vision, glasses
It still makes the image in each eye a different size, but there's not much I can do about that.
vision, glasses
I had a cataract (and surgery) in only one eye, so they're very different. This particular tradeoff makes the closest that I can see something clearly about the same in each eye.
vision, glasses
I ordered glasses with a prescription that I adjusted manually (for better near vision), and I just got them and they are exactly what I was hoping they'd be.
I think the default is to optimize for seeing something infinitely far away, and I have reached the point where that is no longer good for near vision and I need to make an intentional tradeoff.
Actually, now that i think about it, this category is very broad outside of software too.
To me it feels reasonable to say: the things needed for a functioning society (or participation in such) should be free, transparent, and non-discriminatory. Which I guess is almost, but not quite, socialism? I don't care about ownership of those things, just how they're run.
It just occurred to me that a lot of software, including client-side software, is infrastructure. Like, my email client and text editor are infrastructure. And therefore I hold them to different standards than I would a game someone made. I expect them to be free, not for profit, transparent (open source, open protocols, finances, etc.), and non-discriminatory.
I am willing to pay for such things, but if using it requires payment, I will look for any alternative.
I recently started using this Android application for medication reminders: https://github.com/Futsch1/medTimer
It'll make notifications on your phone based on your meds schedule, and you can mark off when you've taken them. Options to repeat or snooze notifications. It keeps track of what you've taken when, or skipped, and you can log that in more detail in the app (including non-scheduled doses).
It seems to work well, and I think I'll keep it.
About “deadnames”
Some myths about deadnames and deadnaming
- “it’s just a trans thing”: cis people can have deadnames too, for many many reasons. It’s not just a special concern of trans people. One common reason is that a name can be connected to an abusive family member, and they may be powerless to change it formally and publicly. Another is the adoption of a name for oneself as a rite of passage.
- “all former/assigned-at-birth names of trans people are deadnames”: not all trans people have deadnames. Practices about names vary widely across cultures, languages and groups. For example I don’t consider my “wallet name” dead, and it isn’t a gendered name and doesn’t make gender dysphoria worse. Meanwhile I choose to not use it day to day because many people have trouble pronouncing it (or recognizing it as a name!)
I think the rejection of deadnaming shouldn’t be understood as a dogmatic issue but as a practice of care, about caring of the real other.
@riesi I'm aware of it. It's occasionally an improvement.
Like, no one can make a web browser because the web is so complex, and we mostly use that complexity for:
And.. maybe a simple client would be better than a complex VM and layout engine a lot of the time?