I mean, I had an uncle showing me HTML at 7 (not a programming language, but still). I learned basic JS on Khan Academy at 11, and if I’d known it had existed earlier, I would have started earlier.

That’s pretty normal for most UEFI x86_64 things up to 2020 or so.

UEFI first became common on new computers in 2011-2012, so I don’t a lot of 2014 computers were BIOS.

I have a cheapo laptop from 2012 (one of last Gateways) and it’s a UEFI machine.

At this point, I think 15 years ago is a more realistic estimate for the last legacy BIOS machines - my Win7 box with a 1st gen i5 is legacy BIOS.

To be fair, the Kelvin timeline had about 25 years to diverge technologically and aesthetically, considering the USS Kelvin was destroyed in 2233. 25 years is more than enough for the Starfleet design philosophy to completely change - look at the Enterprise C vs the Enterprise D.

The USS Kelvin looks pretty prime - a little fancier because of modern VFX, but not more advanced than the SNW Enterprise. I would chalk down discrepancies to just evolution in production effects; I mean, doesn’t even the NX-01 look more advanced in many ways than the TOS Enterprise? Effects getting anachronistically better in Star Trek is not new, and I don’t think it signifies a “back propagation” of timeline alteration.

Also, I don’t think Kelvin Vulcans are that weird; I think it’s mostly consistent with canon. Spock’s childhood in the film is practically a recap of TAS: Yesteryear, while the Vulcan education system seems consistent with the testing Spock did on himself at the beginning of Star Trek IV. The government and culture feel consistent with most depictions.

Additionally, the idea of infinite multiverses has been canon in Star Trek for a while, heavily suggested with TNG:”Parallels” and outright confirmed in Prodigy and Lower Decks - Wesley even explicitly names the Kelvin timeline as its own parallel universe called “the Narada Incursion” in PRO.

I think the variance in temporal mechanics in the franchise can be chalked up to the different methods in which time travel happens - each method is its own “User Interface” where your actions can affect reality differently. Some of them are more traditional time travel narratives, some are loops, some are parallel universes you can return from, etcetera.

Ultimately, I think the Temporal Prime Directive comes down to what you said; each timeline is its own “world” and it’s just best to leave them alone.

I think the plot of PRO is a perfect example of why the Temporal Prime Directive matters even in less-than-linear mechanics; going to the future can cause the future to alter the past, which causes the past to alter the future again and thus the past in a different way, and so on. Basically, messing with time and realities in any way is a dumpster fire in the making.

They briefly mention one where Tuvix becomes Captain of Voyager A in Prodigy.

If only Apple Music would give Linux users some way to access lossless…

Though honestly, I’m only on Apple Music because my parents pay for it anyway (I’m a college kid), and I’ve already started accumulating a CD/digital audio file collection, which currently covers the first 6 studio albums plus albums 8 and 21 plus 1 B sides compilation, 1 single, half a live album, an album demos compilation, and 1 single.

Although the 256kpbs limitation on the browser isn’t the worst (better than a lot of video streaming services forcing 480p on unapproved devices), it still irks me.

Mostly, he uses Photoshop for printing, though, and I don’t know if Krita has as powerful a printing dialog.

My grandfather asked me about Linux, but unfortunately, he’s still using Photoshop for now.

+1 for Clevis. I’ve been using it on my laptop for a year and it works like a charm. Sometimes, you need to update bindings after kernel updates, but it’s overall quite smooth.

From what I’ve heard, ROCm may be finally getting out of its infancy; at the very least, I think by the time we get something useful, local, and ethical, it will be pretty well-developed.

Honestly, though, I’m in the same boat as you and actively try to avoid most AI stuff on my laptop. The only “AI” thing I use is I occasionally do an image upscale. I find it kind of useless on photos, but it’s sometimes helpful when doing vector traces on bitmap graphics with flat colors; Inkscape’s results aren’t always good with lower resolution images, so putting that specific kind of graphic through “cartoon mode” upscales sometimes improves results dramatically for me.

Of course, I don’t have GPU ML acceleration, so it just runs on the CPU; it’s a bit slow, but still less than 10 minutes.

I don’t know why, but I feel cheated that we don’t get an Enterprise J model - what else am I going to use as my weirdly-shaped dinner plate?

I feel like most people who use Nvidia on Linux just got their machine before they were Linux users, with a small subset for ML stuff.

Honestly, I hear ROCm may finally be getting less horrible, is getting wider distro support, and supports more GPUs than it used to, so I really hope AMD will become as livable ML dev platform as it is a desktop GPU.

Is there an old AARCH64 laptop (sub-$100, preferably closer to $50) that can be picked up for a song for playing around with crap like this?

From what I can tell, there’s a lot of crappy old ARM Chromebooks; I wonder if they perform sufficiently faster than an RPi and work well enough with a Linux distro to mess with them. I do wonder, though, if any Windows-on-ARM ones are old enough to also be cheap used (and not be some sort of Windows RT terror or something).

Actually looking at it, my impression has softened a bit. I think I just was struggling with the perspective.

I like the proportions of the earlier concept better - I like big nacelles.

That… is kind of ugly. It’s unimaginative - feels too much like an airplane or a cheap-as-heck shuttle model. It brings up the worst of late-90s/early 2000s blobject design.

It would definitely feel more at home as background ship, but this is not the design of a hero ship. It doesn’t even have to be the traditional Roddenberry-type design; something looking more like the Dove from Lower Decks would be better than this.

Yeh, I feel that. As much as I try to be hippy here, I can’t disagree with that.

I agree with all your points. I don’t deny or absolve them of their wrong; they should very much be aware they’re hurting people.

My definition of “demon” is Hitler/Stalin/Mao/Pinoche level, and despite the evil they do and the fact that they collectively enable “demons”, I don’t think they themselves rise to that level of evil. There are shades of gray.

When I say, “It is difficult to think of how they could coexist”, I mean if they refuse to be kind and coexist with others, meaning that they’ve truly refused to coexist and thus renounced that right.

I agree there need to be consequences for being horrid, I just think human rights need to be considered in those consequences as not to become horrid.

Also, I sort of view human civilization as a whole through the lens of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development. In many ways, we’re still in the pre-conventional stage where we still behave based on punishment and reward, and for humanity to survive long term (if we can), we need to strive as a society towards the post-conventional stage where we are largely beyond pain and punishment. We will likely never attain the post-conventional stage much like a circle can never be perfectly round, but we must approach it the best we can.

Yes and no. I think some people are intolerant out of true hatred and will choose to always act in bad faith. It is difficult to think of how they could coexist.

But also, a lot of people are just intolerant because they don’t actually know the people they’re hurting, only what they’ve been told. If they actually got to know the people their vote affects, they might have second thoughts - maybe not change their votes, but at the least be more prepared to live in a tolerant society. Automatically taking away this sector of the intolerant’s “right to coexist” (assuming this is an accurate interpretation of your point - I don’t intend to sealion, so correct me if I’m wrong) denies them the opportunity to learn and evolve as people and turns us into the intolerant in a sense.

This does not absolve them of their wrong, this does not mean we don’t take concrete action against intolerance in society (and unfortunately, sometimes it does mean taking away people’s “right to coexist” if they refuse to coexist, although we should avoid it as much possible), and this does not mean these people shouldn’t face the consequences of their actions.

Honestly, I often very angry about the intolerant, and part of me wants to feel they’ve renounced their humanity (the good part, anyway) in some sense, but at the end of the day I have to remind myself such thoughts are not conducive to building a good society (that is, assuming we still have a chance for one, which is not a given).

Reminds me of Mariner jettisoning herself out the holographic airlock saying, “Fail me, fail me, fail me.”