I use #krita and have seen some great work done with it. I'm very against closed software, so I've limited my search to linux only.
See the work of https://mastodon.social/@davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
@misskitty.art @_MissKitty
I'm not sure how your two accounts are related.
I thought of you when I ran across these two posts. They are very dense reading. But I know you are a long-form writer.
deadsimpletech.com/blog/why-redacted-wins
deadsimpletech.com/blog/essay_on_redacted
I thought of you specifically because I noticed your attention to detail and careful wording in your short posts on mastodon.
I'm still digesting this text myself. I'm not sure how I feel about it.
@_MissKitty @misskitty.art I also had to stop in the middle of the second one. I agree, it is very dense, and "a bit much" relative to the point it is making.
I found it an interesting way of describing the behavior/phenomenon.
I also feel guilty in two cases myself: both in writing and in reading.
I usually describe this behavior from the point of view of "being in a bubble" or talking "into your own echo chamber."
The angle of "bayesian interpretation" is a new light for me.
There are many purposes to writing. I think that the main thing I see in this particular set of pieces that struck me and I felt worth sharing was the idea that people intentionally write in a style intended to be read only in a superficial bayesian interpretation style.
It makes me think of the way trump speaks. It is often all nouns and energy and a series of + and - points to light up taps in a bayesian filter in his target audience.