I get bonkers annoyed using just two monitors with macos or windows. multi monitor management... nothing behaves how i want it to, apps never open where they should etc etc. I havent tried it on desktop linux enough to know if it's any better - maybe at least id assume have the most configuration control on linux.
How do you do it? I always give up in frustration.
100% would keep the genelecs :)
I can only speak for the Cinnamon desktop environment on Linux Mint, but it’s very simple:
- Apps always launch on the monitor your mouse cursor is on
- Switching the focused window to the other monitor is Win+Shift+Arrow Keys
So if I clicked to open an app, it’s on the monitor I’m already looking at. If I used a keyboard shortcut, win+shift+arrow is super easy and simple.
The fact that it’s a stupid simple rule means I can get way better at just doing things by muscle memory… I don’t have to worry about being outsmarted by the window manager.
I use AeroSpace on mac os for tiling window management with spaces mapped per monitor so that eg space 1 is my top monitor woth my email and chat and space e is on the left for my obsidian, spaces asdfgh are my center monitor for code and terminals, and spaces zxcvb are the right monitor for browsers. I dont stick to this organization rigidly and when I'm doing odd tasks like cad or developing an app I break the patterns and put things on whatever monitor is convenient. I try to stick to a few common apps in the same spaces however.
For Mac I spent $0.99 a long time ago and bought Magnet on the App Store which lets me move windows and resize using hotkeys. For windows I aggressively use windows key + left/right to move the windows around, with 4 displays you just have to remember their ordering and eventually it becomes muscle memory to get it to snap where you want it. It mostly moves left to right, in my case.
On KDE and things like opening app on active monitor / desktop work fine. Only complaint is that on older versions, the taskbar on secondary monitors would sometimes disappear.
For reference I have 3 monitors (2x 4k, 1x 1080p) and am currently using Debian / Wayland and Ubuntu / X11.
It was a bug. I have 3 screens, and it would disappear on the third. An update, sometime around middle of last year fixed it, if my memory is correct.
But, I still have occasional problems with my monitors not waking up when I return to my desk. With 3, I've never had all 3 fail to wake, and a simple disable in the monitor settings, then choose "revert" usually brings them back.
What fixed it for my was switching to Omarchy and using wayland (what it comes with). I don't bother very much with positioning or window resizing anymore. Give it a shot!
Is it expected that LLMs will continue to improve over time? All the recent articles like this one just seem to describe this technology's faults as fixed and permanent. Basically saying "turn around and go no further". Honestly asking because their arguments seem to be dependent on improvement never happening and never overcoming any faults. It feels shortsighted.
On one hand, recent models seem to be less useful than the previous generation of them, the scale needed for training improved networks seems to be following the expected quadratic curve, and we don't have more data to train larger models.
On the other hand, many people claim that what tooling integration is the bottleneck, and that the next generation of LLMs are much better than anything we have seen up to now.
It's always extremely weird to me when people have to make this distinction because I was under the impression that ALL Adderall prescriptions are for the XR extended release which comes in capsules full of small beads of medication. No one should be taking Adderall IR instant release tablets. Those things have almost no reason to exist. I really don't understand who is taking those things and where people are getting the impression that IR tablets are a normal Adderall formulation. "Long acting" Adderall has been the norm for decades now and I haven't even seen or heard of anyone taking IR tablets since like the early 2000's
I was given a prescription for XR. It took me a month or more to even try it, because I’d sleep in, then it would take me a while to get moving, and by that time I was worried it would still be active with the idealist it me would think I should go to bed. Something that didn’t last as long would give me much more control.
Because there is ritalin and concerta, I think it's just easier to understand and explain. Im less familiar with adderall but by searching a few times IR XR and Vyvanse are still prescribed? and adderall ir is also approved for narcolepsy at least.
If I take the lowest dose concerta I will not sleep that night no matter how early i take it. This was pretty devestating when I was younger and not mature enough to realize what was going on. Parents were obsessed with ADD medication at the time. I think vyvanse or xr adderall would be a similar nightmare for me.
Yes. Never tried the others. stratera - weird side effects quit immediately. ritalin is good. concerta also good... too good. Havent tried it in years Id only guess if anything Im slower if older.
Not surprised. Another example is minecraft related queries. Im searching with the intention of eventually going to a certain wiki page at minecraft.wiki, but started to just read the summaries instead. It will combine fan forums discussing desired features/ideas with the actual game bible at minecraft.wiki - so it mixes one source of truth with one source of fantasy. Results in ridiculous inaccurate summaries.
A few months ago in a comment here on HN I speculated about the reason an old law might have been written the way it was, instead of more generally. If it had been written without the seemingly arbitrary restrictions it included there would have been no need for the new law that the thread was about.
A couple hours later I decided to ask an LLM if it could tell me. It quickly answered, giving the same reason that I had guessed in my HN comment.
I then clicked the two links it cited as sources. One was completely irrelevant. The other was a link to my HN comment.
What's interesting to me is that this kind of behavior -- slightly-buffleheaded synthesis of very large areas of discourse with widely varying levels of reliability/trustworthiness -- is actually sort of one of the best things about AI research, at least for me?
I'm pretty good at reading the original sources. But what I don't have in a lot of cases is a gut that tells me what's available. I'll search for some vague idea (like, "someone must have done this before") with the wrong jargon and unclear explanation. And the AI will... sort of figure it out and point me at a bunch of people talking about exactly the idea I just had.
Now, sometimes they're loons and the idea is wrong, but the search will tell me who the players are, what jargon they're using to talk about it, what the relevant controversies around the ideas are, etc... And I can take it from there. But without the AI it's actually a long road between "I bet this exists" and "Here's someone who did it right already".
Yeah, this is by far the biggest value I've gotten from LLMs - just pointing me to the area of literature neither me nor any of my friends have heard of, but which have spent a decade running about the problems we're running into.
In this case, all that matters is that the outputs aren't complete hallucination. Once you know the magic jargon, everything opens up easily with traditional search.
And that becomes obvious when you go to look for it. These work best in situations where false positives have low cost/impact, but true positives are easily verifiable and have high impact. in other words, problems in epistemological p-space. :)
I had a similar thing happen to me just today. A friend of mine had finished a book in a series. I have read the series but it was almost 10 years ago, and I needed a refresher with spoilers, so I went looking.
Well, some redditor had posted a comparison of a much later book in the series, and drawn all sorts of parallels and foreshadowing and references between this quite early book I was looking for and the much later one. It was an interesting post so it had been very popular.
The AI summary completely confused the two books because of this single reddit post, so the summary I got was hopelessly poisoned with plot points and characters that wouldn't show up until nearly the conclusion. It simply couldn't tell which book was which. It wasn't quite as ridiculous as having, say, Anakin Skywalker face Kylo Ren in a lightsaber duel, but it was definitely along those same lines of confusion.
Fortunately, I finished the later book recently enough to remember it, but it was like reading a fever dream.
Yeah, it happened recently for a kubernetes resource. I was searching for how to do something, and Google AI helpfully showed me a kubernetes resource that was exactly what I needed, and was designed to work exactly how I needed it.
Sadly, the resource didn't actually exist. It would have been perfect if it did, though!
I find its tricky with games, especially ones as updated as frequently as Minecraft over the years. I've had some of this trouble with OSRS. It brings in old info, or info from a League/Event that isn't relevant. Easier to just go to the insanely curated wiki.
At some point in time when asked how many Kurdish people live in Poland, Google's AI would say that several million, which was true, but only in a fantasy world conjured by a certain LARP group, who put a wiki on fandom.com.
Or you can take the alternative approach, where Microsoft's own "Merl" support agent says it knows anything to do with Minecraft, and then replies to basically any gameplay question with "I don't know that".
I run a small business that buys from one of two suppliers of the items we need. The supplier has a TRASH website search feature. It's quicker to Google it.
Now that AI summaries exist, I have to scroll past half a page of result and nonsense about a Turkish oil company before I find the item I'm looking for.
I hate it. It's such a minor inconvenience, but it's just so annoying. Like a sore tooth.
> The primary concern is that private equity firms may prioritize financial gains over families, said Daniel Arnold, a senior research scientist at the School of Public Health.
...may? How are they not already by gobbling them up in a calculated way. Targeting states with lax insurance claim scrutiny
I scrolled this whole thread curious if someone would make this simple observation. We did not survive and evolve for millions of years to be born and then do nothing, to not meet needs and have needs met. Historical precedent, tamper with carefully.
I am partial fire and I feel that line of demarcation personally. I've also watched it play out in others like clockwork. As wealth grows, new responsibilities emerge.
It's labeled "whole milk" in small text then below in bigger text it's labeled "low fat milk". The fact that this was not caught and likely would not be deliberate by the author seems slopy (sloppy?) to me. Just my two cents
The prop doesn't seem to have the weird intermittently blurry and inconsistently spaced maze, or at least it's not on the same side. What a weird unforced error it would be if that was the only part of the image to actually be AI-generated.
You added icons and functionality to go to the beginning or end of search/inbox - Something that gmail just has never budged on having and always annoyed me! One of the first things I noticed. I must not be alone on this lol
Thank you! The night before launching the original Jmail we had this hunch that jump-straight-to-end and "random page" would make the site work for people.
Both political far sides are rocking the boat, not just rights even tho they are in power. It's both of them together and the dysfunction of their inability to compromise or reason on anything. Moderates or centrist voters in the USA have no representation and haven't for some time.
Frankly, bullshit. The center is ruling the democratic party, actively suppressing left and frequently tacitly enabling the far right. Meanwhile, left barely does anything. They are not rocking the boat, they are powerless.
Both Obama and Biden were center choice. The whole democratic party is ruled by centrist politicians and ideology which is why they cant oppose the increasingly radical republicans all that effectively.
>"Meanwhile, left barely does anything. They are not rocking the boat, they are powerless."<
The left's judicial branch is very active: they sue every chance they get. And since they've diligently packed the court systems for decades, and since population centers that are predominantly Democratic are usually the locations for filing significant legal issues, i.e., they have left-leaning populations, therefore left-leaning juries and leftist judges, they usually get what they sue for.
Maybe someday we'll be able to look at Epstein's mail or Clinton's e-mails even.
What are you talking about here. It was right wing who packed the courts - to the point the bias is blatant and obvious. They are not even trying to pretend they are impartial.
The "every accusation is an admission" thing is truly right with right wingers like you.
> Maybe someday we'll be able to look at Epstein's mail or Clinton's e-mails even.
Who was blocking the release? Trump. Trump was blocking the release.
I wonder this too, eventually robots will pick apart the landfills once there is technology to deal with it. Tons of metal goes into landfills that could go to scrap yards, etc Altho when they cap off landfills they become a ski resort or a subvision.
How do you do it? I always give up in frustration. 100% would keep the genelecs :)
reply