20 posts shown.
I was sitting on my back porch last night, just staring up at the sky, and I had this sudden, nagging realization that I felt like I was failing at something. It sounds ridiculous, I know. I’m just a guy sitting in a lawn chair, but there was this intense sense of "Oh, I should be doing more with this."
We live in this era where every celestial event, every seasonal shift, every tiny flicker of natural beauty is treated like a mandatory cultural deadline. You scroll through your feed and suddenly everyone is an amateur astronomer, a professional photographer, or a dedicated stargazer. There’s this unspoken rule that if something "special" is happening in the atmosphere, you have to be out there, ideally with a tripod and a thermos of expensive coffee, witnessing it in its full glory. If you don't, did it even happen? Did you miss out on some fundamental human experience?
I find myself struggling with this "experience inflation." It feels like the threshold for what constitutes a "moment" has been pushed so high that we’re constantly exhausted trying to keep up. It used to be that a bright moon or a particularly colorful sunset was just... a nice thing to see while you were walking the dog or driving home. It was a quiet, private communion with the world. Now, it feels like these events are scheduled appointments. There’s a pressure to be "present," which, ironically, often makes us feel less present because we’re too busy worrying about whether we’re appreciating the moment "correctly."
I think about my grandfather. He lived in a rural part of the state, and he didn't care about the names of the lunar cycles or the specific timing of the equinoxes. He just knew when the light changed and when the air felt different. There was no performance to it. He wasn't checking a notification to see if it was time to look up; he just looked up when he felt like it. There was a certain dignity in that kind of unhurried observation.
Lately, I feel like we’ve traded that quiet observation for a kind of frantic consumption. We consume the sky. We consume the seasons. We consume the weather. We’ve turned the natural world into a series of "events" to be checked off a list. I worry that by turning everything into a spectacle, we’re actually losing our ability to just *be* in the world. We’re so focused on the "event" that we miss the actual reality of the thing itself. We’re looking for the peak moment, the most dramatic angle, the perfect lighting, rather than just existing under the same sky as everyone else.
I’ve also noticed a weird psychological component to this. There’s a certain FOMO (fear of missing out) that applies to things that shouldn't even be subject to FOMO. How can you miss out on the moon? It’s always there. But the *idea* of the moon—the specific, curated version of the moon that everyone is talking about right now—that’s what we’re afraid of missing. We’re afraid of being left out of the collective conversation.
I want to go back to a place where nature is just the background of our lives, not the main event we have to prepare for. I want to be able to see something beautiful and just say, "That's nice," and then go back to washing the dishes, without feeling like I missed a spiritual milestone or a social requirement.
Does anyone else feel this weird obligation to "witness" certain natural phenomena, or am I just overthinking a quiet night under the stars?
steelridge58 said:Philosophical Investigations into what is a video game
So, what actually is what is a video game? What are we really doing when we sit down to play one, and honestly, where is the actual value in all of this?
How does philosophy even find its way into the code of these games?
I figure since there are so many different branches of philosophy trying to tackle these kinds of questions, we might as well try our hand at it here too.
Looking back at the first two decades of the 21st century, the massive explosion in tech and the gaming industry itself has paved the way for a whole new category of speculative and reflective games—titles specifically designed for players looking for something a bit more intellectually stimulating. Modern culture has already started to embrace these virtual worlds and digital simulations as legitimate, and often preferred, alternatives to traditional media formats.
There’s this fascinating question raised in an essay by the Italian philosopher Stefano Gualeni regarding whether these worlds—both through their self-reflective qualities and as standalone environments—can be understood as philosophical artifacts. He suggests that we can fruitfully explore, and maybe even answer, this by looking at philosophy through its core mission: directing thought toward examining the very validity and possibilities of thought itself.
In a similar vein, philosophers of language have spent ages trying to weigh the validity and accuracy of using language—specifically text—to frame and convey thoughts, leaning on the old idea that language, especially the written word, holds a privileged, if not exclusive, relationship with how we think.
One of the early 20th-century thinkers who really pushed back against that unquestioned link between thinking and writing was Ludwig Wittgenstein.
From that viewpoint, you could argue that focusing solely on linguistic ways to mediate thought shows a certain numbness in Western philosophy; it fails to account for the specific constraints that this particular medium imposes on the flow of arguments and ideas, which ultimately leaves philosophers somewhat ill-equipped to appreciate the fun, untapped potential of alternative ways to communicate philosophical thought.
So, once we recognize those inherent limits of relying on language alone to carry thought, 21st-century philosophers have this incredible opportunity—through game design and the interactive experiences of virtual worlds—to challenge the long-held assumption that written discourse is the only context where philosophical thought can emerge and grow.
The notion that virtual worlds could be accepted as interactive arguments, academic outputs, or critical artifacts isn't some new fad; it's been firmly rooted for at least a decade now.
And if philosophizing within and through virtual worlds has already opened up new ways of thinking and new avenues of research, then I think we should open up the conversation ourselves:
- what is the greatest potential in the alliance between video games and philosophy?
addx? 😉)
Honestly, I'd say it's pretty slim. If you look at most game developers, there's almost zero connection to Philosophy. In fact, if there's any underlying "philosophy" driving the industry, it's usually just "make a fortune and chase the fame."
Amanda James27 said:It’s a complicated question, for a bunch of different reasons. If you’re looking for a spot where you could actually get eyes on a case in person, I’m thinking places like Best Buy or maybe Expedia—though if you go to the flagship Expedia in New York City, that’s probably your best bet since they have the massive floor space. You could also try ADP, Micron, or Intel. Basically, you need the big-box retailers that actually bother having an exhibition area. The smaller shops usually just operate on a "order it and pick it up later" basis, or they only stock the most popular stuff.
And honestly, returns at physical stores are a total minefield. Usually, if you buy something online, you have the right to return it without anyone asking questions, but once you walk into a "real" brick-and-mortar store, the logic is that you had the chance to inspect everything before paying, so you don't really have that right anymore. It all comes down to whether the manager feels like being nice. Cases are especially tricky because they come in these big boxes; once you break the seal, it’s obvious it’s been opened. Plus, they have all these little bits—screws, internal speakers, maybe some specific cables—that someone would have to meticulously check to make sure nothing went missing.
With some places, you might get away with a return if you're upgrading to something more expensive, but again, cases are way more sensitive than other parts.
In my experience, I’ve only actually returned hardware twice, and both times it was more of an exchange for a pricier part rather than a straight refund. I did it either the same day or the day after I bought it. This was ages ago—like 12 or 13 years back at Expedia with a GPU, and then about 4 years ago with a motherboard at ADP. In both cases, it wasn't because I changed my mind; it was because the system was unstable with those specific parts. That said, when I took that motherboard back to ADP, they docked 20% of the value because the guy told me they couldn't sell it as "new" anymore. There weren't even any signs it had been used, and all the cables were still in their original packaging since I used my own, and the box didn't even have that cellophane wrap you can tell has been tampered with... so who knows if they sold it as new or used. Still, I was just happy they even agreed to take it.
The idea of a "best" case is totally subjective. What works for one person is a nightmare for another. But based on what you're saying, you don't have a ton of options anyway. Modern builds actually have fewer components than they did 5 or 10 years ago. Optical drives are basically prehistoric at this point, so most high-end models don't even have a slot for a CD/DVD/Blu-ray drive. Maybe one in ten has a single slot. Even big full towers don't guarantee it anymore, though the odds are slightly better there—maybe half of them have it. But then again, those ones are $400 and up.
If you browse the web shops for the retailers I mentioned earlier, you'll see that nowadays, the top priority is RGB lighting and looking flashy—expandability has become a secondary thought. Those external 5.25" bays you see? They're mostly found in cheap, practically no-name cases, with maybe a few higher-end ones here and there.
That’s true. The whole landscape has shifted. I actually found one shop that carries some really great cases—they have Zalman and other decent brands that feature all the lighting effects and whatnot.
On another note, I know this might have been covered in other threads, but what kind of power supply wattage is standard these days? I'm looking at heavy workloads—long rendering sessions for both 3D work and video. I don't intend to mine cryptocurrency (which I honestly think is just a fad, and I have better ways to make money anyway), nor am I buying GPUs specifically for that. I just want a solid graphics card and enough headroom for sustained, full-load CPU tasks, like running an i9 (LGA 1200 socket), plus some occasional gaming and general use.
Elizabeth Patel4 said:Alright, thanks! I'm downloading Ubuntu and Fedora now. I think I'll grab Xubuntu as well, just so I can give them all a proper test run.
If you go with Ubuntu along with Matea, you'll end up with an experience very similar to what you'd get with Mint.
Jack Cook7 said:So, what's the plan?
Mint is just a clean, little system built for end users.
If you're looking to spin up virtual machines, then you aren't an end user—you're a developer, and honestly, that's a whole different breed of user entirely.
It’s kind of wild how none of those Linux experts bothered to point that out to you. I guess they've never actually dealt with regular end users before.
Maybe that's why they don't have any.
It isn't that I'm necessarily praising Mint—I don't know the first thing about distro maintenance or open-source policies—but I run my virtual machines on Mint quite smoothly. They’ve never given me any trouble. What tends to bog it down, much like it does with Windows, is simply having too many applications installed at once.
And there is one other thing that can really kill performance: resizing partitions, specifically the one holding your swap space.
swifttinker40 said:I have an image that I need to upscale by about 30%, but whenever I try to resize it, it just ends up looking all pixelated.
I heard there might be a newer tool in the latest version of Photoshop that can handle this with minimal quality loss.
Does anyone know if that's actually true? If so, how do I do it? Or maybe there’s some other software out there that works better.
ETO. It happened.
Back when they were teaching at MIT that they don't waste time on useless fluff like thermodynamics and instead focus strictly on practical applications, I honestly thought students would try to take a tiny image, blow it up, and then be completely baffled as to why they couldn't make it look sharp without blurring everything out.
And ETO...
There is a way, though: fractal algorithms can essentially "hallucinate" details that weren't even in the original file. As long as you aren't looking too closely, a shot of the rolling hills in the Midwest can look razor-sharp. But once you zoom in, you realize it isn't actually grass—it's just math filling in the blanks where the information doesn't exist, making it look decent at a quick glance.
driftingcanyon2 said:I’ve said this before: if you're just starting out, MX Linux is pretty much the gold standard. You could always go with PCLinuxOS, or maybe one of the Ubuntu flavors, but honestly, all of those options feel like a step up from the lackluster experience you get with Mint.
It feels like we’re just watching a bunch of mediocre developers peddle recycled ideas, essentially stripping parts from Debian or Ubuntu because they lack anything original to offer. They slap on some half-baked "fixes," only to pass the same old bugs down to the next version, and then there's the nightmare of pushing updates with kernels that haven't been properly vetted—more stuff lifted straight from Debian or Ubuntu—leaving us with nothing but a broken mess of a Linux distro.
Oh, I’m aware. But what exactly causes the slowdown? Is it some kind of fragmentation? Or perhaps an overwhelming number of files being indexed? I'm mostly speculating here since I don't know the technical specifics, but it reminds me of how Windows behaves—the registry gets bloated, and background processes for every little thing start piling up until everything crawls...
driftingcanyon2 said:Mint was originally pitched as an "improved" version of Ubuntu, though that sentiment really only held water until about 2010; since then, the quality has slipped so significantly that it’s arguably worse than Ubuntu itself. It’s fundamentally flawed because it relies entirely on someone else's foundation—specifically Debian and Ubuntu—meaning it's tethered to those two giants, where bugs aren't actually fixed for years but just get passed from one release to the next. I spent quite a long time using this distro back in the day, so I'm speaking from experience. At best, Mint is mediocre, while the Debian-based Mint is complete junk—unreliable and practically unusable. It's unfortunate that this mess is often "recommended" to beginners. As for swap, the OP keeps bringing it up, seemingly unaware that they don't even need swap with 8 GB of RAM.
When I previously mentioned on the Developers USA Relaxed forum that Mint tends to choke over time, I got absolutely torn apart. Apparently, it's impossible for that to happen on Linux because "it's not like Windows," according to the Gjuro Kladarić school of thought.
But in reality, it behaves exactly like Windows: after a certain amount of time, it slows down until it becomes unusable. To some people, reinstalling Linux just to fix performance issues is treated like heresy.
However, I have a question: why does this actually happen? Setting aside the debate over whether Mint is good or bad, is there a concrete technical reason behind this slowdown?
Carl Doyle92 said:Hello there, I'm looking at the Wacom Intuos S graphics tablet https://www.amazon.com/Wacom-Intuos-Small-Graphics-Tablet/dp/B00S5V9T6M. I'm certainly no expert in this field, as I'm actually buying this as a birthday gift for my sister. I'm a little confused about the whole software situation. From what I understand, it comes with some free software included, but I'm stumped by this specific offer regarding software up to $333 mentioned in the retailer's promotion. Does anyone know how that works? I reached out to them, and they just told me: depending on which tablet you purchase, you can select up to three licenses on the official Wacom website.
If someone could clarify this for me, I would truly appreciate it. Thanks in advance.
To be perfectly honest, I'm not entirely sure what extra value those bundled software packages provide. However, the tablet itself is absolutely worth the investment. In my opinion, Wacom is the gold standard when it comes to graphics tablets globally.
Regardless of what extras you get, you can always pair the device with Adobe Photoshop or the free, open-source Crit. Plenty of professional graphic designers rely on these tools and generally prefer using a tablet over a traditional mouse, though you will definitely need a little time to adjust to the sensation (you'll see why).
I’m planning to build a new desktop workstation (just like I used to do throughout the entire 2000s).
Since budget isn't really a primary concern for me anymore, I want to go high-end. I'm looking for a chassis where the plastic HDD mounts don't snap the moment you try to slide a drive in—I had a "fancy" case once from General Mills where everything just cracked immediately. I want something built with premium materials, not cheap or recycled junk, and with a finish so smooth you won't slice your fingers on sharp edges. You know the drill: hex bolts, solid fit-and-finish, and overall precision.
Ideally, it should feature a tempered glass panel and support for large fans, LED strips, and maybe even some small LED displays for monitoring things like temperature...
Now, my question isn't about which specific model to pick or where to order it online. I actually want to avoid online shopping for this. I’m looking for a brick-and-mortar store where I can physically walk in, inspect the build quality, buy it, and take it home. Plus, I want the peace of mind of being able to return it if it doesn't meet my expectations.
Standard ATX format is fine, and it can come without a power supply since I already have one ready to go.
High-quality front panel I/O (integrated USB slots, etc.) is a must. I definitely prefer a more industrial, metallic aesthetic.
My day-to-day work is mostly on laptops, but I need a desktop specifically because I want the freedom to mod it and pack it with various drives—Blue-ray, optical discs, magnetic HDDs, SSDs, you name it.
Which physical stores in the US carry the best selection of high-end cases? Feel free to include pricing; while cost isn't the deciding factor, it helps me gauge what is top-tier versus what is just scrap.
brighttiger5 said:I tend to have a bit of a negative outlook whenever my laptops end up at a repair shop. There’s always that lingering doubt—what if this happens again? Or worse, what if I fix it now only to find out it’s fundamentally broken later?
Thanks to everyone for the help. I’m really hoping it was just a simple key sticking or something they could easily reset so it works smoothly again.
It’s a real shame, too; for such an expensive machine, it lasted about two and a half years without a single issue.
It happens to the best of us. Honestly, an issue with the screen shouldn't be a massive deal. I’ve actually had pretty good experiences with repair shops myself. Once, they even upgraded my screen from 1600x900 to Full HD. In the worst-case scenario, they might have to swap out the motherboard, but everything is fixable, especially if the laptop is still relatively new. Keyboards are a bit trickier, though, since they have to source the right layout or laser-etch the specific US symbols onto the existing one.
Right now, I’m actually using a Lenovo Flex 5 for work, which isn't usually my favorite brand. People say they aren't the most reliable, so I'll let you know if that turns out to be true. So far, though, I've noticed that most failures come down to accidental damage rather than design flaws—though you do see occasional manufacturing issues, like certain old HP series with ATI graphics or those Acer keyboards.
🥱
Patrick Chase9 said:Could someone please provide a bit more detail regarding this hardware? I'd love to get a better understanding of its specific specs and overall performance.
For instance, are they even available on the US market yet? I'm curious about what kind of price point we're looking at, and more importantly, does anyone actually think it’s worth the investment? I'm specifically looking at a tablet around the A5 size.🤣
Wacom definitely holds the top spot when it comes to graphics tablets, but man, they really aren't cheap.
wiredotter14 said:Since that's an older generation chip without Hyperthreading—kind of like an old i5 such as a 7400—for $67 a little less, you can grab an i3 10100 f with Hyperthreading, which performs more like an i7 7700. Plus, pairing a pricey motherboard with an overclocking chipset for that specific CPU just doesn't make much sense.
A B460 motherboard for, say, $267 combined with an i3 10100 f at about $233 brings the total to roughly $500. That setup offers significantly better performance than your current combo, which sits north of $667.
P.S.
What does the motherboard have to do with the actual processing power? You're recommending a weak, poor-value entry-level processor paired with an expensive board....
P.S.2, you claim a $400 board isn't expensive for this build, but honestly, it feels like you're just trolling me here....
By all means, she should look into your suggestion too. I really don't mind. Instead of an Intel i3, you're suggesting an Intel i3. Fine by me.
Bryan Taylor6 said:Come on, man, that platform is totally obsolete. What kind of motherboard would he even need for just browsing the web or basic office tasks from $400?????
Are you just trying to offload old stock that nobody else wants to touch?
Back in the day, those vintage computer magazines used to claim you could still use old hardware for light web surfing. Those days are long gone. Today’s internet is incredibly hungry for processing power. Just opening up Facebook can make an older processor start sweating under the load.
That's why he needs something decent. This motherboard isn't expensive at all, and it'll serve him well for quite a while.
The CPU I mentioned has 4 cores, which is a standard Intel i3 that won't break the bank.
The worst thing he could do right now is buy an AMD build, only to find himself needing to swap everything out in three years.
urbanowl81 said:Since I haven't really played anything in ages (the last thing I touched was BF2), I just need a desktop for browsing the forums 🙂, running some accounting software, a stock trading app, Excel, Word, YouTube, and so on. Basically, my requirements are pretty basic. I honestly think this old machine could keep going if memory wasn't such a massive bottleneck; otherwise, I'm planning to let it retire gracefully. The old rig has a Q9650, which was top-of-the-line back in the day (around '07 or '08), G.Skill DDR2 RAM (4x2GB), an ATI 4850 that was swapped for a GTX 580, plus an SSD and an HDD. But man, that memory is killing me—if I have an accounting program running in the background, I can only open a couple of tabs before it tells me it's out of memory. Maybe a few more if I don't have YouTube open, but it's frustrating. Even though 8GB shouldn't be *that* little by today's standards, I don't know. From what I can see, it isn't easy finding DDR2 sticks that would actually help (like 4x4 or 2x8GB). The motherboard (a Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3) supports up to 16GB, but right now it's sitting at 8GB. I found a used 8GB 1600 Kingston stick on AliExpress LINK, but I have no idea if it'll even work properly. To be honest, I'm a bit reluctant to sink $50 or so into this old computer, though if it fixes the issue, it's much cheaper than buying a new one. What would you recommend?
If I go the route of buying something new, what's the best move? How much would a decent, modern PC cost these days? I saw someone in another thread put together a build with an AMD Ryzen 5 3600 and a GTX 1660, only to get told it was "bottom of the barrel" because the components are older generation (LINK). I'm a bit out of the loop; I've been reading that there's a shortage and prices for older parts are climbing (understandable, given the pandemic).
I wouldn't suggest building a configuration with an AMD Ryzen. You mentioned yourself that you aren't a gamer, and I assume you want a computer that lasts and stays reliable for the long haul.
Go with an Intel's motherboard; the ones you'll need aren't expensive. You can find them for under $500.
Grab a 4-core processor (don't go lower than 4 physical cores; things run much smoother with at least 4), and nowadays, an NVMe drive is standard practice (and they aren't pricey either).
I know some people might criticize me for not giving specific suggestions for processor types or memory, but if you're interested, I can put together a reasonable build for you.
Just pay attention to the chipset. It doesn't have to be the latest 1200 series, but remember, once you pick a motherboard, you have to choose your processor based on that.
For example:
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/motherboard-example-link and then
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/intel-core-i3-9100-linkYou won't even need a dedicated graphics card (though you certainly can buy one and plug it in).
brighttiger5 said:Hey everyone.
So, a few days ago, my phone fell right onto the key for my ROG GL 553VE.
I’ve been scouring YouTube looking for some tutorials, but I can't find anything specific to my exact model.
The key keeps popping off constantly, which makes typing incredibly frustrating.
I don't think there's any deep technical mystery here, but I probably just need to know how to fix it.
If anyone could lend a hand, I'd really appreciate it.
It looks like they just copied a terrible design choice from Apple (who also forced users to swap out entire keyboards). Honestly, whoever came up with that at Apple deserves a stern talking-to.
Basically, half the time you'll end up having to replace the whole keyboard assembly. Occasionally you can just snap it back into place, but more often than not, you can't.
Jesse Ortiz4 said:I have this 27" model and the Dell UltraSharp monitor is doing just fine for me.
I've had it since $600 from Best Buy.
I actually own one myself and I’d definitely recommend it. It offers full rotation on all three axes, an IPS panel with 10-bit color per channel, and a complete range of ports from VGA to DisplayPort. On top of that, you get built-in speakers and a 2560x1440 resolution. Personally, I haven't run into any performance issues; the colors are surprisingly vibrant, and the factory calibration is quite solid.
Thomas Nelson25 said:I'd throw external memory and intelligence into the mix too, especially with smartphones.
People are basically glued to them 24/7 at this point.
It’s total cyborg territory—everyone just acting based on what an algorithm tells them to do. And honestly, the person on the other side of the screen? Even if they are human, nowadays they might as well be a bot.
That person is just as much under the machine's thumb.
All this is bound to lead to some weird side effects... we'll just have to wait and see.
You say "will." I say "are." I can already see it happening.
I could easily write a book about these new generations of "digital natives."
They’re becoming psychotic, even feral and aggressive, while their entire existence is reduced to being little worker bees in corporate environments that feel just as hollow and alienated as they are.
The only thing left from their biological programming is the impulse to have children. But once they actually have them, they have no idea what to do with them. Form is replacing substance.
silverotter592 said:Hey there,
I’ve been sitting here thinking about this, and I wanted to ask everyone: how much substance do you actually find when you hang out with people who are on their own spiritual journey? I mean, when it comes to really opening up and sharing the highs and lows of life across the board—is there any actual depth there? From what I’ve seen personally, every single person I’ve run into who claims to be into spirituality seems to have already picked a specific religion or a certain niche movement to cling to, and honestly, it feels like they aren't actually looking for genuine, soul-level friendship. It feels more like they just want to recruit anyone they meet into their little group or community. So, I'm curious, what has your experience been like in your day-to-day interactions with others who are also walking this path?
There seem to be fewer of them every year. Ever since that massive retail boom back around 2003, people have become increasingly obsessed with material things. The older generation has passed on, and the new one hasn't really stepped up to fill the void. Everyone is just too caught up in the grind of making money, which doesn't exactly mesh well with a spiritual lifestyle. That said, I don't really run in artist circles, and I suspect there might be more meaningful connections to be found there.