It's frustrating how some people insist on prefixing reddit URLs with "old", requiring everybody else who opens their link to load the wrong page, edit it, and reload the modern version. 3 seconds of OPs time could have saved thousands of people from wasting their 8 seconds each.
And how do you think everyone else feels about being forced to open a shitty mobile page with 30x the data requirements and extra telemetry, popups about using an app, and asking for a login and requiring people to edit the title with old.
> requiring everybody else who opens their link to load the wrong page, edit it
It's not required. You have a preference for the "new" experience, but many people see the additional time it takes to load and read the "new" experience as the actual waste of time.
There are non-steroidal OTC supplements that are specifically anti-catabolic instead of anabolic like HMB[1], a metabolite of the amino acid leucine, and also widely used in the fitness community. Personally I have no idea which is preferable though, or whether anti-catabolism is something actually positive, as we know the importance of autophagy of senescent cells for longevity. Most of the literature I read suggests the less growth signalling, the better longevity, with the only exception being the frail elderly.
Most data on HMB shows that it is effective in preserving muscle mass in people with cancer cachexia or the eldery, results are generally not great for those without specific diseases or of younger age.
I'm still taking it because it's cheap and I figure I might as well, but anavar is likely significantly more effective.
Yes, HMB is another compound that would be potentially very beneficial during catabolic times such as extreme weight loss. The typical dosage would be 3g/day.
Examine has done excellent write ups on all the research related to it, which can be found below. They recently paywalled the bulk of it, but it's still on the wayback.
It's not as if Android offers anything either. Third party tools like syncthing can be used to backup the camera folder, but the root android folder is protected against copying because of permissions issues that Google refuses to fix. Same if you connect it to an external SSD. You have to root your phone truly be able to make a simple, complete backup. But that comes with a lot of disadvantages for financial apps, security, etc.
I wish we could go back to this uncomplicated UX. I just spent literally 2 hours setting up a brand new Epson ET-2850 printer for my dad. I'm quite disgusted at how slow, bloated and disjointed the process was. The printer ships with an android app, which worked fairly well, and, on the Epson website, some Microsoft Windows software, which was one of the worst software experiences I've ever had. The Wi-Fi setup is totally disjointed on the printer, app and windows release. You enter the Wi-Fi password via the app, which should then forward it to the printer. That's fine, it's better than using the dreadful printer interface. The printer saw the right SSID right away. No confirmation was given whether it connected or not. No big deal.
The software on their website was a Windows executable .exe file that seemed outdated even 10 years ago. To complete the last few steps, the printer network connection had to be set up once again, even though I had already previously connected it. Each attempt would take around 10-20 minutes, only to fail. The network errors and troubleshooting steps were incredibly generic and unhelpful. The worst part, until that point, was that the printer shipped with outdated firmware, and I did an online firmware update via the printer itself, confirming that the printer's Internet connection had indeed already been established. Rebooting the printer did not help. It turned out that, despite only just downloading the Windows executable that same hour from the Epson website, they were shipping an old version .exe, with some bug that causes the network setup to not be detected. However, it never prompted me to update. Only after restarting the Windows computer, and then re-opening the .exe, did some update trigger, and it allowed me to finish setting through to the last step of the installer to download the rest of the bloat and let the printer appear in the list of available printers on the network on the computer.
I then did a test print via an iPad. Took about 15 seconds.
Delusional technohopium to cope with the fact that we are only increasing the rate at which we are annihilating biodiversity globally. Just today the government of Namibia announced they are going to cull wild animals amid drought (https://www.dw.com/en/namibia-to-cull-wild-animals-amid-drou...). This is e/acc delusion akin to entropy pipe dream that is atmospheric carbon dioxide removal.
Of course, there exists the whole field of photobiomodulation. Red light therapy (630/670/810/830/850/1060 nm red and NIR light) helps the eye in the morning (see Prof Glen Jeffery's work at UCL; the mitochondria are only sensitive to RLT during a certain window of the circadian rhythm, that coincides with early morning sunlight that is shifted towards the red/NIR), particularly when it comes to preventing and slowing age-related macular degeneration, but also improving colour perception, controlling blood glucose levels, improving athletic performance and recovery, mood and cognitive performance, and some other benefits. When I first got interested I thought I'd just get a small handheld LED device, but as I got deeper into it I decided to buy a large mains powered full body panel with 5 wavelengths. In particular the benefits to my sleep and skin have been fantastic, with the caveat that I live in northern Europe at a latitude of 53.3 degrees north. Perhaps those nearer the equator will feel more muted responses. That being said, improvements to vision are counterintuitively very difficult to actually judge without measuring, because the brain is constantly adjusting/hiding our defects.
Hi, do you happen to have to have some resources for someone interested in using red light therapy? Or even just a simple buying tip to get started. As someone with quite high myopia and a little bit of astigmatism thrown in, I'm at higher risk of myopic macular degeneration, so red light therapy might be extra useful!
I'm only seeing this now, sorry. First I'm not a doctor, so I can't give medical advice, certainly not if you believe you are already predisposed to something. I would say that there is no difference between the cheap and expensive devices, as long as they emit the correct wavelengths at the correct intensities. Since that's very low for targeting the eye (you are not trying to treat deeper joints/full body), you won't have to overspend. I think Prof Glen Jeffery mentioned a handheld red light in the 30 euro range for the morning treatment.
You can also look at (670/810 nm LED light strips to hang above your computer monitors and passively absorb some while starting at your monitor all day if you are getting an excess of blue light). I think that is another protocol though, but it might help.
I am sure though that it's more about consistency and treatment time (as in, you can't double the intensity to halve the treatment time). Furthermore, more is not better, it's more like an on/off switch after 2-3 minutes. You can do it every day, just like the solar spectrum is relatively higher in the required part of the spectrum at early morning sunrise every day.
But honestly, listen to Glen Jeffery, perhaps read /r/redlighttherapy
The destruction, death and injuries seen in occupied Ukraine are already absolutely equivalent to nuclear war, minus the radiation. Also, I imagine the next nuclear weapons to be used in conflict will try to minimize their lingering "dirty" nature. So the added threat of nuclear annihilation is inconsequential.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed over 200,000 - almost entirely civilians. And those were tiny little bombs relative to what exists now a days. The biggest nuke ever tested, Tsar Bomba, is more than 3,000 more powerful than those.
And many don't seem to realize what nuclear war will be like. It's not going to be two sides launching little tactical nukes at each other's armies. If nuclear war breaks out, the involved countries are going to try to eliminate the other country. Not their army or their military, which can be rebuilt, but literally completely destroy the other country. US nuclear targets were declassified some time back. [1] While we did of course focus on trying to eliminate Soviet air capability, we were also planning to extensively bomb civilian population centers, medical production centers, industry, and more. And it's 100% guaranteed that the Soviet target list looked pretty similar.
Conventional war is nothing even remotely comparable to what nuclear war will entail.
I don't agree with your comment. Unpreparedness is one thing, but you paint a picture of weakness and reliance. Why are there no Dutch F-35s or French warships in Ukraine? Where are the British special forces? Let alone the non-NATO countries of Switzerland Austria, Cyprus, Ireland, Malta, and Sweden. Some NATO members have huge militaries, albeit with many NATO commitments, i.e. not even close to being utilized to their full potential. Others like Ireland have enough resources to fund those of close allies. Think of all those taxes paid over decades into defense. Together we could have stealth bombers in Moscow within minutes and helicopters and troops soon after. Wagner could have done it by themselves had they had the self-confidence. But no one is doing anything at all, simply because Putin has threatened to nuke us all.
Dutch have contributed massively relative to gdp. The British special forces trained Ukraines special forces after the war started. Sweden is in NATO. And you can't bomb a nuclear state.
The NL have contributed massively. I never meant that they didn't, I was selecting some powerful, random countries with still untapped resources to counter your comment that implied weakness. It was not at all my intention to diminish their contributions (consider that I didn't even mention those of Poland and the Baltics; even though I hate using GDP for this, but that is another discussion...): Again, my point was that, relative to what I imagine Europe's real military might is, it has not even really gotten started compared to what we could be doing, if only we weren't so scared of nukes. Just think of how we could have annihilated the soft target that was the disorganized 64 km Kyiv convoy, back in 2022. A quick search yielded that we have 1703 fighter jets in the EU-28, let alone the large warships, and who knows how many other assets. If we declared war (I'm not a lawyer, but it would easy to prove casus belli, and have jus ad bellum, given Russia's literal aggression and genocide). We could be attacking them along their entire (gigantic) border all the way to the east that they couldn't possibly hope to defend being so spread out. It would look totally different than the "weak" image we are projecting now because we aren't at war.
Sweden is not yet in NATO. They are on the verge of it, with Orban signing approval today, but Hungary has not yet formally submitted their instrument of ratification. Details matter when correcting people.
Well, the nuclear threat is no small threat. It's possibly humanity-ending. Specifically the nuclear winter.
It's amazing and I attribute it largely to American intelligence, how much russia was damaged with "only" a 10s advance on the Doomsday Clock (we're at 23:58:30 now).
