This may be my ignorance, but aren't most distributions [1] just an Arch / Fedora / Debian / whatever base with a desktop environment and a few opinionated choices (UI tweaks, installed applications, etc.)?
[1] I realise CachyOS makes some kernel modifications, but is that typical?
I believe the difference is between Omarchy simply having some default configuration for certain applications compared to CachyOS having a repository with a larger amount of packages which are being maintained by the CachyOS devs.
> [1] I realise CachyOS makes some kernel modifications, but is that typical?
Yes, very common. I think not making modifications (like Arch) is the atypical case, as "unmodified from upstream" is one of the core value propositions for Arch and why we chose it in the first place.
Still, CachyOS is probably an outlier in the amount of tweaks it does, and the amount of choices it surfaces to users about those tweaks.
That makes any kind of insight into consciousness as a general term impossible though. That would mean we could not learn anything about human consciousness as such from studying specific persons.
It means that if something has conscious mental states then it must have subjective experience from its own perspective. If John has a conscious mental state, then I must be able to ask "What is it like to be John?". Hope that helps.
Speaking for myself, I only used Neovim because of its modularity and the keybindings. Imho, everyone should give the basic Vim keybindings a chance at least once and see if they like it.
At this point, however, I do not really use Neovim anymore. I switched to Zed, the Vim emulation is pretty good and customizable and most functionality I want is already there along with incoming support for Jupyter Notebooks. VSCode also has these features.
It is fun to use Vim/Neovim but unless I need to use it, I doubt I will return to it.
