming as much literature as possible seems like learning by coverage, which is worth examining.

Learning by coverage is usually done in contexts where there’s pressure to learn a lot in very little time. For example, this happens to teachers when they’re expected to teach for a test. But the research on this is clear: teaching by coverage results in disconnected, useless knowledge. It ironically results in abysmal test performance.

So what’s the alternative? Learning for understanding and transfer. When someone learns this way, they perform well in novel tasks. They become experts. They are more creative. They feel the thrill of knowing and being competent.

I take this to mean that we shouldn’t aim for consuming as much literature as possible. I take this to mean that we should aim for understanding and transfer.

Not with the S3.

However last Christmas I gifted a Timemore C3 to my partner’s parents and the coffee was great!

I did notice the C3’s chamber is smaller so for my usual dose (30g) I had to refill in the middle of grinding. I also think the coarseness steps are a bit large, compared to things like the ZPressos or the S3.

If you’re set on your budget, those quality-of-life issues won’t be a thing with the S3.

You know what you’ll use it for. You have a clear budget. You found a good grinder. Sounds good!

For what it’s worth, the cheaper Timemores could also work, although the S3 is beautiful and works great for your purposes.

It sounds as if you think good quality of life is more likely in unequal contexts. However, have you seen the evidence on this? Do you know what the quality of life is in countries that are unequal versus those that are more equal? Have you seen the evidence from something like The Spirit Level?

Here’s an index that represents quality of life mapped against inequality:

Which societies have better quality of life? The unequal ones?

Ah. You’re right. It’s not obvious.

You seem to care about truth, validity, and honesty.

I know trusting a stranger on the internet sounds absurd. But is it really impossible for someone to have had a coincidence in their day? Or for someone to really like something and share it?

Here’s what it ultimately comes down to: would you distrust me if I simply promised it’s true? What if it’s a digital pinky promise? What if it’s a digital double-pinky promise? Heck, I didn’t think it’d come down to this, but if you’re down to take off one of your shoes we could have a digital triple-pinky promise. I’d offer a quadruple-pinky promise but that seems too decadent.

You’re right! Only few people can do those poses! And only few people can draw them. I suppose we have a potential cycle:

• trained gymnast does pose
• freezeframe capture
• trained drawer draws pose
• drawing is shared
• repeat

lol literally yesterday this arrived in my inbox: https://gmb.io/hip-flexors/

Obviously I’m not paid by them and I’m not affiliated with them. I just like their stuff and they’re my main exercise

What a great drawing

This is amazing in two directions.

Direction 1: she does the JoJo poses so well

Direction 2: the JoJo artists captured true human poses so well

What do you mean, Johnny Enzyme? What is your take on attention spans?

Your next glasses should have a very thin frame

Or they can still have a thick frame but have them be transparent

You seem to really value fun, and that is genuinely okay.

It probably seems as if I’m splitting hairs. It might also seems as if I’m interested in conflict (in the memes-conflict dicotomy you mentioned). Overall, it might seem as if I’m an armchair philosopher yelling at the clouds from my ivory tower.

The way I see it, I’m not making a point in that ivory tower. I’m not in the vacuum of philosophy for philosophy’s sake. I actually think I’m doing the total opposite: what happens when we notice what we pay attention to, how the world affects us, and how we affect the world? In other words, what happens when we open our arms to the world instead of closing our eyes to it?

This is incredibly practical.

Every single choice that we make has consequences. It affects people nearby and around the world.

I’m not arguing for us to pretend to be perfect people, whatever that means. I’m arguing for noticing our place in this world and how we are connected to others. I’m arguing for expanding our perspective instead of narrowing it.

Even when we expand our perspective we can still choose memes and fun.

I do it. I’m like you in that sense.

The very small change is noticing that we are making choices and that choices are consequential.

I know it sounds absurd. You’re thinking I’m insane. You’re thinking there’s no way a sane human being believes lasagne bolognese is politics. You’re thinking my definition of politics is useless or absurd.

But let’s look at this closely. Again, politics is the distribution of political goods and our assessments of those distributions.

• Are we not paying attention to lasagna bolognese right now instead of something else?
• Are there not implications to a lasagna bolognese? Was that lasagna bolognese produced in a vacuum?
• Was there not a distribution of labor involved in producing it?
• Were there not political structures within which your lasagna bolognese was created?
• If the killing of cows was involved, was there not a political decision to kill a cow?

Being aware that politics is everywhere means we can choose what to pay attention to and what to do. It’s fine to choose lasagna bolognese. It’s fine to choose what kind of life you want. We’re involved in politics even if we don’t know it. We’re already somewhat skilled at it.

For your filter to work, you’d have to add many other words. Politics is the distribution of political goods, including attention and significance. If you pay attention to something or think something is significant, that is politics. So for your filter to work, you’d have to filter out anything and everything that you pay attention to and think is significant.

Sure. I’ll tell you what I understand, but I’d suggest checking what I say against Girard’s videos themselves.

Anyway, his approach involves supporting your lower back. In a way, it’s almost as if your chair’s back is exclusively there to support your lower back.

Notice that, in this approach, your upper back is not supported by your chair. That means that you have to engage your core and back muscles to support your upper back and your shoulders and head. That is why sitting for long can get tiring and at some point is simply impossible.

Depending on your chair, you might be able to easily lay back, almost as if your chair was a bed. This is fine if you are not typing or using your desk. But I think Girard generally favors the sitting up straight and using your muscles.

I messed up my back years ago. Sometimes I work sitting down for hours. Here’s how I’ve managed:

• Physical therapy and Gold Medal Bodies to learn how to move and strengthen what needs to be strong
• Watching and following Olivier Girard videos. His approach requires naturally using certain muscles while sitting, so maybe this won’t work for everyone. His approach also means that breaks are a must. I cannot sit for too long. Every half-an-hour or so I get up and move.
• Getting good enough chairs and desks. I followed Girard’s guide to buying chairs and desks. This means I can sometimes work for more than half-an-hour straight by lifting my desk so that I can work standing.

Hope this helps! And best of luck with your back

THIS.

Lots of other comments talk about economic hardship. Yes, that’s part of the story, but there are very wealthy people in very wealthy countries who don’t have children. And there also are very poor people in very poor countries who have lots of children.

I guess the question I would ask is:

• If economic hardship is your theory, why do very poor people in very poor countries have lots of children?

So the story is not entirely about money. It’s also about the factors you mentioned.

It’s alright.

I think I see where the confusion started.

I was referring to @CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de’s comment (where they say “I’ve blocked that instance.”) and you were referring to OP (who hasn’t said they blocked .ml).

Does that sound right?