Obviously there will be backups, but I also don't want to lose anything on it as much as possible.
Don't rely on a USB stick for that, no matter the brand, at least based on my personal experience.
Libb
joined 1 month ago
I started fencing, because I enjoy poking tall guys in the belly with my rapier.
the guy's belly is just really close to my eye level and also larger since the guy is bigger). I like how exposed, soft, fleshy, juicy and vulnerable a tall guy's belly looks and feels.
sometimes also jokingly push my rapier deeper into the guy's belly and twist it there 90°.
What do you think about that?
I think you insist a little too much on the enjoyment you feel and how fun you think it is... But it may also just be me not being able to appreciate your sense of humor to its full, I willingly admit that.
Reading your post, I'm surprised you don't know already for sure if it does indeed hurt, or not, to do what you 'jokingly' like to do to these men? I mean, were every single one of those tall dudes you 'jokingly' stabbed in the belly kind enough with your person to not let you experience by yourself what if feels like? How nice of them.
If I had to pick one, the Nobel. I don't care much about awards.
Wouldn't be surprised if it has a flux capacitor somewhere in there too
Wasn't the last (working) one destroyed in a train accident somewhere in the 80s? Not that I'm old enough to have first seen this movie back when it was released. Absolutely not.
Thx!
Would love to read a few pages out of his journal. Also, if you have not clicked the links embedded in the first post, this is worth reading too: https://news.wsu.edu/news/2024/10/28/endowment-supports-cataloging-of-worlds-longest-diary/
You can also buy (excellent) point & shoot film cameras, btw. or a rangefinder camera for a decent price (non-Leica branded, because Leica is expensive no matter what ;)
I hope you wont mind me reminding this: film is not simpler. It's as much work if not more as any other type of manual photography, digital or not. The difference, beside the lack of immediacy, being that you control the output and not some computer code... which means that you must assume the many mistakes that will happen too ;)
I learned photography on a film camera back in the late 70s. And to me B&W film have yet to be rivaled by anything digital. The real issue with film is that, depending where you live, it can be a pain to get it properly processed (of the few remaining places around here, too many simply can't be bothered to do it right). One could certainly process B&W at home but it would still be a pain to learn to do it properly. And don't even think about colors (a lot more complex and expensive) and then there would be the demanding task of scanning each negative or each print and then digitally clean it.
You say that most of what you write will end up digitally, do you do some sort of editing to improve the text or do you just copy it? (depending on what it is ofc)
I do. I consider all writing a draft and all re-writing an opportunity to edit it. And since I need to write drafts it's not like I was wasting my time with fancy extra steps ;)
Note that as far as my notes are concerned, I don't copy them digitally as I don't need a digital copy at all. They serve as an inspiration or a reference that I don't need to access on a computer at all, I access them through my (analog) setup.
It's a Zettelkasten (a fancy German word to say 'box of cards' that is both a note-taking and management system). All my notes are simply and directly moved from my DIY notebook to my references archives. Hence, if you checked the link in my first post, my notebook being both A5 and A6 sized (which is the size of my index cards). No rewriting is ever required.
Nowadays, Zettelkasten is considered digital by most younger users but the concept was formalized many years ago as an analog system and has been in existence as an analog system... for as long as people were able to write on slips of papers. Personally, I see zero interest in having mine digital so it stays analog, it works really well ;)
But this has made me think, how much do I need to have digitally anyway?
Which is an excellent question, imho :)
What do you think would be a substantial use case you could separate from your phone?
I've been using smartphone since the first iPhone, btw. It's just I quickly realized how toxic they were, the huge risks they were for our privacy too, and decided to I needed to maintain as much distance as possible and therefore quickly learned to barely rely on my phone at all, and only for what I have no choice, aka IDs, security and banking, taxis/Uber (those two not being strictly required but a real pain to not have with me for when I need to get one).
The idea for me being to only use for what's required (in my case: ID, security, passwords, taxis/Uber) and leave all the rest to other tools.
- Social? I do Lemmy (an nothing else) only on the computer. No notification on the go (it's never that urgent or important), no fomo (I can't be bothered), no distraction.
- Messaging? Barely any, and only through SMS. People wanting to reach me know that there are better means to reach me than an app and they either accept it or they won't reach me... which is perfectly fine with me too as they're the ones wanting to get in touch, not I (and never that urgently either: I will use an email and whenever I can snail mail have my preference ;)
- Reading? I read printed books (out of privacy and ownership concerns and after almost 20 years mostly reading ebooks, if you want to know) and carry a pocket book with me.
- Writing? I take my notes with a pen on paper (I just created a post about that ;)
- Games? I play chess... irl (I even carry a small pocket chess set, just in case). I only play lichess or chess.com only at the computer.
- Music and podcasts? I still own my iPod classic (the one with the wheel and no Internet at all) but I seldom use it since I barely listen to music or podcasts when I'm out for my long daily walks.
What is, in your opinion, a necessary set of minimal restrictions on freedom of thought, speech and expression?
- Liberty of thought?
What the fuck?! Anyone should be free to think what they want, no matter how ugly, dirty or stupid, or even criminal, that could be. That's thoughts, ffs. - Liberty of expression. My stance is that we should not tolerate call to murder or to direct violence against anyone or any group of persons (be it physical, or otherwise). That also means, we should not tolerate any call to the 'I feel offended' argument to try to shut anyone we disagree with (we're all free to not listen to anything we don't like, that doesn't mean we have any right to censor it), and no tolerance towards any call to 'vengeance' or to 'cancel' anyone no matter how much they 'deserved' it (judging and then, maybe, punishing someone should be the exclusive job of justice not of an angry (and stupid) mob of people).
For the rest, the liberty of expression and the liberty of discussion are fundamentals to any working democracy—and to any working educative system too, looking at you (way too many) colleges and universities. Their absence being key to the creation of any kind of... dictatorship you can think of.
I'll let anyone pick the kind of political regime they want to live in, I've made my choice and it's not a dictatorship even one controlled by the 'good guys'. Fuck that.
Edit: if you feel like downvoting this, by all mean do it but keep in mind that this won't teach me (or anyone else for that matter) much of your reasoning in doing so. So, if you want to help me (and anyone else reading this) realize how wrong I am, maybe explain why/how in a comment? Otherwise, your downvote won't mean much if anything, to me at least.
Thx for explanation :)
Fingers crossed.
Most people are easy to manipulate, religious or not.
People being religious just tells us the type of things they're more likely willing to believe in/act upon. But the gullibility is the same with or without religion (edit: and that is real major issue in everything that's going wrong nowadays), to me at least.