Posting things to Twitter was a lot easier when I could do it in 1-2 steps, on my Mac, instead of the 8-10 steps needed for Windows 10.
Not to mention the 4-5 extra steps to capture an image.
Mac:
1 Screen capture command
2 Select area to save
3 Done
Windows:
1 Screen capture command
2 Select area to save
3 Save to clipboard
4 Open clipboard
5 Set it not to save as a .jfif (again)
6 Save it again ("for real" this time)
7 Close clipboard
8 Done
Plus, I have to repeat steps 1-3 in many cases, because I keep thinking that once I've taken the screenshot, I'm done.
But of course, on Windows, I'm not.
Anyway, as I was just reminded, Horizon: Forbidden West came out today, so I'm going to go remind myself why I got a PC.
So I could play games on it.
I'll say it again: if you do not NEED a PC to use for PC-only stuff, DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES settle for a PC.
Get an OS that doesn't hate you.
Since I've been using my new PC, I'm starting more and more to feel like a domestic abuse victim.
Why would anyone with self-respect put up with this shit?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Tim Wise has written "13 Questions for those Who Want Critical Race Theory Banned."
I thought I'd answer them.
Carl and his LotusEaters did a video on this, but I haven't watched it yet.
Before we get into the questions, let us note that his framing is utterly dishonest from the start: he frames opposition to Critical Race Theory as opposition to "teaching accurate American history."
This is just an outright lie.
Suppose a 19th century curriculum in American history wanted to teach Manifest Destiny as part of American history, that is, to teach as FACT that America has a God-given right to conquer and annex all of North America.
The Woke deal almost entirely in hyper-realities, that is, pseudo-realities, paralogics, and paraethical systems.
@ConceptualJames I keep underestimating this phenomenon, because as much as I understand intellectually that people do this, the idea of CHOOSING TO LIVE IN A FAKE REALITY is so evidently a bad and wrongheaded idea, I tend to assume people who inhabit such pseudo-realities are MAKING MISTAKES.
@ConceptualJames This turn to pseudo-reality, the deliberate orientation to the back of the cave will and way from the light of being and truth, this is a thing of the will primarily, and a thing of the intellect, which is darken by it, only secondarily.
Everything that is, every being or entity, is something. This means that about every entity "what is it?" can be asked. The proper answer will be to name its what-it-is (Greek: τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι) or essence (Latin: essentia) or whatness (English: awkward).
The essence of an entity isn't the same as the entity, because there are (in almost all cases) many entities that share the same what-it-is.
All dogs are dogs. That is, each dog has the ontological structure of being-a-dog, the essence of dog or "dogness."
The word "species" is another word that classical functions as a near synonym for "essence" — because it marks off a natural kind.
Other natural kinds include, e.g. chemical elements or the particles of physics.
Who you are isn’t reducible to what you are, but what you are is the foundation of who you are.
Similarly everything which is socially constructed is built on the foundation of the natural. You cannot ‘deconstruct’ nature away anymore than you can construct a building in air or a perpetual motion machine.
Those who reject Platonism, that is, who reject realism about essences, fall automatically into nominalism, the thesis that what things are is merely how we talk about them. This view rejects truth and knowledge, since to grasp “S is P,” there must be something stable to grasp.