HN user

jetanoia

99 karma
Posts8
Comments19
View on HN

Agreed with your post – except on the “Kids pajamas” – they should probably be reclassified under the “Anything which goes in or on my body” list you made.

Whether it’s undisclosed flame retardants, toxic dyes, or other harmful substances, kids bodies are generally more susceptible to harm via environmental pollutants. Such harms may not be at all obvious in the short term, but could still be very harmful over the long-term.

I wish I knew of a vastly superior option (ie, safer option) for buying kids or baby clothes. (Anyone have suggestions on this?)

That said, I believe Amazon is probably at the riskier end of this spectrum vs.traditional stores because of their distributor-centric structure.

Basically, if a harmful product were to receive any negative press, it would more easily be equated with a single company/seller from another country, and probably one with an odd-sounding name.

With a more traditional brick and mortar store, the product may be sourced from the exact same producer, but the reputation hit will be greater to the brick and mortar store, because the customer tends to equate the product more closely with the the store itself. Often, they present themselves to the public as the “seller” of the product whereas Amazon will more give the presentation of “distributor” on behalf of “(_insert_generic_inscrutably-named_foreign_corporation_name)”. Fly-by-night seems an apt description for these companies most the time.

This seemingly reduced level of accountability is the biggest problem I have with trusting them but it’s not the only one; it’s just compounded by the often fraudulent reviews, their practice of taking down authentic but critical reviews, and of selling counterfeits – even occasionally when one orders via a “Prime” option, or fulfilled by Amazon, or seemingly buys an item directly via the manufacturer’s Amazon ‘store’.

Of course there are many other issues as well but these are a few that have created headaches for me in the past to the point that I now avoid them for most purchases.

Your “plastic band” argument- indeed, most of your arguments on this- fails to acknowledge the pleasant reality of the ipad pro’s.

My 2020 ipad pro 11” does not have that unsightly plastic band, nor the iphone 15 pro.

As far as aesthetic elements, these enclosures appear essentially as metal and glass, an appearance not markedly different than existing macbook appearances.

Even the iphone mini 13 manages to fit effective cellular arrays in its compact form sans the big plastic bands on those ipads you mention. And despite its diminutive size, the mini 13 can still manage a reliable call over cellular for hours at a time. With the greater real estate offered by the macBook form factor, there are broader options for effective antenna arrays and also their power supply versus phones and tablets.

My experience with them is mixed. I’ve had a couple of theirs and they’ve been markedly inaccurate in some categories. For example, reporting I was not in bed when I actually was, or vice verse on other nights. As a result, the sleep hours were off. I still love it for the temperature control (set to manual, not their ‘auto’ algorithms), but if it can’t reliably report something as simple as whether I’m in or out of bed, then accurately judging sleep stages should be even less likely.

My oura ring has been far more helpful in identifying patterns leading to less quality sleep. For example , by highlighting elevated resting heart rates and asking me if I ate later that night, consumed spicy foods or alcohol, etc. That said, it’s not terribly durable. After a couple years it refused to accept firmware updates. Then a few weeks ago (after maybe 3 years of use) it stopped connecting to the app altogether and support tickets are going unanswered. This is greatly disappointing but I may spring for a replacement anyway because of how helpful it’s been in correlating lifestyle choices to sleep parameters (& quite consistently so).

You are right about one thing - you have the luxury of popping a pill every day that treats your condition. And from that platform, you can look down on the others and tell them to just be patient and resilient.

Your injunction to “build psychological resilience” is exceptionally tone-deaf for those suffering from cognitive problems. If your prefrontal cortex was receiving insufficient perfusion and excessive inflammation, you would begin to see the futility of such a suggestion. Try telling that to someone who’s drowning.

The suggestion that people with LC can, through the measures you suggest, get back to “an acceptable level of life quality” demonstrates how little you understand of their situation. Many people suffering from LC were formerly top-performers in their respective fields and are now suffering considerably every single day- have been for many months or years - and are understandably desperate. Unfortunately, many have chosen to end their lives because after trying the approaches you suggest (and being gaslit in a similar fashion) they concluded that life was not worth living.

Finally, your saying this girl has no fucking idea what she is doing implies you are an expert in the subject matter that she writes in. Is that the case? I find that doubtful. And I sure hope not because the illogical way you reason here would be a huge disservice to the life-sciences field.

According to the lead researcher, yes.

While anecdotal, her sleep improved significantly within 1 or 2 days of starting this new diet.

I believe she also cites improvements across cognitive symptoms - both her own symptoms and also more broadly, why it would help generally for others. Unfortunately my own LC brain fog is inhibiting my recall of the specifics.

I’m glad to hear she has found relief and hopefully others will, too. I’ll give it a try if I muster sufficient motivation and if this approach is acclaimed by some more positive anectdotes (especially those people who report an abrupt improvement in symptoms). I looked up her treatment regimen and it does sound like quite a hassle. But the risks sound manageable especially in light of the potential benefits.

Those 5 advantages are very important, but you haven’t mentioned its disadvantages which render the advantages less dramatic.

A significant disadvantage is the lower energy density of the sodium battery chemistry. Implications include faster discharge/lower range if the physical dimensions are the same as a lithium battery, or if optimized for more range/power, then it would be a larger and heavier pack vs lithium with the costs that entails.

This lower energy density is one of the main reasons it has been considered more suited to stationary application because the extra space and weight is less problematic than in a mobile applicaiton

fyi the aljazeera screenshot doesn’t show the dji article - just a cookie disclosure. Was the ‘ridiculous’ part in the article? Or their saying that the cookie gives “voice to the voiceless”. (Which is funny)

I wonder if Amazon warehouses could also be included in this calculus. Obviously there’s far fewer locations than the other chains referenced in the article, but many of them are much larger, so like all things Amazon, economy of scale could make for more efficient installation.

They’re building more of these warehouses so perhaps it’s easier to incorporate structural support designs for the load stressors versus modifying older buildings.

And given the recent construction of many, one would hope they don’t need new roofs in the next decade or two (according to the article that would make deploying solar panels in the near term less economical).

Besides supplying power needed in the warehouses themselves, they could eventually use the power generated to charge their planned fleet of electric delivery vehicles. That should be more feasible as battery storage improves.

Some interesting snippets from the article:

“Authorities say the first of its kind directive aims to create a healthy internet environment.”

“The first of its kind of rules in the country will be applicable toward algorithm recommendation technologies used for personalized push notifications, sorting and selecting, filtering, and other ways to provide information online to users, according to the announcement Tuesday. The new directive was jointly published by the Cyberspace Administration of China, along with three other government departments, and will go into effect March 1.

“While algorithms have injected momentum into political, economic, and social development over recent years, problems caused by unreasonable application of algorithms have profoundly affected the normal market order and social order,” the country’s internet watchdog said in the announcement.

Meanwhile, authorities have also tightened their oversight on algorithm recommendation service providers that offer news services, banning them from generating “fake news” or disseminating it.

“One of the most striking additions to the final draft was a stipulation prohibiting algorithms from sharing fake news,” Kendra Schaefer, head of tech policy research at Beijing-based consultancy Trivium China, told Sixth Tone. “(The rules) reflect some of the biggest concerns across Chinese society today — content control online, the aging population crisis, transparency of big tech companies, anti-competitive behavior — and seek to get out in front of a future where algorithms are used to corrode social unity or exacerbate market problems.”

how would 'counter-terrorism' phone-tracking strategies be employed for containment?...

are they actively recording all phones GPS movements so that later when someone tests positive for Omicron, they work back through that GPS database to see who else might have been exposed?

or perhaps screening text messages from telcos to identify symptomatic hotspots that will be pursued with 'random testing'?

or... ?

there must be countless ways to such tracking but I'm curious what methods are most likely, how broad is the scope (looking to identify individuals vs broader trends), and finally, what actions might they take? (forced quarantine, etc.)

Interesting how mask wearing has likely emboldened store theft… and also interesting to see responses such as this.

I can empathize with the store owner’s desire and rights to preclude theft and shoppers have plenty of alternatives if they don’t like it. But I’m curious what privacy considerations or vulnerabilities may be anticipated by this sort of practice (e.g. if the imagery is high quality, poorly protected, and stored indefinitely)…

Reminds me in a way of paparazzi and so I wonder, when will ‘automated paparazzi’ become a thing, and when will it be considered to have gone too far?

Certainly too creepy for the public to allow (or even imagine) today but perhaps in 5 or 10 years the masses may be sufficiently conditioned to consider the privacy tradeoff worth whatever conveniences (or ‘security’ benefits) it dishes up for them.

Marketed as ‘public view’ imagine Boston Dynamics or drones with more ai, solar powered, operating at amazon or google scale. Maybe they’ll even dress them up like birds and other wildlife to give it an ‘organic’ or natural feel. Fun times.