For $700 they could at least throw in a 4k Blu-ray player.

Then again, I ponied up extra for the disc version of the original ps5 for that exact reason, only to find out the media player software is a giant piece of garbage that was clearly given no effort. So I can’t say I’m too surprised.

American here. I’m choosing to believe that this is just a normal, everyday amount of poop-related slang for the UK, and that you’re not playing it up for comedic effect.

I have to disagree a little bit personally. It can be a chore, but sometimes there is a sense that you’re taking this generic piece of tech sold by the millions and tailoring it to your personal preferences. It’s a little silly and superficial, but it can add a little extra enjoyment to that whole experience of getting a new shiny that you’ve been looking forward to.

All that said, paying $95 for the experience of setting up a used exercise bike is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard.

Aw heck, I’ll take the downvotes…

/taps head

Can’t be responsible for a global IT shutdown when you’re only a couple percent of the user base!

But are their actions causing public outrage at: a) the causes and purveyors of climate change, or b) the people protesting climate change?

I don’t think the “any attention is good attention” adage applies to something as politically polarized as climate change.

Ha! It took me a minute too to realize that having to google WTF a skibidi toilet is was the Millennial test, not being expected to know it.

Finally, a sterotype of “millennial” that recognizes we kinda be old now!

I actually didn’t, which was the main reason I replied.

It’s fairly common to see people arguing as though a thing is either risky or not risky, without any sense of context.

Risks exist on a continuum, and something not literally being forcibly banned doesn’t mean there is zero risk in that thing, just that the risk is lower than those things that are forcibly banned or that the risks can be mitigated in other ways.

Same reason you go through a metal detector to check for weapons before getting within half mile of a plane, but were left pretty much on your honor to not bring a Samsung phone with a spicy battery on board.

That’s asinine. It’s like saying “If brakes really mattered, a cop would check your brakes before letting you drive to work in the morning”. Brakes are pretty damn important, but very few places (in the US at least) have any mechanism for ensuring yours are in working order even periodically.

Proper risk mitigation takes into account (at minimum) the likelihood of an event occuring, the severity of the event occurring, your willingness to tolerate a failure, and the cost associated with implementing corrections.

Airlines have an EXTREMELY low tolerance for any kind of risk that could conceivably lead to a catastrophic failure, so the fact that you’re allowed to have a device, despite potential safety concerns, comes from a combination of a few factors:

1. The chances of some kind of major interference with flight ops happening are demonstrably pretty low
2. People would likely push back quite hard on not being able to use electronic devices for entertainment on a flight.
3. Most people comply with the request.
4. Related to 3, there is little reason for airlines to change the rule, since cell operation is next to impossible in flight anyways, and wifi/bluetooth are not in the frequency range of concern.

The real issue is that airplane mode should really only affect cell signals now and leave WiFi alone since planes have WiFi now and a lot of applications share between devices with WiFi, and leave Bluetooth and NFC alone since they’re short range and low power and unlikely to cause issues.

I’m not sure how common it is, but my S22+ will remember if I turn bluetooth or wifi on while in airplane mode, and leave them on in the future. That’s especially nice since I use a CGM that pairs to my phone via bluetooth, so I don’t have to worry about accidentally losing that connection.

Spot on about there not being any point in having cellular service enabled. You’re 6 miles up and traveling a mile every few seconds, so you might as well just shut that radio off and save a bit of battery power.

You have a point about how silly it is to scrimp on ethernet ports in new construction/remodels–wifi with a wired backhaul is unquestionably preferable to pure mesh.

But to say “wifi has nothing other than mobility” is purely asinine. It’s like saying that planes offer nothing over cars except the ability to travel faster–yeah… that’s kinda the point! Compared to the number of networked devices in the average home, there are very few current or near-future devices that could leverage even a gigabit connection fully, let alone justify a dedicated wired connection.

Streaming video needs a few 10s of Mbits tops, security cams are similar, streaming audio needs a fraction of that, your smart home devices & hubs are negligible, mobile phones and tablets downloading 100MB apps barely even blink at current wifi speeds. Even the average WFH-er is going to saturate their company’s VPN before their wifi connection struggle.

Is an ethernet connection technically better in some of those cases? Sure, but the vast majority of people would notice no functional difference aside from having to plug in a second cable.

Another point that rarely seems to be accounted for is what type of miles are being used for comparison.

Aggregate autopilot crash rates may look good compared to non-autopilot rates, but if autopilot cannot be used in inclement weather, challenging roads, or other risky situations, then the statistic is misleading. (Statistics??? Misleading??? Well, I never…)

How so? It doesn’t seem too off to me that 1/4 of people would prefer working, say Wed-Sat (4 days) over Mon-Fri (5 days) I’d happily sacrifice a Saturday off in exchange for two weekdays off, all else equal.

When this was posted a few weeks ago, it was also pointed out that your socioeconomic status and geographical location can probably also be predicted pretty well by voice, which also correlate with T2D risk factors.

It is a neat finding and all, but unless there is some underlying physiological tie between T2D and your voice that’s not explainable otherwise, it’s kind of the diagnostic equivalent of “psychic” cold reading.

¿Por que no los dos?

Seriously, crimes require motive and opportunity. Clearly a prevalence of guns provide the opportunity murderers prefer, so why should we wholesale disregard that as a way to reduce mass violence when guns are the preferred vehicle?

To be clear, I empathize with the argument that mental health issues are also a factor, but that argument seems to be brought up exclusively as a reaction to gun control, and never with any serious follow through. So until the pro-gun crowd starts proposing some actual solutions that aren’t simply blame games rooted in vague racism (fatherless families blah blah blah) or christofascism (put Jesus back in our schools) I can’t take them seriously. If universal mental health care, dismantling of systematic racism, etc were issues supported by the pro-gun bloc, then it would be a different story.

Bombings aren’t as common as school shootings because most school shooters don’t want to kill that indiscriminately.

I’m gonna need a source on that one. The entire MO of these mass shootings (and indeed bombings) has been to cause as much death and injury as possible in a short timeframe, and the only targeting I’ve seen is toward the general building, such as a school or nightclub.

It’s always the same playbook… Put out a trash argument, and then try to pivot to the next talking point when you get called out.

I’m interested in discussing the actual argument you made, not an imaginary one you’re making for me.

School bombings and mass stabbings are simply an infinitesimal problem compared to shootings. Surely there’s a reason for that, and the most obvious one is that there is some impediment to committing murder in those ways that is smaller than using a gun.

I’m sorry, but “there’s no point in trying to solve the main problem, because if we did, we’d just resort to trying to solve the lesser problems next” really isn’t a good argument. It’s the entire point of progress!

What’s stopping mass stabbings and school bombings from occurring now? If they as effective or achievable as shooting people, presumably murderers would be using those options on par with shootings. If they are more difficult or less effective, then it seems like we should prefer the lesser evil, no?

Ironically, Millennial Yodel is a pretty dope band name.

Actually, no it’s not… Maybe an album name though.