A Journal Through My Activities, Thoughts, and Notes
Ctrl+Alt+KP 1 这里KP是哪个键？
## Claude responded: KP 是 Keypad，就是键盘右边的数字小键盘（NumPad）上的数字键。
KP 是 Keypad，就是键盘右边的数字小键盘（NumPad）上的数字键。
所以
如果你的键盘没有小键盘（比如笔记本），建议直接设成
## Claude responded: KP 是 Keypad，就是键盘右边的数字小键盘（NumPad）上的数字键。
KP 是 Keypad，就是键盘右边的数字小键盘（NumPad）上的数字键。
所以
Ctrl+Alt+KP_1 就是 Ctrl + Alt + 小键盘的1，不是主键盘行上方的数字1。如果你的键盘没有小键盘（比如笔记本），建议直接设成
Ctrl+Alt+1（主键盘数字）就好。#网摘给我的Windows Server 2022 装上了Ubuntu子系统，虽然只是WSL1也只能WSL1，还是很欢喜。因为软件环境不满意而不时想离职的心又退却了几分。
然而并没有什么用：工具链还都是windows的。乖乖退回到gitbash解决方案。那个环境留着玩点儿个人项目，也挺好！
然而并没有什么用：工具链还都是windows的。乖乖退回到gitbash解决方案。那个环境留着玩点儿个人项目，也挺好！
#网摘
One could say in the first quarter-century of my life, that while I was always fascinated by programming, I could never overcome the guilt of not really knowing whether the tool I am building right now isn’t already superceded by some much better implementation someone else has already written 30 or 40 years ago; I could write a TSV-aware search and replace, or I could find out about
You need to reinvent a couple of wheels to get to the edge of what we know about wheel-making, not a thousand wheels, and not zero; probably four or five is sufficient in most domains, maybe closer to twenty or thirty in the most epistemically rigorous and developed fields like mathematics or computer science. Each wheel you reinvent, and every directed question you ask along the way, will propel you faster to the true frontier than that same amount of time spend in idle study, or even five times that amount.
— Andrew Quinn, footnote on Replacing a 3 GB SQLite database with a 10 MB FST (finite state transducer) binary
One could say in the first quarter-century of my life, that while I was always fascinated by programming, I could never overcome the guilt of not really knowing whether the tool I am building right now isn’t already superceded by some much better implementation someone else has already written 30 or 40 years ago; I could write a TSV-aware search and replace, or I could find out about
awk and solve that entire class of problems in one fell swoop, for example. My central conceit is that this is a trap.You need to reinvent a couple of wheels to get to the edge of what we know about wheel-making, not a thousand wheels, and not zero; probably four or five is sufficient in most domains, maybe closer to twenty or thirty in the most epistemically rigorous and developed fields like mathematics or computer science. Each wheel you reinvent, and every directed question you ask along the way, will propel you faster to the true frontier than that same amount of time spend in idle study, or even five times that amount.
— Andrew Quinn, footnote on Replacing a 3 GB SQLite database with a 10 MB FST (finite state transducer) binary
Me: AI Users vary. Some know AI well, some not. Sometimes the my dislike way is good for others. Anyway, I hate the no-brain-ask way. For quality suggestions I definilitely like it. Good questions let people think, help people grow.
GPT: That’s a solid standard.
The distinction is not “asking is bad” versus “never ask.” The real split is:
- low-effort prompting that offloads thinking back to the user
- thoughtful suggestions or questions that expose options, risks, or better framing
The first is laziness. The second is useful collaboration.
So the right rule is not “avoid all asks,” but “only ask when the question carries real intelligence.” Good questions compress judgment, reveal blind spots, and improve the user’s thinking. Bad questions are just a disguised refusal to decide.
That maps cleanly to how I should work with you:
- don’t append empty optional offers
- don’t ask obvious next-step questions
- do raise strong suggestions when they improve the result
- do ask when the question itself adds value, not just permission-seeking
GPT: That’s a solid standard.
The distinction is not “asking is bad” versus “never ask.” The real split is:
- low-effort prompting that offloads thinking back to the user
- thoughtful suggestions or questions that expose options, risks, or better framing
The first is laziness. The second is useful collaboration.
So the right rule is not “avoid all asks,” but “only ask when the question carries real intelligence.” Good questions compress judgment, reveal blind spots, and improve the user’s thinking. Bad questions are just a disguised refusal to decide.
That maps cleanly to how I should work with you:
- don’t append empty optional offers
- don’t ask obvious next-step questions
- do raise strong suggestions when they improve the result
- do ask when the question itself adds value, not just permission-seeking
tmux in gitbash 在Windows server 2022上太不稳定了（也可能是我不会用）。但我最近喜欢上了平铺Panel的概念，于是我找到了wezterm。现在看它表现非常好，应该很大程度上可以替换掉tmux。爱了爱了！
Anyone can become angry, that is easy ...
but to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose, and in the right way ... this is not easy.
—ARISTOTLE
If I am not for myself, who is for me?
If I am only for myself, what am I?
If not now, when?
—HILLEL
Illusions are the truths we live by until we know better.
—NANCY GIBBS
#书摘 The explosive child - A new approach for understanding and parenting easily frustrated, chronically inflexible children
but to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose, and in the right way ... this is not easy.
—ARISTOTLE
If I am not for myself, who is for me?
If I am only for myself, what am I?
If not now, when?
—HILLEL
Illusions are the truths we live by until we know better.
—NANCY GIBBS
#书摘 The explosive child - A new approach for understanding and parenting easily frustrated, chronically inflexible children
#网友语录 懒聪 我们终其一生寻找的应该是，自己喜欢的生活和自己本该成为的人.所以多走点弯路没关系，花很多时间在路上也不要紧.只要你一直在成为自己的路上就行.命运的仁慈就在于，只要你往前走，它总是给路。
