When I read the title, I thought "Surely this Larry cannot be more cited than the famous F. D. C. Willard". But then I read the article and it turns out that's very specifically the record Larry broke.

https://www.science.org/content/article/how-easy-it-fudge-your-scientific-rank-meet-larry-world-s-most-cited-cat

Source: https://xkcd.com/303/

You know, the kind that insists on using Arch, despite being slightly (or more) below the skill level one should have before using it.

Even though I find it likely that you detected an actual bias in the design of the meme, I don't see any explicit indications of Manjaro's, Fedora's or Alpine's genders.

That's what I thought too, but it turns out that is not true! Here's a couple of interesting links: Non-analytic smooth function, Bump function, Flat function. EDIT: Fixed the links and added another one.

Check out xonsh.

I don't know what Nitter is, but I think bird.makeup might be what you are looking for.

Xonsh. For basic use (running CLI programs with arguments) it works like any other shell, and for other uses it has nice Python syntax (and libraries!). For example, I like not needing a separate calculator program, as I can do maths directly in the shell with an intuitive syntax.

It me.

I've got used to XFCE.

Yes, you are mostly correct. In some sense, it is more a cultural thing. If your Arch breaks, the expectations for your ability to deal with it yourself are a bit higher. There are good instructions and people willing to help, but the latter (both inside and outside of Arch community, I think) may tell you that you shouldn't be using Arch if you don't meet their expectations.

Anyway, another aspect of it is the fact that with my system, I am a bit of a tinkerer.

I like Terminator for its mouse-controlled multiplexing. I also like the fact that it's made with Python, although I haven't utilized this fact in practice.

Ooh, thanks for the tag! This is great!

Yeah, Lynch seems to have published multiple related papers in the recent years. Superficially the science seems valid, but I haven't spent enough effort to confirm. Nevertheless, I accept that this kind of evidence should be sufficient, but in some layperson sense it lacks the concreteness of my (impractical) suggestion.

I'll share (a crude translation of) a piece of song lyrics. It has two great nuggets of wisdom right next to each other!

"There are no meaningless days Or if there are the whole life is So useless that it's better not To think about it today

And I suppose it won't be a punishment If we go together for a while When we turn out to be monsters Will the good days be a lie even then?"

The first part, for me, is about the meaning of life. How it must come from within and how it is in every moment. The second part is good relationship advice, in my opinion. Duration does not equal quality or significance. (The monsters part I don't consider that important, but for some it may be.) And these points work well together. The meaning is in the moments.

The song is Sielunvihollinen by CMX.

Andre Geim got the Ig Nobel for this. He is the only person this far to have got both the Ig Nobel and an actual Nobel prize.

I'll start with Shiofaioth:

Fuin huomo, aokae lie-laik-duei mas uin toroic kuin uin poulaiseir, bue-ecoidae-duei faelid dai opia, daet hui toroic soe-baisen-xoai iroitedaefa hein touras huic poulaiseir-ki duil Rio Hudson.

That's interesting! My first, hasty reading of that was that the work would be done by the deceleration, but that must be wrong also, as the frame becomes inertial at the end of the acceleration, even at the full speed. So, I am still unsure where the work is done, but as far as I understand, this confirms my intuition that if some particles are brought back, the observer provides the energy needed for those particles to "become real" in the frame of reference of those waiting at home.

Reading also the earlier strips might help with that. (Unless your problem is specifically with the last panel punchline. That's just about different interpretations of the word "how".) Anyway, thanks for reading!