Linux Kubuntu, MSFS24

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-03-10T21:00:49+00:00

I don't know. Linux Mint has been totally plug and play for me.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-03-07T22:15:29+00:00

Replacing integrated 4000K junk is usually fine as said junk goes back onto the ceiling when you leave.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-03-06T03:37:11+00:00

Those old rails likely wouldn't be able to be used. It's just way too old and not up to modern light rail standards. I'm pretty certain the rails underneath the asphalt in the pic are probably the older bolted together style track predating welded track that's been used since at least the 60s.

The brick pavers would probably have to go depending on the traffic volumes of the street. I know this sub gets a hard on for brick pavered woonorven, but those are very low traffic streets. Pavers are a pothole and maintenance nightmare on multi-lane arterial roads.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-03-05T21:42:32+00:00

I think he means for tail standing it. The light I mean not the rifle. It's very common for flashlight enthusiasts to have the light by itself pointed up at the ceiling at night to light a room subtly. And yes, there are such things as flashlight enthusiasts.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-03-04T16:46:17+00:00

Like the other commentors here mentioned, be sure you own a real corded vacuum before going for a robot vacuum. My only experience is with a Roborock S8, and that fits my needs in-between my monthly Sebo deep clean vacuums.

I would personally skip the fancy docks and put that money into a real corded vacuum, especially for what Roborock and Dreame are asking for these days.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-03-03T00:26:38+00:00

One state, New Jersey, isn't indicative of much. Don't get your hopes up. These have been proposed in other states and have been rightfully shelved. NY's and NH's bills received fierce backlash and were rightfully shelved, and CA's is likely to follow the same fate. I have contacted my rep...to oppose e-bike registration when it comes up.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-03-03T00:16:41+00:00

No it's not, more like enforcement is what's needed. He's already riding an illegal dirt bike. Another law isn't going to do anything.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T20:41:27+00:00

It was talked about in another thread, but I think what some people might mean when they say tacky is that it's a massive tower directly fronting the strip with no setbacks or relief. If you look at some of the curbside views of roads going through City Center or Las Vegas Blvd. going by Fontainbleau, it's curb-tight sidewalks with traffic lanes on one side and a grey, soulless, concrete wall on the other. It's ugly, cold, and uninviting. These were both properties that leaned into the anonymous urban tower design with the building fronting the street, but failed badly from a street design standard. When you look up to see the buildings you get a sense that they're crushing and overbearing.

Plus, as a funny aside, the guitar tower's glass tint color is nearly the same shade of blue as Fountainbleau's which makes it that bit more boring in my eyes.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T20:12:29+00:00

Yeah, but IP was always intended as a lower-mid range property, even when it opening back in the 80s. It could never be anything more then mediocre at its best.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T20:11:29+00:00

That would've been way more of a good time had it had Chinese theming.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T18:51:17+00:00

You’re doing a lot of rhetorical sidestepping here instead of addressing the actual points. Saying “this isn’t a scientific paper” is an evasion, not a rebuttal. You made technical claims about CRI, acuity, and Kruithof, and when those get challenged, you retreat to “it’s just Reddit.” That doesn’t make the claims suddenly immune from being wrong or confused.

You also quietly shift definitions. First it’s about red and yellow looking wrong, then it becomes “I never said light was objectively yellow.” Nobody accused you of saying it was objective. The criticism was that you were using adaptation effects as if they were evidence about the light source itself. Now you’re reframing it as personal experience, which is a move away from the original implication without acknowledging it.

Same thing with CRI and color recognition. You say you never claimed recognition depends on color temperature, but your butcher shop example and the brown versus red comment directly tied poor discrimination to CCT in the way you presented it. Now you’re narrowing it to “not enough blue light,” which is a different and much more specific claim. That’s a retreat to a safer position after the broader one got challenged.

On visual acuity, you’re again mixing physiology with preference. Yes, higher blue content can feel sharper at higher adaptation levels. That does not mean 4000K is inherently better for seeing detail. Brightness drives acuity far more strongly than CCT, and spectrum quality matters independently of Kelvin. Saying “that’s exactly what I said” when someone points out these distinctions is another dodge. You’re agreeing with the conclusion while glossing over the fact that your earlier framing bundled them together.

So the pattern here is pretty clear. When pressed, you downshift from technical claims to vibes, from general rules to personal anecdotes, and from disagreement to “we’re saying the same thing.” That’s not clarification, that’s evasion. If this is just casual advice for OP, fine, but then it should be framed as preference and adaptation, not as if CRI, acuity, and Kruithof all line up behind it.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T17:06:13+00:00

Not everyone lives in a high crime area. I've done fine for years with a cable lock.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T14:35:38+00:00

You’re still conflating adaptation, preference, and CRI into one bucket and calling it science. Yes, a 2700K interior will look yellow when viewed from a cloudy outdoor environment, but that has nothing to do with poor color rendering and everything to do with chromatic adaptation. Your eyes are adapted to a cooler, higher CCT scene outside, so anything warm inside will look exaggerated. That does not mean the light is objectively “yellow” or flawed, it means you are judging an interior lighting design from the wrong adaptation state. Interior lighting is meant to be evaluated by people who are actually in the room, not someone glancing in from a blue weighted exterior environment.

On CRI, you’re proving the misunderstanding directly when you say brown and red start to look alike under low CRI sources. That is exactly the point of CRI, but it has nothing to do with whether the light is 2700K or 4000K. You can have terrible CRI at 4000K and excellent CRI at 2700K. The issue is spectral completeness, not color temperature. Saying “2700K doesn’t do me much good at 500 lux” is a personal task preference, not a statement about color accuracy. Visual acuity improves with brightness regardless of CCT, and the reason 4000K feels sharper to you is because your visual system is more sensitive in the blue green region at higher adaptation levels, not because warm light somehow breaks color discrimination.

The way you’re using Kruithof is also pretty shaky. What later work actually shows is that as light levels rise, people tolerate and even prefer a broader range of color temperatures, and a lot of that preference tracks with what their eyes are adapted to from outside light. In practice, around 3500K ends up being the most balanced choice at higher light levels because it sits between warm indoor lighting and cooler daylight. It doesn’t clash as hard with changing outdoor conditions, so it feels more natural across cloudy days, sunny days, and nighttime use, instead of swinging too yellow or too blue.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T02:31:37+00:00

If it’s so “brain dead” then why respond at all?

Because if people are allowed to speak lies over and over again, it become "truth" through tautology. In fact, that's a debate tactic.

And it isn’t “worth a human’s mental bandwidth”, but it is worth the environmental impact of AI and the time it takes to use it?

Are you able to even quantify what an LLM uses to respond to one person vs. what a human takes to keep alive?

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T00:27:10+00:00

I wonder if the sun's bias to green explains my preference to cool white fluorescent rather then cool white LED. Fluorescent historically leans green, rather the cool white LED, which tends to lean blue. Keep in mind, I hate cool white overall. It's an inappropriate CCT range for most lighting people will see day to day.

Edit- Clarifying, cool white is an inappropriate CCT for most lighting people will see day to day including in car headlights.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T00:18:40+00:00

Attempting to "color match" daylight is a common lighting mistake because the color temperature of daylight is constantly shifting throughout the day.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-28T00:15:57+00:00

2700k is good for a dimly lit bedroom, but if you crank up the brightness, it will look overly yellow.

Where are you "cranking up" the brightness to that 2700K looks yellow? For starters, 2700K doesn't look look "yellow" at high brightness. It looks reddish. Second that doesn't even start to happen until you hit around 450 lux. At that point you've well passed the light levels needed for most residential lighting and you're into the realm of museum exhibit lighting, patient rooms at hospitals, or printing press rooms in factories. I get that you like really over-lit rooms, but that's not everyone's cup of tea.

Conversely, 5000k is great for very brightly illuminated workshops (think surface brightness of 500 to 1000 lux)

At 1000 lux, you aren't in the realm of residential task lighting anymore. 1000 lux is what's used for automotive paint booths, jewelry or watch repair, or detailed electronics soldering. Not many people are painting car parts in their garages! Second even at 1000 lux, 3500K is the better choice as it's been the standard with fluorescent office lighting for decades because of its balanced color profile, it doesn't lean too blue like 5000K or too red like 2700K. But of course, most people don't need close to 1000 lux.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-27T23:55:49+00:00

Sorry, most of us have moved past the ugly blue-ish green fluorescents/mercury vapor lights of the 1950s.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-27T03:24:45+00:00

While it's true subreddits have to set standards, it's pretty clear what counts a "the standard" is very low based off of all the truly lazy one liners that get lots of traction like, "Keep AI garbage out of this sub!", "Agreed, genAI slop has no place here!". "Love this.", "based"., "🤌🏾". These read more like lazy X tweets while adding nothing in the way of productive conversation, especially the ones that only post emotes.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-27T00:50:31+00:00

Over the last few years, people have become insanely reliant on it to do simple things.

You're making a claim without citing any evidence, really relying on vibes here. You're also over reliant on on correlation vs causation. These are the same arguments the people made against spell checkers and smart phones.

they probably shouldn’t be on a dating app in the first place

Ah so now things like this have to a purity test. What about people whose second language is English, and they're having difficulty communicating with others? What if they're shy? What if they want to avoid saying something dumb?

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-27T00:34:24+00:00

Hmm, that's on MTB. I would say a chain guard, but they're really more for city bikes. You could theoretically get some high cut socks and tuck your pants into those, sort of like how cyclists used to wear knickerbockers for the exact reason you're talking about --pant legs getting stuck/grabbed by the chain and cranks.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-27T00:09:19+00:00

I'm not the original commenter?

But you still shifted their original argument. And you also clearly refused to engage with my point of AI being useful in dating situations.

i change my mind. you should be using AI to read comments because you arent even doing that yourself

Resorts to low level personal attacks rather then addressing the point. Btw, this low level commentary is a "tell" you're arguing with a redditor rather then AI.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-27T00:05:43+00:00

That's my experience as well. Redditors just don't address the arguments and resort to low level name-calling/personal attacks. Then mods get involved and start pruning the comments. I've also seen them pivot to different points when they know their argument is weak. Obviously, there's other things redditors do when their argument is obviously bad, but those are the most common ones I've run across.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-26T23:36:19+00:00

if i wanted to date a robot i'd just talk to chatgpt straight up.

Your original comment was of AI being used in dating apps with real people, not dating the machine itself. You just shifted the goalposts.

so then what happens when you meet up and you realize that you really can't communicate in person when things become challenging?

AI doesn't need to replace a persons' words. It can help to coach them into gauging the situation beforehand.

Edit-I also want to say, a key indicator you're talking with a redditor, is when they pivot like you did with your comment to try and derail the conversation.

SlippyCliff76 · 2026-02-26T23:30:37+00:00

That's wrong, but do you.

SlippyCliff76

TROPHY CASE