darkfags btfo

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

>accuracy

I'm generally not reading war and peace on a terminal, so I hardly care. It's aesthetic as fuck.

>>57559292
What precisely are you attempting to say here?

>>57559387

that dark themes are shit and I'm tired of seeing edgelords posting screenfetches of dark themes on this board anytime they get the chance, even seeing a screencap of 4chan in tomorrow mode makes me want to puke

>>57559466
It's not edgy, it's that your eyes don't get strained staring at a dark screen for hours on end like when you are programming, unlike a light theme.

File: dark.png (870KB, 2072x1598px) Image search: [Google]

870KB, 2072x1598px

>>57559292
No one gives a shit, and a majority of coders use dark themes because they don't care, or they have some reason for their preference. Also some people (including myself) have more frequent eye strain when looking at bright/light backgrounds.

There's also evidence to support the idea that your environmental lighting plays a big role as well. If you're in a light environment, then it's probably better to view a light screen. Similarly a darker screen is better when it's dark out. So perhaps there's merit to using both light and dark in different scenarios.

Here's a picture of my dark-themed OS because I don't give a fuck about your dumb opinion, OP.

>>57559799
fellow darkfag here, but
>FUCKING GNOME

>>57559292
>accuracy
You're aware that's not the reason people use dark schemes, right?

i use pink background fite me

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

File: 1476139297972.png (44KB, 1028x772px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 1028x772px

>>57559292
I miss the command prompt days when dark was the default for everything. Only when officefag normies wanted things to look like "muh paper" did everything go to shit.

I want everything on my computer to be light-on-dark but it's like being left handed. Everything works against you.

File: 0728eCi.jpg (151KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1366x768px

>>57559830
What's wrong with it? The only other comparable modern DE is KDE, and I dislike it aesthetically. GNOME is sexy out of the box, and any strange quirks can be fixed via extensions.

Quirks --> Extension Fix:
- Topleft hot corner is annoying
--> https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/118/no-topleft-hot-corner/
- Dislike switching apps via Overview
--> https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/307/dash-to-dock/
- Hate the huge titlebar for windows taking up space?
--> https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1026/maximus-ng/
- Want a traditional tray in the top bar?
--> https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1031/topicons/
- Fix little aesthetic gripes
--> https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/358/activities-configurator/
& https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/800/remove-dropdown-arrows/
& https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/355/status-area-horizontal-spacing/

>>57559292
>People with astigmatism (approximately 50% of the population)
and why is that mother fucker ? Because people are literally destroying their eyes on white background. Fuck you i don't want to be blind any time soon.

>>57559744
Except every single study on this topic has suggested that light themes (not perfectly white) are far better for reading ability and eye strain.

>>57560209
it literally hurts my fucking eyes and I need to turn down the brightness to almost a 0, so fuck you, I'm not suffering because some faggot on /g/ told me there's a 50% chance I may have a harder time reading shit on a black background

>>57559292
Laptopfag here:
-Dark themes save power.
-I actually find I can read them easier, so long as contrast is not ridiculous, but then contrast fucks everything up.
-Aesthetic as fuck, personal preference, don't give a shit what you think.

This doesn't make me an edgelord it just means I have different preferences and usecases, stick to arguments about things that actually matters like editors please.

>>57560250
You probably have your monitor configured incorrectly or have a #FFFFFF background.

>>57560320
>You probably have your monitor configured incorrectly
no I don't, I have 2 completely different monitors, both with brightness turned down
also at work I had to turn down the brightness to like 20/100 and switch to warm color because I almost went blind the first time I used it

>>57559292
Yeah, I will turn my eyes ball into fire because a faggot on /g/ said so.

>1980
top fucking kek

Regardless, black and dark themes are far more comfortable for me, so that's the only metric that I give a single shit about.

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

File: 1458917351222.jpg (49KB, 400x438px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 400x438px

>>57560423
/thread

>>57559292
>It causes the eye to focus by tightening the iris
yea nah

this means you get more eye strain with white backgrounds/black text

you literally don't want this

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

>>57559316
>>57559336
>>57559375
>he doesn't know what a CRT is
gtfo underage

File: slika21300375813.jpg (77KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 800x600px

>>57559316>>57559336
>>57559375
>>57559899
>>57560011
>>57560428

Weren't CRTs over 60 Hz with overclocking. I do remember mine going up to 80 Hz

The Sony E430 could do
800 x 600/155 Hz
1024 x 768/121 Hz
1280 x 1024/91 Hz
1600 x 1200/78 Hz

It isnt from the 80s however

This makes sense, because books tend to be black on white, and their refresh rate is low

ITT: feels over reals

Dark text on light background is objectively and factually better for your eyes than light text on dark backgrounds.

Keep your shitty dark as my soul themes but don't make up shit about it being for anything other than subjective aesthetics.

>>57560947
These people don't actually do any work on their computers. Just look at the shitty fonts and terrible rendering they use with the dark as my soul themes.

>>57559292

none of that matters because of my personal preferences

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-17 at 7.36.43 PM.png (62KB, 594x350px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 594x350px

>>57559292
Personally, I find that if the background is dark, you can have a better range of syntax highlighting colors which are easier to distinguish from each other.

With a white background, you end up with a lot of dark text colors, some of which look very close to black.

mfw people try this hard to justify how upset they are that people like a different aesthetic than them

>>57561198
Syntax highlighting is for children.

Did they try it with middle tone backgrounds?

What about different colour variations?

Not trying to start shit, I'm interested.

File: 1290436613546.jpg (32KB, 341x450px)

32KB, 341x450px

>>57561198
>NSInteger
what does that mean?

File: wew.png (472KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 1920x1080px

I agree and all of the text I read is black or dark on light background...


However, whenever I use syntax highlighting I prefer a dark background for better contrast.

there is a lot more to back this up than what OP posted. Like a few have chimed in this thread, every study has shown that dark on light strains your eyes less.

I know people who use darkthemes don't use google, maybe you could duckduckgo it and find out for yourself.

You just think dark themes "look kewl" and that's fine.

anything you say about "it hurts my eyes" is flat earth level bullshit

This does not change me using my computer how I like

>>57561543
Shut the Fuck up Jordan

File: 1478281980461.jpg (46KB, 553x539px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 553x539px

>>57559799
>he needs a calculator to solve 14432.6067415730337079 x 356

whatever you say, idiot

>>57561656
Delores breezed along the surface of her life like a flat stone forever
skipping along smooth water, rippling reality sporadically but oblivious
to it consistently, until she finally lost momentum, sank, and due to an
overdose of flouride as a child which caused her to suffer from chronic
apathy, doomed herself to lie forever on the floor of her life as useless
as an appendix and as lonely as a five-hundred pound barbell in a
steroid-free fitness center.

>>57560209
>Except every single study on this topic has suggested that light themes (not perfectly white) are far better for reading ability and eye strain.

i have cataracts

you're wrong

>>57561530
It's an objective-c thing. It's basically just a wrapper for a regular integer, but you have to use it for the built-in ui stuff.

>>57561462
what's wrong with it

question for all the darkfags defending their reasoning: do you ever read books or do those burn your devil eyes too?

>>57561462
>No don't make your work glow faster only children do that

Faggot

>>57561896
>question for all the darkfags defending their reasoning: do you ever read books or do those burn your devil eyes too?

paper doesn't emit light, it only reflects it, you infantile retard

>>57559292
This just in studies show that participants were 26% more accurate in reading text in a format with colors they are used to vs one they are not used to.

File: ss1.png (119KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1366x768px

The advantages for each are both based on your environment, in sunlight / pitch black room.

It's 2016 and designers / UX people still havnt figured out a unified way to provide a simple / day/light mode for usability - letting the user decide instead of forcing one or the other.

The initial study is now BTFO because of the framing of the study on mutual exclusivity.

>>57561945

lighten up, Zero Cool

the question wasn't, "do books emit light"

the question was, "do you ever reak books or do those burn your devil eyes too?"

>>57562113
Why do you care who uses what color scheme? Why do you have this push to be right?

>>57562004
Hey yo that is ugly as pass I mean my eyes hurt looking at it

>>57562164

if darkfags could keep it to themselves I'd be fine. I don't give a shit what you use, but everytime I browse /g/ darkfags post their fucking desktops in every thread and it's an eyesore.

9/10 desktop posts on /g/ are darkfags which leads me to think most of them are attention whore teenagers. They tailor their desktop environment not to be clean, easy to read and functional, but rather as a means to 'express themselves'

>>57562113
>the question wasn't, "do books emit light"

the fact that screen emits light is the reason why white backgrounds burn your eyes retard

>>57562351

what about the scientific studies cited in this thread that say light on dark causes more eye strain? bullshit?

Whenever I'm forced to read white on black text on some page momentarily I see scanlines

This can't be healthy

>>57562383
No studies in this thread have said that. The only study presented (on OP's post) only says light on dark causes more READING INNACURACIES, not eye strain

File: solarized-dualmode.png (73KB, 492x208px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 492x208px

>>57559376

rm -rf / home/anon/shit

I still use dark thou. My appartment is bright but the blinds are always shut, so its dim. I guess both are sub optimal
>>57561198
This. But your comparison is bad. No selfrespecting fag uses white, more like pic related.

>>57559292

>People could more accurately read my blurry ass 1980 CRT

That's nice.

>Most studies have shown that reading digital books written with black characters on white (light) background is better for the eyes than reading the same in white text with black (dark) background. In the experiments, the subjects read with 26% greater accuracy when they read with dark characters on a light/white background. The science (physics) behind this phenomena are the following:
1) When the background is white, display is bright and the iris closes a bit more than normal and this decreases the effect of the "deformed" lens. With a black background the iris opens a bit more to receive more light and the deformation of the lens creates a much fuzzier focus at the eye. This is known as "fuzzing effect" or "Halation".
2) While reading an e-book, white stimulates, in nearly equal amount, all the 3 colour receptors in our eyes . This makes reading white text on dark background stressful on the eyes.

>>57560829
CRTs had to do 75Hz just to be useful. Even my shit Gateway monitor could do 85Hz. 100Hz was pretty common.

>>57562343
The shit font rendering they always have is a much bigger problem than the color scheme.

>>57559292
The study's results do not necessarily apply to LCD screens, which are fucking light bulbs. The right way is to determine what works for you experimentally.

>>57562640
the thing that futurblindfags don't understand is that neither of those two color schemes are acceptable.

>>57561462
Anon gone full retard, or better full /g/

>>57560829
go to bed bryan

>>57559292
Dark themes are way more confortable than light theme.

Only retards and soccer moms use dark text on light background, all dat white light damaging your retina

I have epilepsy.

>>57561835
>>57561913
>>57563272
"Syntax highlighting is juvenile. When I was a child, I was taught arithmetic using colored rods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuisenaire_rods). I grew up and today I use monochromatic numerals."

- Rob Pike

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-nuts/hJHCAaiL0so/kG3BHV6QFfIJ

I spend ~40 hours a week staring at a code editor and have tried both light and dark themes for extended periods of time. I don't care what anybody says, dark themes are easier on my eyes. I start getting a headache if I stare at a light theme for too long, and I have a harder time scanning through code on light backgrounds.

>>57563416
>having to use Cuisenaire rods to learn arithmetic
Was he retarded as a child?

>>57563416
"I see the benefits of syntax highlighting, just as I see the benefits of diapers."

- Rob Pike

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-nuts/BmFX-PF9bSA/p3f8PA3nzu4J

>>57563458
He's still retarded.

>>57563416
>thread
>Well, this is a topic on which people will never reach consensus.
So I prefer to look for my favorite editors rather than fight over it.

well, does anyone have any recommendations for light colorschemes? I'm a user of Tomorrow-Night-Eighties .

emacs default theme master race

>>57562343
Maybe have have an easier time reading it?

>>57559466
they are better in very low light settings
the monitor light projection is reduced minimizing eye strain

>>57559799
>quod libet
muh niggah

>>57559466
You have issues, lad.

>>57559292
bill gates designed ms-dos with a black background and white characters, i think that's enough for you to >>>/trash/ with your shitty opinion

i would feel like a tryhard teen edeglord if i started using black themes.

i imagine having a white background would keep you more alert and awake in the long run.

>>57560209
The OP post literally contradicts this, if white backgrounds force the eye to tighten and focus, it causes more strain.

While I wholeheartedly agree with OP, good luck finding any half decent light shell themes. They're all shit. VS Code and Spacemacs are the only light themes I find pleasing.

>>57562343
>as a means to express themselves
What's wrong with expressing oneselve?

>>57559292
>Lightfag this hard
Enjoy your eye strain

>>57559292
>>most studies have shown that dark characters on a...
source? or tl;dr

>>57565759
>inb4 one quote is most

File: Screenshot_20161118-073055.png (342KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1080x1920px

Looks like i'm doing fine

>>57559799
>majority of coders
>majority
NOW WE ARE GOING INTO THE FULLEST IMPLICATIONS

>>57559376
Except that it looks objectively worse

File: Screenshot_2016-11-18-01-36-58.png (148KB, 480x854px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 480x854px

>>57565895
Easy on the eyes

>>57565965
Not for me really
As long as you're using autobrightness you're good
But it's preference so won't argue why one is better then the other

>>57566019
I usually keep my brightness at 50 or 35 because my battery drains faster than nerds fapping to Mia Khalifa

File: 1376137866726.jpg (22KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 225x225px

>tfw keratoconus
>tfw can't use any dark theme without the white text smudging to shit and becoming unreadable
shame because they look okay

File: 1479339023596.jpg (37KB, 480x586px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 480x586px

>>57559292

I'm not reading white on black because it's easier to read, I'm reading white on black because it black doesn't rape my eyeballs.

>black not raping

you guys who use black backgrounds are dumb. there's a reason why books don't have black pages with white ink.

>>57561611
what? The OP showed that white background with dark text strains your eyes more than dark background with white text

People who use dark themes don't want eye strain and don't care for less focus if that is the trade off.

>>57566202
Books don't emit light

>>57561611
Dude try reading shit in the dark with light theme and brightness half way, it's torture to my eyes

>not using dark for terminal and light for text editor

>>57561530
NextStepInteger 卐

>not using f.lux

>>57559292
Get some new results with the modern user in mind.

Dark light room + ultrabright white background & black font makes your eyes see even less than a bright room + dark bg & white font.

Try to let your pc/monitor run without turning them off after x hours autamatically and go to sleep.
After you wake up, immediatly go sit in front of it and try to read anything.

OP is a massive faggot edgelord.

>>57560209
To be precise, it said that black text on white background was better for readability than white text on a black background.

But that says nothing of what a good dark theme is all about, which is lightgrey text against a darkgrey hackground, which would eliminate the concern that the letter forms would blur.

>>57566019
>autobrightness
enjoy your PWM

It's easier to find a good (on the eyes) dark theme than a light theme.

>>57566202
Why would anyone use blak pages for books? It will just make them more expensive

>>57566202
because of money you fuckin idiot

For reading: dark text on a light background.
For programming: light text on a dark background.

i dont know about focus

but if i stay looking at a white screen for more than 3-4 hours, my eyes burn like hell

also, sleep gets fucked up if done at night

what about color temp? i particularly enjoy the 'home' mode of my thinkpad... it turns everything kind of yellow-greenish, and it is easy on the eyes

>1980
stopped reading there.

>>57559292
i use dark themes on my laptop because I use it at night mostly in a dark room. Light backgrounds hurt my eyes when used at night without additional lighting.

>>57565895
absolutely disgusting

>astigmatism
>misreading text
Mollycoddling retards & the genetically inferior is the bane of generalizations.

>>57560829
>80Hz
>High refresh rate
Kill yourself.

>>57559292
>benchmarking normies
>benchmarking people with astigmatism
>benchmarking people in 1980 and implying its valid today
You do realize, that my black background emits a crapload of light compared to the CRTs in the old days, which makes the second point totally invalid today, right?

>>57568591
This. There have been studies that confirm that staring into a single bright lightsource four hours while in the dark actually damages your eyes in the long run.

File: stockphotocoolschoolagekidwithbackpackandthumbsup133286.png (67KB, 340x217px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 340x217px

>>57559799
What do you think about MATE?

>>57570656
Pretty good for upping alertness, although gurana is better.

>>57570656
It's ugly and feels dated. Same with XFCE.

Both are perfectly functional and usable, but they have no polish so they feel low-quality.

>>57559292
just use what you want
what does it matter other people suffer because of their poor choices?

File: Screenshot_20161118-094135.png (323KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 1080x1920px

>>57562640
Or maybe because it's blurry as fuck

Is it possible to customize a good looking personal theme with a dark background on winblows or is it impossible? I've tried fucking around and it looks like shit

>>57565965
>serif system font

>>57571728
>watch me on my high horse as I pretend to be detached
As somebody who isn't up his own ass I'd put it more like
>what does it matter if other people prefer a standard that MIGHT end up being very inconsequentially detrimental to their performance

>>57572405
>he doesn't have a retina display

Does this mean photon is the best 4chan theme?

itt butthurt darkfags

>>57572514
Yostuba B like a normie

>>57562640
Noone uses the color sceme on the right you fucking retard. If you want to argue against a "dark" theme, then dont present us on that noone ever fucking uses.

I thought this thread was about the darknet.

>>57572599
reported

Solarized dark
Fite me

Tldr: Black text on white background is clearer but puts more stress on the eyes.

White text on black background is not as clear but less difficult on the eyes.

I always use light grey on dark grey background so I don't really care for all this.

File: darkroom.jpg (261KB, 1024x1457px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1024x1457px

I can understand that dark backgrounds are easier on the eyes if you are sitting in the dark, but why would you? I dont think my coworkers would enjoy it if I put blinds on the windows and play blackout in the office. Also, it's "illegal" to work in a dimly lit room anyways.

Plus, even with dark backgrounds, your LCD still emits light (unless you have an OLED screen), so you are still staring at something brighter than your darkasmysoul room.

But yeah, syntax highlighting with light themes sucks.

>>57572435
i don't pretend to be detached. why would anyone in their right mind give a shit what color theme you personally use in an editor?

>standard
it's not a standard

>>57562485
the top theme makes my eyes itchy in instant

>>57562915
i vote for ember font on dark background

>>57559799
Fellow sith.

File: theme.png (16KB, 673x506px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 673x506px

>>57559292

>>57560066
this

fucking normies ruin everything

Why are all you people still feeding this fucking troll? Just move on and let the "muh scientific study taken out of context" manchild throw his tantrum alone

>>57575520
>Why are all you people still feeding this fucking troll?
Because we are all good Samaritans who can not see a poor, hungry troll, without feeding and petting it.

>>57560074
I just installed ubuntu and I wanna get rid of unity, should I install gnome-shell or some other package?

>>57559292
That's true, I use light background, except at night. If I'm browsing very late in pitch black darkness it's easier on the eyes to just throw on a dark theme. Easier to read black text but easier to tolerate lower brightness if it's super late

Any recommended, light themes for Kate?
The builtin solarized has a too low contrast between the font (light grey) and the background (light orange).
Also, I kinda prefer blueish tones, just like the standard Yotsuba for example.

>>57559292
That's great OP. I literally don't care. I'm going to keep using dark theme anyways.

>>57575520

How is the study taken out of context? the only "muh" in this thread is the darkfags "muh eyes hurt"

>>57559466
>I want to be hardcore buy my mother won't let me.

>>57560272
>-Dark themes save power.
yeah, on an amoled display.

black uses more power as the pixel has be be turned on (white), then made black

Well I have tried working with both and I found working with a dark background way more comfortable and less exhausting. I don't give a fuck what a study tells me I listen to my body. Everybody's different.

Fonts are also important. I use roboto mono nowadays but Terminus is also nice. Many people seem to use Adobe Source code pro but my eyes really don't like it. As i said.. Everybody's difdiferent

>>57559466
you are a dumb cunt. Dumb annoying cunt. Themes and Color schemes with darker backgrounds don't kill your eyesight and are easier on the eyes to read at night or low light conditions for extended periods of time.
You seem to have fallen from your crib or whatever that damaged your tiny brain and you need to vent about trivial things like dark/lighter color schemes, quoting shit studies conducted 40 years ago using different parameters than the shit you are tryng to argue.
Hope you give up eventually and start doing something productive and instead of taking this shit seriously and start random discussions on random internet boards you finally contribute something note worthy.
Til then, go fuck yourself sperglord, nobody can take your shit thread seriously because you seem to have a mental disease.

File: opinion.jpg (127KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 500x281px

>>57559466

They're both good. Black for comfort and white for readability. I use black because I stare at my screen a lot and with white I've gotten eye strain. Eye strain is the most annoying shit ever.

Black makes me more comfortable, bored, and lazy. White makes me pay attention and read better. Probably improves efficiency, too.

I've tried to use a hybrid method. White in the morning and dark at night. Gets me out of my comfort zone without much downsides. Dark is a must at night regardless of who you are.

>>57565608
Not quite. Since light text on dark background is blurring the image you will try to squint to unblur the image, causing more eye strain.

>>57560074
Systemd is what is wrong with GNOME

>>57578346

not that guy, but I haven't seen a single study cited in this thread that backs up this claim of darker backgrounds being better for your precious little eyes

i find it hard to believe that this is true. if it were true, you would think light on dark would be the norm. It's not, and hasn't been for quite a long time. Why would 99.999999 percent of office software be black on white in 2016 if the opposite was easier on the eyes or better in any way? Once upon a time Wordperfect/Word, 123/excel and things like that followed were light on dark. If they went back people would be pissed

>>57559292
it doesn't change the fact that a CRT on full bright will slowly fry your eyes
i still use CRT and the only reason i don't need glasses is because i always used dark themes on everything
also it does save a bit of power

File: 1456289464391.gif (95KB, 377x350px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 377x350px

>>57559292
Was this tested in a room with lights on or off? I use a dark theme because I'm in a dark room.

My preference is light themes used in a brightly lit room.

I do have mild myopia which may or may not be relevant. I don't use any correction for near work. I can read with dark themes fine but the lack of contrast in bright rooms is annoying and switching from a dark editor to a bright browser is retina searing.

File: idothistoalltextdisplays.png (75KB, 1784x814px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1784x814px

>>57559292
The eternal faggot, OP, is still sucking cocks I see. But really, I get about 40% more screen time before I get a headache, with dark backgrounds.

>>57559292
>black on white forces you to squint constantly, so you can make out the characters better
Okay buddy, whatever you say.

>>57561462
If you're whining about efficiency, studies have shown that syntax highlighting increasing code comprehension speed significantly.

I mean, "Syntax highlighting is for children" is pretty much the epitome of edginess.

>>57561896
My books don't shoot light into my eyes.

>>57563416
>>57563475
Rob Pike's greatest achievements lately are using Macbooks and creating a new font for Go.

He's clearly past his prime.

>>57562434
You mean >>57575358
comfy

>>57559292

>>57581827
how do you blankpost in linux kevin, i don't know how to the invisible character

and while you're at it how to you whitetext since u never told me last time

>>57560272
>Dark themes save power
I'm just going to assume that you don't own an OLED laptop and tell you that you're full of shit.
>displaying dark pixels on an LCD uses (negligibly) more energy than whites
>while using a dark theme you have to turn up the screen brightness to reliably read some parts of the interface compared to a light theme, which obviously uses more power.

>not using beautiful light brown theme
are you guys masochists or something?

File: Untitled.png (296KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 2560x1440px

>>57559292
lolnothankyou

>>57582595
>cmd on taskbar

oh im laffin

>>57582611
I use few command line based programs, it's faster to use them through an already open command window..

>>57559292
>(((studies))) have shown

>>57582978
You have to go back.

>>57579083
systemd is licensed as free/libre software, and there's no evidence that it's malicious. The 2 things people have against it are either
A. They dislike its design, because it's too big and it's a dependency for some things, like GNOME.
or B. They think systemd is a tool for the NSA to use maliciously because it's a Redhat product and Redhat has cooperated with the NSA to an extent in the past.

Here's why I think both of those are dumb reasons, and to use systemd anyway:
A. As an end-user, I don't care about my init system beyond how well it boots up my computer (and whether or not it's proprietary). From what I've read from developers, the reason most distros are using systemd now is because it's easier to maintain for them, and it provides a more consistent experience for users.
B. That could be true, but in the same way that there could be a Santa Clause. It's an unproven hypothesis, and it's the same as a paranoid conspiracy theory. Anyone has to just look through the source code and discover ONE instance of malware/spyware in order to actually prove this claim. AFAIK, that hasn't happened yet.

>>57583977
The fact that it is a dependency for GNOME means that the GNOME devs have a shit design philosophy. They've basically made their DE not portable and not modular.
Even fucking KDE bloat is more modular than GNOME
There is no excuse for their poor design.

w-why not xfce?

>>57559292
Right now do this study with colorblind people.

I remember I couldn't use 60Hz CRTs larger than 14'' because flicker was unbearable.

>>57561462
This, if anything semantic highlighting is the way to go. I personally just use very light gray text with very dark gray background for everything.

t. full-time programmer

>>57559292
People claim they get eye strains from bright themes. But that will only happen if you are in a dark room. In which case staring on a bright screen (even with a dark theme) will be bad for your eyes anyway.
Open your blinds or turn on your fucking lights and you won't have this problem. There is a good reason most things are dark text on white background and not the other way around.

>>57584494
>There is a good reason most things are dark text on white background and not the other way around.
yeah. it was cheaper and easier to print black ink on white paper than doing the opposite

>1980
>High refresh rate

wat

>>57584536
You're a retard.

>>57584602
no, you are the retard here if you can't tell the obvious

>>57584678
The obvious is that you're a retard. Leave.

>>57584697
please just kys

File: whatthefuck.jpg (24KB, 353x427px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 353x427px

>>57584720
So mean.

>>57584720
no really, what did you expect? to make black paper and use white ink on it? or maybe print the negative? it became a standard and nobody really thought about changing that. and it comes from times when people were reading books in a dark room with a single candle next to them

>>57559799
Austin W Smith

AssailantLF at gmail dot com

https://github.com/AssailantLF

Mountlake Terrace, WA
2250 I St NE Apt 3
Auburn WA 98002-2848

// facebook / Austifarian

>>57579071
im asian i dont need to squint

>>57582611
What is wrong with that? I have it pinned there too

File: 2016-11-19-212529_1280x800_scrot.png (225KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1280x800px

tru

File: blind.png (676KB, 1269x721px)

676KB, 1269x721px

mfw light themes

>>57584730
[email protected]

it's real, ask him if he meditated already