Actually it is pretty much the other way around. While ClearType GDI is by default incorrect gamma, it can be fixed by disabling ClearType (making for a grayscale mode that’s always gamma-correct) or by selecting the gamma-correct picture in the ClearType Tuner (https://fontgammatest.netlify.com/cleartypeGDI-gamma.PNG). On the other hand, DirectWrite is not actually gamma correct, it always produces way too dark anti-aliasing shades for black on white text no matter what is done.

[defaults]
next = –evolve

in my ~/.hgrc so I can just say `hg next`. I never wouldn’t want the –evolve; it won’t do anything if it doesn’t need to.

The biggest advantage of this workflow over mq is that merges work properly, so you get far fewer conflicts. `hg rebase -d inbound` is more likely to work than `hg pull –rebase` with mq, and vastly more likely to work than `hg qpop -a; hg pull -u; hg qpush -a`.

* hg amend is a bit shorter than hg commit –amend and it doesn’t ask you to update the commit message.

* hg evolve is similar to hg next –evolve maybe?

* hg pick is great for pushing a random commit on top of whatever is current tip. Like qpush.

* hg pdiff is like MQ’s hg qdiff

* hg split/fold are nice. fold is a bit like MQ’s qfold.

* I actually rarely use bookmarks and prefer |hg wip| as configured by ./mach bootstrap.

I think conspiracy theories are certainly a valid point, although I think traditionally it was only a very small subset of the population that would ascribe to them.

Having said that social media I think play an important role in making it easy to lock yourself into a bubble with like-minded people, but as I said I want to talk about that a bit more extensively later.

But, I still think that a wealth of evidence that people can verify themselves, that doesn’t come from the group that’s involved in the conspiracy, can still help. Yes, there’s going to be the true crazies that can’t be convinced and think even facebook, twitter and all the satellite companies are ‘in league’ with their particular enemy, but I’d like to think that’s a true minority.

Suppose I believe that those very many sources aren’t really independent. Suppose I believe they’re all “the liberal elite” or “the conservative media” – a single homogeneous entity with one agenda.

Now, I’ve got many distinct sources that happen to agree with me, and one source disagreeing. The evidence is overwhelming: the one source (“the conservative media” or “the liberal elite”) is obviously wrong, and I’m not sure how you would convince me otherwise.

(Side note: this is why representation and identity are important. If a whole demographic of “other” people appear to be a homogeneous group, you’ll weight all of their opinions as if they were a single viewpoint.)