Care to share that evidence?
Care to share that evidence?
These are facts whether you like them or not.
That’s cheap… I’ve paid over $500 -with- insurance.
I’ve had good luck with them over 3 pairs. I get the exam at Costco and then buy from Zenni. The most expensive pair so far has been $108 for progressives with anti-glare etc although that was during a sale. They are better quality and have lasted longer than almost anything I’ve got from the traditional optometrists places, even when I’ve gone higher end. Even better, you can select the distance for computer, mid or distance - I wear one of 4 pairs depending on what I’m doing - AND they don’t check your prescription so you can use an old one if you know that works for you.
Ain’t never going back.
Sure, right. Because I’m sure you are free and clear of centuries of systemic white supremacy… Uh huh.
The left has GOT to stop using race/skin color.
You first.
Yeah, Nebula is quite good. Really like Curiosity Stream too… I subscribe to both.
But alas, most channels I follow are Youtube only and not likely to change :(
But do you have a viable alternative in your back pocket?
Biden is also Hitler. He is racist and fascist.
Prove it.
In my experience pretty much all IP cameras phone home in some way at some point, so yeah, you are best off putting them on a separate VLAN and routing appropriately.
The only brand I’ve had a good experience with is Reolink. I don’t think the quality is appreciably different than a brand like Hikvision and the firmware and support is vastly superior.
Edit: Some good info on using Reolink cameras with Frigate. I use Blue Iris but would vastly prefer OSS.
Don’t.
I would interpret the American Academy of Pediatricians stance as being supportive. But that’s open to interpretation, I suppose.
It’s literally cited on the HHS page about it: https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/youth-mental-health/social-media/index.html
So you acknowledge that you don’t have the skills necessary to interpret papers so… what, you decide that Nature adequately represents their findings enough to dismiss them? Even though you say there is little evidence of a causative link? Even though the surgeon general says they feel there is and cites that evidence to back it up?
I mean… what?
It’s a pity you aren’t worth responding to. Have a nice day!
Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me.
Why would you conclude that? Because it conflicts with your “vibe”?
Do I really need to point out that you yourself are “literally just posting vibes” ?
You didn’t even bother investigating whether or not they had justified their stance with science. I’m not convinced you made it past the headline, much less read any of the content that article linked to.
The funny thing is I actually did read two of the studies I quickly found and which you too can find. But you seem more interested in adhering to a certain… vibe.
Have a nice day.
Edit: You know I was busy and totally forgot.
The very first result on my search engine, if you search for “effects of social media on children’s mental health” is the HHS.gov website, specifically this page: https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/youth-mental-health/social-media/index.html
And wouldn’t you know, right there are 5 separate papers cited to support 1. that social media is widely used; and 2 it “presents meaningful harm to youth”
No, it’s just based on vibes.
You didn’t bother looking, clearly.
Edit: I’m not saying I’m familiar with what the studies say, although some draw a clear link with adverse mental health impacts on kids. Not sure how far that goes. I’m also not saying I agree with the SG or the need for warning labels, but to say this is based on “vibes” is, ironically, speculative at best.
Your snark, arrogance and cynicism are unwarranted and inappropriate.
But I do appreciate your providing some info - I was genuinely curious and didn’t quite know where to find this evidence - initial searches did not turn up the kind of “overwhelming evidence” you claimed existed. I’m not for a second disputing the USA’s involvement in coup attempts or regime change in general - I think this is quite adequately documented. But your claim was that there is “…overwhelming evidence Blinken has supported multiple coup attempts” but the best you can do is to essentially say he’s guilty of this personally because he has worked for the US government.
That’s honestly pretty weak.