I have lived with multi-monitor, but I have to say I don't generally feel the need and haven't for a few years. Desktop workspaces and a tiling WM help a lot.
The one exception is if I'm doing web dev, where I need the browser, the browser dev tools, and my IDE, and having two monitors can be nice. But that's occasional for me, and I make do with opening the laptop and using it for the browser, and then having the dev tools + IDE sharing my 27" 4k everyday monitor.
Most of the time I can only read one thing at once anyway and I want it in front of me. I have hotkeys to switch workspaces instantly, which is often less disruptive than swiveling my eyes/head between two monitors. Any screens beside my 27" monitor are too much of a head swivel for more than transient use anyway.
There's an entire universe of coffee between currently fashionable pale roasts and typical Starbucks destroyed black beans. That is not the alternative.
I was absolutely joking, but in hindsight I can see that's not clear.
There are a number of words that are being declared in some quarters to be so offensive they may not even be uttered, like "faggot" which I have been chastised for even uttering in quotation, and informed I must call "the f-slur".
My take on this is it is giving power to these words they would not otherwise have and is deeply regressive. We should follow the example of "queer", which used to be used in highly offensive ways but in recent years has been adopted and claimed by the queer community and has been stripped of much of its power.
I was trying to poke fun at the idiot who is trying to give "slave" new power to offend, but obviously I didn't do it well.
We're in the process of declaring some words unsayable in order to massively amplify their power as offensive slurs. It's going great so far, though sl**e still has some distance to go.
Conversely I'd find taking my hands from the keyboard to change workspaces for instance to be clunky and awkward. That's why I use keyboard first, TrackPoint second, trackpad or mouse distant third.
Really I always thought, and I don't assume it was my original thought, that they probably were used to keeping the moon at a fixed relative position and they did the same with artificial light.
This is the first time I've heard any suggestion of being attracted directly towards the light. How would that make sense? They'd just fly straight at the moon on a clear night.
I have 8 or 10 bars within 5 minutes walk and there's zero noise or other detectable influence. I get more inconvenience from the churches 3 minutes walk away.
Though as a non-embedded dev who has interviewed embedded candidates I like to ask them to talk about the issues around C vs C++ for embedded and the first point 8 out of 10 of them make is C++ is bad because dynamic allocation is bad. And while they could expand to almost sort of make their point make sense, they generally can't and stumble when I point out it's just as optional in each.
Just throw in a $20 Intel Wi-Fi card if necessary, and don't buy the first models of the latest CPU, as with any manufacturer, and Thinkpads are some of the another for Linux.
I would use only one if I could find one I like that is thick enough. For a while I put two in one pillow case but the result was too oval in side profile.
The taste you get is radically different though. A press vs chopping is not a convenience issue as much as a recipe one.