arjun makes me want to shift to linux+vim, and i really do want to, but configuring neovim today was a humbling experience and i may not be ready for it yet. i've been trying to use vim for a while now, but the learning curve does not facilitate ease, and especially after reaching a certain amount of speed with my usual platforms (texstudio, vivaldi etc.) moving to vim-based navigation (vim+vimtex, qutebrowser) is a definite struggle. i did install vimium onto my browser, but it's currently passively present there as well. add it to my future plans! i do enjoy the ease with which vim lets you navigate, without even modifier keys, and i will reach there eventually. i only learned today that texstudio lets me fix 'triggers' for macros, and i already love it.
i recently switched to zen browser (based on firefox) for media consumption on google's manifest v3 announcement rendering adblockers useless on chromium-based browsers. as much as i love vivaldi, i cannot tolerate ads anymore, especially on youtube, and the drastic steps i've taken to stop seeing them are not something i can just let unfold. i don't see a single ad these days on my devices, and i would like to keep it that way. i'm sure everyone's taking my data and analysing it very well to give me personalised ads, but i just don't want to see them anymore.
the current epoch of earth is proposed to be called the anthropocene, from anthro- (of humans) and -cene (of the current era, the cenozoic). sub- even that, many people call this the information age. today, i find myself wondering, is that the best way to describe it? i think it should be the age of ease, as everything tends to that. low-quality output is preferred if the input is easier (chatbots, wysiwyg word editors), excessive work is put into "figuring out" what users probably want, and a low degree of error is tolerable if it reduces a modicum of their work (apple, and even google, now). as i mentioned in my ramble, if we are our choices, what does it mean if others choose for us? i find myself leaning on 'thought-less' choices sometimes too, and i hope it doesn't become a form of mithridatism.
i usually find myself being diplomatic on the usage and applications of LLMs, considering how ubiquitous they have become as the 'new technology', but i can never seem to shake a feeling of unease. i am never resistant to new tech, i embrace it, but i can't help but feel a bit restless at how well they slot into a common human weakness. if we hear a fellow human "voice", confident and assured, we tend to believe it. i believe this is evolutionary, and i can see how it makes sense. if you've never been to an area of the woods, but a human being tells you, confidently, that most people who go there haven't been able to escape, you have to believe it, don't you? we have spent the past few decades transferring that feeling onto text, and voice, and LLMs don't hesitate. should we trust something that doesn't know what truth is? i wish i knew enough of philosophy to write more about this, but i need to read a bit more.
not to sound old-fashioned, but arjun and i spent a long amount of time on creating the dfa, and coding, and debugging, and nothing felt as good as when i found a small bug in a language i don't even know (yet). i don't think we can hijack our brains so much as to feel satisfaction without effort. monkey brain will always remain monkey brain, i suppose (maybe until someone develops a dopamine injection). hey: i can start writing black mirror episodes now. i'm not going to preach, but i do want to advise: as much as i hate it, vehemently, nothing feels as good as effort paying off.