This guy is right. The OP might be completely truthful and not lying to himself, but the probability that he isn't is quite high. Same as reading someone calling himself a genius, might be true, but it rarely is.
Further posts clearly portray what one might call "McBuddhism", complete with meditation and the new age "don't judge others!". Judgement is an animal mechanism, it's your subconscious quickly putting people in boxes to ascertain their intentions and reliability then your conscious refining that rough estimate. You can't "turn off" judgement, only keep it inside.
Once again, people being misled around by emotions and tone. Judgement is a tool, it's not good or bad by itself, what matters is its accuracy, i.e. truth.
Judgement is an animal instinct as you say, but I think it can also be a cognitive habit.
Our self awareness - in theory - allows us to change our habits, or at least temper them.
So my experience of this is that my default animal instinct is to automatically judge people in a negatively biased way (which I think may come from our evolutionary instinct to try to predict danger - or if not, perhaps something encoded in me specifically at an early age) but I have tried to adopt the conscious habit of overriding this initial instinct with “mediating thoughts” like “what do I really know about this person?” and “how would I behave if I were in their position”.
I also try to simply remember my discovered self-knowledge that my instinctive emotional response - pre-thought - is to be distrustful or overly negative. Just keeping that in mind helps automatically attack the judgemental thoughts as they come up. I guess it helps me recognise the pattern and not trust those thoughts.
I’m quite convinced that I’ve done this for long enough now that my “habit” of automatically judging people has lessened over time.
The instinct is still there, but better cognitive habits have been overlaid on top.
That said, I still feel I’m about 5-10% along in terms of progress compared to where I’d want to be! (And in reality there is no “end” to this work).
My outward behaviour towards others is generally “good” - I think - but I find myself often frustrated at the instinctive negativity in my head which I have to proactively counter - each and every time.
And because I’m human, I sometimes (ok… often) forget to.
>The latter is also where touch screens shine - the UI can evolve over time.
I think that also serves as a perverse incentive: no need to make it as perfect as possible the first time, you can always fix it later! Tech debt, coming to the controls of your moving 1~2 tons of metal, f yeah!
Not again, please let me forget that my country spawned the worst kind of flim-flam nothing-to-say-but-in-a-lot-of-words intellectuals that would disgust any proper philosopher pondering about actually life relevant questions in clear language.
"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep", as some mustachioed German once properly described.
Are you referring to Bruno Latour or the author of the post? If you're referring to Latour, I would strongly urge you to read "Laboratory Life", which is [as] clear and easy to read today as it was when I first encountered it nearly 20 years ago.
(You can tell he's a continental philosopher because this is five times as long as it should be due to every sentence being filled with synonyms.)
Of course, he also once said that Ramses II couldn't have died of tuberculosis because science hadn't invented the concept of "dying of tuberculosis" yet.
You're probably right. I looked at Neumann ("Independent soft clip, peak and thermo limiters for woofer and tweeter; Woofer excursion limiter; thermo limiter for the electronics and amplifiers") and Genelec (https://www.genelec.com/key-technologies/protection-circuitr...) for info - as they're the reference in the monitoring world - and my guess is that it's implemented like Apple, via some simulation function from time-integrated wattage and frequency to bool (limit on/off).
Apple isn't the first to use advanced limiters to get the most of loudspeakers, if I remember well, this trick is what allowed Devialet to make the Phantom what it is.
Which is why loudspeaker measurements should _always_ include something like this: http://0x0.st/XG1y.png
Congratulations on your v1.0.0! This is definitely a very nice tool, I'll try to play with it a bit and maybe try to make an ebuild (though the build system seems a bit complicated for proper no-network package managers). The extensive benchmark section is a nice plus.
reply