Or simply leave your phone at home. Need to meet with friends? Plan a meeting point. Need to take photos? Do you really? What right have you got to photo other people's faces? Just leave your damn phone at home.
If you want to take photos, bring a good quality video camera, preferably with optical image stabilization. It’s much harder for disinformationists to deny or reframe a long, uncut video.
I must say that as an Emacs user, I do feel a bit jealous of UIs like this. Is it something about doing everything in buffers which means we don't make complex layouts like this? Could/should we take inspiration from something like Textual, which this expense tracker is built on top of? https://textual.textualize.io/
Well, green roofs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_roof) are having a comeback all over the world, so it's quite possible Iceland will pick them up again as well...
How's LineageOS with WhatsApp, Signal and random banking apps these days?
Or let me put it another way: anyone running LineageOS but struggled to run any essential apps? (I don't care about games or whatever, I mean the apps you need to get around in life).
Whatsapp and Signal are fine. Random banking apps suck because their myopic and incompetent policies around custom OSes. Especially here in Germany where banks and even tech company management see internet as a magic, totally untrustworthy new curiosity. Combined with the overall extreme risk-averse society, basically none of the bank apps from big banks work with custom OSes. All require various levels of "hacking".
They use Google SafetyNet as a security guarantee and some outright ban access while letting you use a completely custom Linux PC. There are ways to hack those API calls with various system level interceptors like Magisk. I keep a custom made 2FA code generator from my bank as a backup though.
Anecdote: I develop an app for a bank at my job in Germany and I was forced to implement root detection because of some annoying pentest. Everyone agreed that it was just security theater + checkbox compliance but it "had to be done"...
I think detecting root and displaying a warning about risk is okay. N26 does it, so does Scalable Capital.
However Sparkassen, Deutsche Bank etc all refuse to work on Lineage OS at all *without any actual root solution installed*. I actually don't want any root access, I can use recovery mode and even write special permission XMLs if certain apps need it.
I just don't want bundled Google Dialer etc in stock ROMs that is feeding more data to Google about me and my loved ones. I keep my and my family's contacts in a private cloud solution. I don't use GMail for private e-mails. Nor Google Calendar. Removing these apps break stock ROMs due to special permission modifications Google did. Lineage OS is my escape but the stupid banks reliably choose stupidest security theather solutions that you were forced to implement.
Even the apps that work for online banking, you can't use them for digital payments anymore. The old integrations worked fine but with Google Wallet even GrapheneOS isn't good enough
Weirdly Commerzbank Banking App rejects logins approved by a rooted phone so I cannot login with my LOS phone. Comdirect is literally the same company but a purely online product. It is so stupid. I also use INGDirekt and it works.
For some banking apps, you have to root the device on the contrary, to be able to install other apps that will make the banking app run on a custom ROM.
It's completely absurd, but it's how it works today.
No we can't cause it was absolutely a turning point in Google's trajectory.
After Reader, it was Currents, Google TV, Picasa, Google Now, Spaces, Chromecast Audio,Inbox, GCM, Nest, Fusion Tables, Google Cloud Print, Google Play Music, Google Bookmarks, Chrome Apps, G Suite....
Reader keeps coming up because after Reader, Google's motto turned into "Do be Evil"
You are not wrong, but my irrational mind is unlikely to take your advice. Try treating it as a meme, rather than anything belonging to a sane discussion. For me, I don't think I'll ever get over it.
> A key to Leibniz’s view is symmetry of creation. The best only emerges against the worst, the beautiful against the ugly, the harmonious against the dissonant.
Leibniz's surviving corpus is massive and sprawling (far larger than any other member of the Republic of Letters) so it could be that i haven't read whatever this is a reference to, but I don't recognise this sense of balance. For Leibniz as i understand him ours is the best of possible worlds because God created it to be this way, in his infinite benevolence and wisdom, and whatever the calamities occur must be part of some kind of plan of which we can only be ken (apperceptive) to a fraction thereof.
Reading Leibniz is like standing at the gate of modern and medieval thought. He didn't so much 'ransack' ideas, as this piece says he does, as try to reconcile even the most contradictory of positions. It's odd but exquisite.
If anyone wants to jump in I would recommend Lloyd Strickland's annotated translation of the Monadology (Leibniz's Monadology). Or really anything by Strickland, including his book on Leibniz on binary. See Strickland's website: http://www.leibniz-translations.com/
The balance idea sounds like misremembered Hegel. I think the best of all possible worlds theory should be seen for what it is: an attempt to reconcile the idea that a perfect god made the world with its observable imperfections. It’s intellectually more satisfying than the “fallen world” idea which just leads to more questions, and it remains compatible with mainstream Christian doctrine.
If you want to reject mainstream Christian doctrine that’s fine, but it’s not what Leibniz was trying to do.
In any event, his most lasting influence isn’t even in the realm of philosophy. Dude was a genius.
> intellectually more satisfying than the “fallen world” idea which just leads to more questions, and it remains compatible with mainstream Christian doctrine.
Doesn't mainstream Christian doctrine say that we're in a fallen world? Isn't that bit about "by Adam's sin we all sinned" (I'm forgetting the rhyme) a pretty central part of the catechism? (basically Romans 5:12)
Now as to God creating a universe in which a fall like that could occur (one that emphasizes free will), is that perhaps what Leibniz was addressing?
I can't speak to Leibniz since I haven't studied his philosophy at all, but there seems to be at least a distinction between a fallen world (or a corrupted world) and a fallen man.
That is, you could take the view of some (so called) gnostic sects that see the world as a corrupted mess created by a demiurge. In such a view one could understand man as a divine spark that is imprisoned within this world, perhaps even maliciously tricked by that demiurge, and gnosis is the realization and means to escape. That is a kind of heresy that was argued against quite vehemently by the early church fathers (as well as Neo-Platonists like Plotinus for what it is worth).
That would be opposed to a view that the world is a good creation (or at least as good as was possible given the material available, in the vein of Plato's Timaeus) and man is the ambiguous thing, given free will and the choice to align itself with God. In that case, the fall of man is better seen as a rejection of a good that has been offered.
A theologist like Leibniz is concerned with dogmas, which are like axioms: They are assumed to be true and form the basis of a logical system, that is supposed to consistent.
Beside that Leibniz contributes to a thousands of years old discussion about theodicy, the righteousness of god.
Let's look at the historical context first, because your bible verse is fitting:
In many cultures of the ancient world, misfortunes and disasters are said to be the result of a divine punishment. This can be seen in the old testament on many occasions, but it's basically the same in Greek societies etc.
Christian scholars read the book of Ijob as an instance, where this thought is challenged: Ijob is living a righteous live, why is he punished?
The book itself doesn't really give an answer to that, but in the ancient world view kin liability applies. So even when Ijob was sinless, he inherits the sin of his forefathers, going all the way back to Adam.
Your bible verse (Romans 5:12) is referring to that, but if you read a bit further, this world view of the old testament is contrasted with the new testament. To paraphrase: Where one man (Adam) brought sin into the life of many, now one man (Jesus) takes the sin from all.
So in the Christian doctrine the argument, that bad things happen to us due to inherited sin doesn't apply anymore.
Which leads us to the scholarly discussion, which Leibniz is part of. The central dogmas (axioms) of Christianity relevant for the theodicy question are the following:
* There is only one god
* God is almighty
* God is all-loving
* God is understandable, since God revealed himself through Jesus.
The job of philosopher/theologist is to resolve, the perceived contradiction, that bad things are happening to good people and a loving, almighty God wouldn't allow that.
The most common solution is to drop one of the axioms, e.g. "God wants to help us, but he can't" (not almighty) or "God works in mysterious ways" (not understandable).
Leibniz instead doesn't sidestep the problem and argues, that even the best possible world can't be free from sorrow.
I, personally, really like his line of thought, but this comment is already to long to describe it further.
Pretty hard considering Hegel would not even be born a few decades after Leibniz died. Agreed that it is preferable to the "fallen world" starting point of so many other philosophies. Once you think the world is fallen or broken, the only remaining thing is trying (and waiting ;) ) to bring about some kind of Utopia by changing humankind, nature, etc..
Wow Windmove is a little gem that I'd never heard of. Shift-<arrow> is way more intuitive for me for moving around buffers than bashing C-x o or invoking ace window and then choosing a buffer number. Activate with
Brilliant, discovering things that you didn't know you needed that are already there in Emacs is a joy. Like getting a hug from the hackers[0] who went before.
reply