Brother I’m more vampire than man and I can only see white and gold. I have no idea how to use it as black and blue

I see, I have an acquaintance who has a type of autism. I’m happy to read you made nice first contact with the new neighbours, as I know it could be harder for someone on the spectrum.

What issues come with your reading superpower?

That means you’re the top 1% of the world, essentially, or even higher. Unlikely but not impossible, some of the fastest in the world read between 2,000-4,000 wpm.

I wasn’t guessing your age though, it was merely part of the calculation. If you’re older it just means you had even more time to read impressive numbers of books.

Why not use the local library? They often offer print services

It is pretty slow, I do about 450 a minute, though I do love reading.

The fastest 5% of readers can hit around 700-1000 words per minute, and if you’re autistic with hyperlexia, you can process text at extremely fast speeds using both brain hemispheres simultaneously. The average novel is about 90,000 words, so at 1000 wpm that’s 90 minutes per book, meaning 5 books would take you 7.5 hours of reading daily. More realistically at 700 wpm, you’re looking at 10.7 hours per day.

If you can sustain 5 books per day, that’s 1,825 books per year. To reach 20,000 books, you’d need about 11 years of consistent daily reading. The math becomes even more favorable when you consider shorter works like romance novels (89,000 words), young adult books (50,000-80,000 words), and short story collections (30,000 words).

If you started this pace in your teens and you’re now middle-aged, that’s 2-3 decades of reading time. At 1,825 books per year, you could hit 36,500-54,750 books over 20-30 years. So your claim of tens of thousands of books isn’t mathematically impossible, especially with the neurological advantages that come with hyperlexia. The math works if you’re an absolute machine with enhanced reading processing abilities and the dedication to treat reading like a full-time job for decades.

That’s an impressive claim, but let’s break down the math here. To read 10,000 books in your lifetime (that you claim is only a small part of books read), you’d need to maintain an absolutely relentless pace that borders on the impossible.

Let’s assume a typical book averages around 70,000 words (roughly 200-300 pages). The average adult reads at about 238 words per minute, which means ech book would take approximately 5 hours of pure reading time. Multiply that by 10,000 books and you’re looking at 50,000 hours of reading - that’s equivalent to working a full-time job for 24 years straight, doing nothing but reading.

Even if we’re generous and assume you started reading seriously at age 10 and are now 70, that’s 60 years of reading. To hit 10,000 books, you’d need to finish 167 books per year, or more than 3 books every single week for six decades. That means spending roughly 15 hours per week reading - every week, no breaks, no vacations, no life getting in the way.

The assumptions get even more problematic when you consider that this pace would need to be maintained through your childhood, school years, career building, relationships, and all of life’s other demands. Most voracious readers I know average 50-100 books per year at their peak, and even that requires significant dedication.

For context, if you read one book per week for 50 years you’d reach about 2,600 books. Impressive, but nowhere near 10,000. Your claim would require either superhuman reading speed, an unusually broad definition of what counts as a “book,” or some serious exaggeration. The math just doesn’t add up for a realistic human lifestyle.

It works as a multiplier for other pain meds as well. Take paracetamol combined with ibuprofen and you get the pain relief of a low level opioid like tramadol.

There’s having 30 books, and 10.000 books. There’s probably a sweet spot somewhere in the middle. No one needs 10.000 books.

It’s not weird. When a small company does something like this they lose users and it could damage them. Google doesn’t care because they know people will use them no matter what.

Isn’t Beeper another security risk? They also store your data on their cloud, and it’s not encrypted during the bridge process.

That’s so weird, what firmware do you think it could be?

Interesting, which browser did you use? I remember agar.io also being very laggy. Haven’t tried slither, but other browser games were laggy too. I’d need to reinstall Linux since I have since removed it again. I’ll let you know when I find something!

In the meantime I’m really curious for anything you find that could help.

You mean on only integrated the other games like agar.io lag as well? I tried with integrated and the RTX3060 both, and it’s baggy on both.

Did agar and survev not lag when you used the RTX3060?

I tried all of those, same issue on all of them on Brave, Chromium, and Firefox. I’ve given up hope for now, maybe with the next laptop.

3D graphics worked out of the box, but the 2D animations in the browser on any browser, any distro, any driver are super low FPS. I feel like I’ve tried everything and I cannot solve this. What’s your distro?

I have a Lenovo Legion 5 Pro with an RTX3060. When Linux can run 2D graphic animations in browsers with more than 5fps I’ll switch, but it just doesn’t work.

It may have come a long way, but let’s not pretend it’s flawless.

Installing Linux is so simple nowadays that fixing the bootloader is a level higher now

But is the information wrong?

Lucky for Europe then that it’s not on major fault lines