KamikazeRusher
@KamikazeRusher@lemm.ee
- Comment on Smart TVs take snapshots of what you watch multiple times per second 1 month ago:
I’ve jokingly said this before, but just wait until manufacturers start adding 4G/5G to TVs explicitly for ads and telemetry…
- Comment on I know Mormons can't have alcohol, but couldn't they just dip their tongue in a glass of beer and not move it? 2 months ago:
Like with caffeine specifically they have a long history of forbidding its use and then suddenly they reinterpreted it the way you’re suggesting.
I had to think about this. I can’t seem to find any articles in a quick search where church leaders (a Prophet or Apostle) explicitly forbade its use. I have, however, found many excerpts where leaders who do not sit at the head (Quorum of the Seventy, BIshop, etc) have made statements warning against it or even flat out saying that members should not ingest it.
Given the structure and lack of corrective statements coming from above, I would attribute the confusion to local and regional leaders being overzealous by including caffeine explicitly in their teachings. Some have worded things in a manner I would find accurate, such as “high-dose caffeinated energy drinks” or “excessive soda consumption which results in high caffeine and sugar intake.” Others though explicitly call out caffeine as an “evil,” describing experiences with caffeine withdrawals or members deciding to not ingest alcohol, nicotine, nor caffeine. These mentions seem to have drummed up confusion primarily in the 80s (a lot of “Letter to the Editor” publications from this period seem to have been back-and-forth arguments among members, lol).
Initially I didn’t think the history is as “long” as you claimed, but then I realized that the 80s was just forty years ago, and with some results of the topic dating as far back as the 70s, it would mean it’s been an intra-member debate for almost half a century. And half a century is practically a lifetime 😖
- Comment on I know Mormons can't have alcohol, but couldn't they just dip their tongue in a glass of beer and not move it? 2 months ago:
Yeah… unfortunately, confusion about this particular subject exists because members often look for the underlying justification on things and then extrapolate from there.
(I’m going to paraphrase and shorten things a lot here so we don’t have to dive into definitions and technicalities. Bear with me.)
The doctrine brought forth about this is what’s referred to as “The Word of Wisdom,” which was a short outline of what things were deemed as “harmful” or otherwise “unsuitable” for the body. The idea being that the Lord was promising to people that if they didn’t ingest these things, they would live a healthier life as a result. “Hot drinks” was mentioned and clarified a century later to mean “tea and coffee.” Furthermore, “tea” refers to black and green tea, and not necessarily herbal tea.
People, by nature, want to understand the “why” behind things. You also have people who want to understand where the line begins and ends so they can tiptoe it. Enter the rumor that since the “hot drinks” referred to “tea and coffee,” they both have not-so-insignificant amounts of caffeine in them. Obviously that must mean drinks like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, plus foods such as chocolate, must also be in violation of this, right?
Well, the issue with that is people think they’re applying “the spirit of the law” (meaning the larger picture behind it) when they’re actually applying “the word of the law” (taken at face value). The idea behind the Word of Wisdom is to take care of your body by having a balanced diet and not eating too much of a particular thing. Certain items were called out explicitly; if caffeine were the true issue, then it would’ve been called out instead. But it wasn’t, and there have been some clarifications to emphasize that caffeine itself is not the explicit reason behind it. (However the idea of “addiction” could extend to caffeine if someone were to consume large amounts of it regularly, but addiction or dependency can occur even to things like Tylenol when too much is consumed, so targeting it specifically is silly.)
So in short, it’s a mixture of misunderstanding and overzealous practice. Caffeine is perfectly fine. Just like anything else: make sure you’re not consuming too much of it.
- Comment on Arizona toddler rescued after getting trapped in a Tesla with a dead battery | The Model Y’s 12-volt battery, which powers things like the doors and windows, died 4 months ago:
I’m going to upvote you for providing the viewpoint that models which have the manual releases hide them to prevent damage occurring from someone who instinctively pull on it to open the door. In the case of young children, they won’t know enough to not do the same thing they would do in other vehicles to open the door.
However, obscuring them from view also means they’re at high risk in the event of an accident which kills the power. Trying to calmly walk a child through the steps may not work. I don’t know how much force is needed for some of the release latches (and I’ll assume not a lot is required).
- Comment on Arizona toddler rescued after getting trapped in a Tesla with a dead battery | The Model Y’s 12-volt battery, which powers things like the doors and windows, died 4 months ago:
Cybertruck also has manual releases but the rear doors hold it in the map pocket. Better but still not in a sensible place when someone is panicking.
- Comment on Arizona toddler rescued after getting trapped in a Tesla with a dead battery | The Model Y’s 12-volt battery, which powers things like the doors and windows, died 4 months ago:
Ok. So that’s the Model 3.
How about the Model Y?
Ok. Not all Model Ys have rear manual releases. I’ll assume the best and believe that only certain countries have this design.
How about the Model X?
So it’s behind the speaker grille. Uncertain if you need a screwdriver, but I’ll assume not. However it is hidden away from sight.
How about the Model S?
Oh, it’s under the carpet.
So yeah, turns out, I’m not making shit up, and there is indeed empirical evidence for it.
- Comment on Arizona toddler rescued after getting trapped in a Tesla with a dead battery | The Model Y’s 12-volt battery, which powers things like the doors and windows, died 4 months ago:
I was talking to a Tesla owner about this and they argued that if the window is electric then there’s no difference making the door electric. They couldn’t understand that the door itself can be operated independently of the rest of the vehicle.
Making windows electric causes a safety tradeoff. You get ease of operation while losing the ability to open the window in the event of an accident (where power cannot be supplied). However you can still unlock and open the door manually as an alternative escape option. This also applies in non-accident scenarios (dead battery).
Making doors electric is nothing more than a safety risk. From the inside you might have access to a manual release latch, but some doors require you to unscrew things first. Any emergency situation where you need to exit as soon as possible and the power is lost almost guarantees that you’ll be unable to safely escape.
- Comment on Stack Overflow Users Are Revolting Against an OpenAI Deal | WIRED 6 months ago:
I think it would’ve been funny if the title was “StackOverflow contributors are revolting” and the comment was “a little more than usual.”
But hey, gotta get whatever amount of humor in while you can.
- Comment on Or we could do metric time 6 months ago:
Network switches with over 10 years of uptime chuckle nervously
- Comment on Researchers unlock fiber optic connection 1.2 million times faster than broadband 6 months ago:
It’s not symmetrical yet though. Which is weird.
Eh, I would say it’s to be expected. A lot of infrastructure still relies on coax/DOCSIS which has its limitations in comparison to an all-fiber backbone. (This post has some good explanations.) However it wouldn’t surprise me if some ISPs argue that “nobody needs that much uplink” and “it helps restrict piracy” when really it’s just them holding out against performing upgrades.
- Comment on when the insurance won't pay for the medicine you were prescribed 11 months ago:
Nah I didn’t read your original comment as minimizing it, but rather saw it as someone who might not be from the USA. It sounded like genuine shock to how life-saving meds could just be flat-out denied for somebody.
- Comment on when the insurance won't pay for the medicine you were prescribed 11 months ago:
Let’s say you get diagnosed with a treatable autoimmune disorder. Treatment isn’t cheap, so usually someone who recently got diagnosed and referred to a specialist to perform care will find that their insurance denied approval for prescription of medications and supplies needed.
The insurance companies will want the doctor to re-submit while providing documentation of the diagnosis (as proof) and an outline of the treatment plan. The insurance company can say “your plan states six months of injections but we will only approve for three.” At that point, the patient is stuck with a three-month plan because the cost of treatment is too much to pay out of pocket and the doctor won’t go forward with a six-month plan unless the patient pays in advance for the three months that wouldn’t be covered.
Another example is rare disorders where the medication may cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Insurance may decide the cost is too high and deny coverage for the prescription.
Finally, there are instances where more common issues (such as diabetes) may have the insurance artificially limit how many doses of a drug they decide to cover. If a person has a special case (like needing to take twice the amount due to tolerance or it being based on the person’s weight), insurance may deny it because it exceeds what they believe the average person should need.
All of these are examples where someone is stuck waiting for what is essentially life-saving medication just because insurance doesn’t want to pay out, or doesn’t care that you have a special scenario that requires some exceptions for it to work properly.
- Comment on Choose A or B 11 months ago:
Infinite rare fish
They’d no longer be considered “rare” then, right? Or can only I eat/keep them?
Night light
Could be good or bad. Is this a night light in just one specific room? Is it a flashlight I always have on me to use as needed? Is it a glowing orb that floats around me that I can’t control?