Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | throw9986bbdhi's commentslogin

Can you then detach it to make it "non-quick", if you want to keep working on that separate context thing?

What I find annoying with my workflow (linux) is that starting a terminal and shell takes a lot of time. I wonder if it's possible to have a terminal always loaded so that my keybinding for creating a terminal would actually: move terminal in current workspace, focus it, then spawn another invisible terminal in the background.


I kind of use tmux for this, to have a persistent session. Even if my desktop manager (Gnome3) crashes, which happens sometimes when I run a bazillion VMs and run out of memory, my tmux session still survives and I can `tmux attach` once logged in again.

So the idea would be that you start tmux somehow/somewhere, then in your new shell you can do `tmux attach` to get into that session from anywhere, and if you close this new shell, you can still do `tmux attach` to get back to where you were.


Yakuake supports invoking the terminal in windowed-mode, if that's the profile you choose for it. I don't follow the purpose served by spawning an invisible background terminal; that doesn't seem to be common workflow, but I suspect you could wrangle it in your shell startup file so that the terminal self-invokes in hidden mode - but having 2 running copies (invisible and windowed) may result in both appearing when you press your global shortcut.


> I wonder if it's possible to have a terminal always loaded so that my keybinding for creating a terminal would actually: move terminal in current workspace, focus it, then spawn another invisible terminal in the background.

Use rxvt-unicode or another terminal that has a client/server mode. Start up a server in the background on boot or login (e.g. as a systemd user service), and make your keybind launch a new client process. Should be pretty much instant.


This is not really correct. Humans make systematic errors of judgement (bias), which is reflected in texts. But you could still imagine an AI unbiased, "perfectly modelling" this "biased" data (retrieving the "true model" behind this data).

Not that I endorse this article either.


Your comment has me pondering. Is there such a thing as an unbiased human experience, let alone an unbiased human utterance? Everything we do is informed by the past, however indirectly and outwardly unpredictable.


> you could still imagine an AI unbiased, "perfectly modelling" this "biased" data

Imagining something is different from building a working system.

In beginning physics courses, students learn the fundamentals of Newtonian mechanics using frictionless point masses, but no one has built one for the students to use in the hands-on labs.

If bias goes into a model through the training data, bias will come out when the model is used.

The only unbiased models are untrained models, which are not very useful.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: