It's an unreasonable argument because the people who treat medication like candy are far less common than the people who are restricted from seeking medical assistance due to repressive family situations.
In Italy these services are thankfully not restricted in the same way they are in, say, America - but there are still plenty of life situations (like suffering SA from a family member) where shame, social pressures and threats can cause the regular medical system to be hard to access.
That is a far more reasonable scenario than "I just love popping abortion pills!"
No one claimed that people just "love popping abortion pills". At least my reading of their comment is that these pills are considered dangerous to take alone in your bedroom, without monitoring and follow-up by health professionals, and are therefore expected by the health system to be used in a hospital setting. That sounded reasonable to me.
That statement is unnecessary unless you believe that some people treat them as candies (not literally but take them casually and without thought).
All medication is dangerous in excess - OTC painkillers often have absolutely disastrous OD effects with ibuprofen causing major stomache problems if abused in moderation or heart/kidney problems if abused more seriously.
Sounds very appealing. Anyone here have experience with it? If I want to try it, should I go print or digital? How is the writing compared to say The Economist or other more mainstream options?
How is the economist these days? Around a decade ago I read it cover to cover every week for 18 months, but during the brexkt referendum they seemed to go into a tantrum and half of the magazine was always about how brexit was 100% a bad thing. Even if I agreed with them I don't like "100%" biased news because at some point it's like propaganda. I understand they were started in support of trade deals but even so. Has it improved?
I've lapsed my subscription because it has, in my opinion, gotten a bit too clickbait-y and many of the articles are sort of thin rehashes of already covered material. It is still better than most, but also fairly pricy.
> Even if I agreed with them I don't like "100%" biased news
I can understand why this might seem like a good take to have but sometimes you need 100% biased news because some things are 100% biased. Things like climate change is real or genocide is bad should not be controversial takes. Convincing people that there are two sides to an argument is exactly how you end up with sensationalism and extreme views that push the Overton window.
I understand and appreciate your point, but takes like brexit are nuanced. They might be overall bad, but they will always have some benefits and in my opinion journalism (especially economic journalism) should explain those benefits even if the point is to show that they are more than cancelled out by the negatives. Without this kind of reporting this is exactly how the Overton window gets moved.
I think that when it comes to topics we can vote on, saying X is bad because media says it's totally bad is not really an informed opinion.
Agreed. But I think newspapers like The Economist have argued points like "Brexit is bad" quite well and it's not very nuanced because however you slice it, it has been catastrophic for the UK unless you're a corporate lawyer who has suddenly gotten a lot of new business.
Saying something deserves nuance because 1 out of 99 experts disagrees is exactly how you end up with increasing measles cases or adding 6 more lanes to a highway.
Faster and cheaper negotiation of covid vaccines plus negotiated first delivery of them because of not requiring the sign off of every country first was one highly publicised example
Having subscribeed for years, I find it very good on that front. I haven't detected any political bias, and I suspect they would say that fairness and honesty is what the "journalism" half of "slow journalism" means.
While probably true, I'm not sure how much Fedora can be owned really. We should give credit where credit is due though: IBM has, together with Intel, Red Hat, and a few others, been very supportive of the Linux ecosystem since early on. Their scalability work, their GPLing of code, and upstreaming of said code, did a lot for people to look at Linux seriously. There are obviously people inside IBM who understand this stuff. So there should be hope.
Paperlike is indeed nice for handwriting, but it has drawbacks. The increased friction makes it uncomfortable to use your fingers to navigate the iPad for long, and since it makes the finger motion along the screen less smooth, it sometimes prevents the iPad from correctly interpreting drag-and-drop or multi-finger gestures in my experience. It also makes writing very noisy compared to the stock iPad, and also compared to paper, so if you have a shared office you might want to reconsider. I ended up removing it again from my iPad. But to be fair, this was on a $400 iPad ~5 years ago, so perhaps high-end iPads with newer Paperlike versions work better.
Across a decade, I’ve used a Paperlike on five different iPads ranging from the iPad Mini, standard iPad, iPad Pro, both Gen 1 and Gen 2 Apple Pencils plus other styluses and never once experienced the problems you suggest. I’m making this comment on an iPad wth aPaperlike protector in fact.
To the contrary, the noise levels when writing are dramatically lower and I simply cannot imagine anyone becoming fatigued because of a paperlike protector.
Interesting. I wonder what’s the difference in our usage, perhaps the amount of force we normally use when swiping and writing?
Regarding noise, one of the main reasons I stopped using it was because my partner complained about the «scratching» noises when we were home officing together during Covid lockdown, and I personally also found it loud. I didn’t get complaints on the iPad before getting the screen protector.
Regarding the friction, I personally found swiping uncomfortable over time, but I guess that might depend on a lot of factors, including force used when swiping and skin type (oily vs dry skin, skin thickness and sensitivity, etc.)?
I don’t know why the difference. But if noise is a problem I would suggest buying different nib types and experimenting with those. Amazon has a wide selection, including rubberized ones that will make writing on the iPad nearly silent.
Indeed, I did switch to a rubber-like PenTips nib after that, and it made the writing experience really silent. Unfortunately it also felt somehow clumsy to write with – worse than just plastic-on-glass writing. It’s hard to describe, but it somehow made the «turns» in my handwriting feel awkward, and despite sticking with it for months I couldn’t get used to it. There’s perhaps other brands out there that make better ones, haven’t looked around further.
In my case, I eventually went back to a mixture of laptop and paper for most tasks, and now just use the iPad for highlighting (Zotero), lecturing (using Notability on projector as a blackboard/whiteboard), and occasionally to make figures and slides. But I stopped using it for note taking or drafting.
Published article bout supposed breakthrough battery recovery with zero refs to actual sources as the other commenter noted.
So likely the article is LLM reprint of something else or aggregation. Thus blondie slop.
But even so it tops like crazy because … well because, in all fair evidence, HN folk seems to care zero about sources, or less so about authorship when is/gets excited about random shit, but in the same time cares badly whether sacred code in Linux kernel was AI written.
reply