I don't use anything like a "writer deck" but for me pen and paper is a non-starter due to hand fatigue. I can type for much, much longer periods than I could ever hope to write by hand.
It also introduces significantly more lag, at least for me, between the thinking and actual writing down of the words.
Sometimes slowing down the process like this is helpful, in other cases it's better to make the emission of the words onto the page as immediate as possible, depends on the piece.
Costs about £5, lasts many months of heavy use -- much more than any cartridge pen as the whole barrel is full of ink -- and I have never ever had one leak in my bag or pocket.
Not the person you were replying to, but “oh, gee, I wish I’d thought of that! /s”.
I spent my first few decades trying to train myself not to write in a way that causes physical pain. The closest I got was when I discover Lamy Safari pens, which won’t let me hold them the “wrong” way. That only makes it a little less horrid.
> Real life isnt a Tom Clancy novel. Jack Ryan wont save the day.
What made this movie suspenseful* for me was not how realistic it was, but how only half of it was realistic and the other half was completely disconnected from reality. A random incoming nuke of unknown origin, I can easily buy that happening. A deliberative process among highly competent officials deciding on a response, sorry but that is just not real life. Maybe it was at some point in our past, but certainly not in 2025.
As for the ending, it felt like a cop-out to me, but it didn't really matter to me.
If he's not able to also provide them with a sizeable initial capital, this lesson is also completely irrelevant. No one becomes really wealthy by investing savings off their modest salary.
It's better to invest in assets though than just the stock market. The wealthy build wealth by borrowing and buying assets like real estate. This ways makes it easier to avoid income taxes and capital gains taxes and you also get massive tax deductions for asset deprecation that you can use to offset most or all of what income it does provide.
Sounds like this high school is doing a great job preparing students for the real world, where they can be swarmed by jackbooted thugs at any moment for any reason.
How about a subscription service that just sends you a new fridge full of food every week and takes the previous fridge back to be refilled. Instead of doing dishes we could also have a subscription service that delivers a whole new set of dishes and cookware every week. No more dishwashers!
> No one is offering that service because it would be completely illegal.
It would be technically possible to decentralize distribution while still paying rights holders for each download. Laws could be rewritten to accommodate, encourage or even require this.
My biggest gripe with streaming services is that you literally can't legally own the content you paid for. You can only "license" it. Amazon, Google, Apple, whoever can revoke your access at any time and there's nothing you can do about it. There are plenty of examples of this already happening. The rights holders are protected, but the consumer is fucked. It's untenable, in my opinion.
reply