> On one hand Google is the lesser evil between M$ and Apple.
While I acknowledge this is certainly a highly subjective perspective, it is rare that I hear of Google being "less evil" than Apple. What either redeems Google or condemns Apple in your point of view?
Forgive my ignorance on the subject but if it's not government mandated then what's stopping them from going bankrupt and not respecting the guarantee?
If they set aside no money to keep the promise then they physically cannot do anything about it when they run out of cash to keep the external services running.
True, big companies would be able to continue the guarantee but if all companies are not forced to set aside some 'contingency' money in the event of failure to keep the services running would you trust them to keep their end of the bargain?
Would that not hurt the smaller companies more since you'd be less likely to purchase from them as theres nothing in place to say they must keep their promises?
Edit: Not saying it shouldn't be an option not to provide the guarantee, just maybe there should be something saying if they do provide it then they must keep their end of the deal in the event of bankruptcy
Even (especially?) oil companies can't be persuaded to set aside money to clean up their own damn wells, or at least their governments can't be persuaded to make them pay. We have zero chance here.
Orbit is incredibly hard. It's only just possible. A few percent more gravity and we would be permanently earth-bound. Getting to orbit requires hundreds of thousands of components to function together perfectly. Failure requires one to go wrong.
Yes, that's the way science should be done. But look at the number of negative result papers that get published, et cetera. How much push does a negative result give your career vs a positive one? Who's interested in spending ten years of their career pushing a test for a hypothesis that most people (and likely themselves) think is negative? And of course the microscope cannot prove the negative hypothesis, nor does it really help the negative hypothesis much.
It's funny how any involvement with cryptocurrencies is now an immediate red flag. Is there any use for cryptocurrencies in 2020 that isn't either an outright scam or a pump-and-dump scheme?
I don't think Brave's attempts to integrate BAT are either a scam or a pump-and-dump. I think they're sincerely just trying to figure out how to move "the internet" to a revenue model that doesn't necessitate holding its users hostage.
Every decentralized or censorship-resistant network gets dragged down to the worst of its adopters in the public consciousness (not entirely by accident IMO). It's sad, but should be acknowledged as par for the course at this point. If you're not going to fall into line, expect the power brokers to mix you up with the worst of 'em.
I wonder how far the American Medical Association/physicians have set back medical discoveries.
The traditional solution is Drugs. Some recommend exercise (although a friend recently couldn't get a prescription for Physical Therapy until after trying steroids for 2 weeks). Even fewer recommend diet changes.
Could this breathing method be a drug free solution to various psychological disorders? (Don't get me wrong, people may need drugs, but it's something to consider before a Physician gets someone addicted to Drugs for the rest of their life.)
It just seems like every industry has made huge strides in technological progress and scientific knowledge, then you have medical which is still unknown. Engineering and Medicine are both applied sciences, it seems either bizarre or corrupt that medical is far behind and has low quality outcomes, despite high costs.
> it seems either bizarre or corrupt that medical is far behind).
It’s not bizarre. It’s simply very difficult to conduct experiments with a complex subject such as human beings that can produce clean results linking actions to results.
I mean diet and exercise can have profound effects on your health. My personal experiences have been that doctors I have been to are likely to prescribe something and then toss in “also you should exercise and lose some weight”. I herniated a disc and basically my options were steroid shots or surgery. I opted for the steroid shots just to get rid of the constant numbness and pain down my leg. But there had been no real help on what to do now. “Strengthen your core” um ok thanks. All that to say a lot of time is spent treating the symptoms and not the cause. Meanwhile I’m stuck finding the cause and then trying to remedy it.
Unless you sustained a back injury, the cause is most likely weak core and trunk muscles, which places strain on your spine. Therefore, strengthening your core and trunk is the solution.
I have had excellent results with reverse back extensions [1] and inversion table stretches and crunches.
I definitely recommend Physical Therapy for that. They are Doctors but not MDs, they don't prescribe. They teach exercises, stretches and do massage and that crack that chiropractors do.
Physical Therapy is really what I need most the time, but when I was a kid I was taught to go see a PCP.
Mental health (particularly psychiatric illnesses) is something of an outlier among medicine in terms of how limited progress has been compared to other disease categories.
As for physical therapy, I have also experienced a degree of reluctance in prescribing it. But in my case my doctor has always been even more averse to drugs (aside from things like tylenol). I think I had to go through a couple doctors visits worth of suggesting alternative exercises or other lifestyle changes first. Maybe physical therapy is just expensive and they were trying to protect me from the out-of-pocket costs.
This is the first person/company that actually has a realistic (still optimistic) Coronavirus timeline.
Prior to this, everyone had unrealistic "fall 2020", then pushed to "January 2021".
This still assumes a vaccine and production of the vaccine will be finished in under a year.
A more realistic estimate seems to be 2022.
I don't understand why this is so hard, you can look at pandemic physics to know that Coronavirus is not going anywhere. And you can look at previous vaccine and medical production to understand how long it takes to make hundreds of millions or billions of vaccines.
I think it's such a hard pill to swallow that it's easier for a lot of people to incrementally move the goal posts from a psychological perspective. Nobody wants to suggest 2022--lest it become real from the mere suggestion that this is the case. Everyone keeps talking about a vaccine, but I don't see a lot of people facing the realities of what will be required for the vaccine to succeed (70% of the population inoculated). Nobody wants to talk about the potential for a less than desired durability in the vaccine (i.e., the scenario where you might need to be vaccinated 4x per year). All of this just seems to be too soul crushing and horrific to make it part of the regular dialogue, and I understand why--the reality is brutal.
Similar to research fraud, I want the medical field examined for anti-science fraud.
I caught my Physician recommending an expensive and dangerous surgery that could be done by a dentist or surgeon. I asked if there was data, she said yes. There was no data. And the trend was using lasers rather than surgery since it's safer. I confronted her and she said-
"If you ask a physician, they will recommend a physician. If you ask a dentist, they will recommend a dentist."
This physician used factionalism rather than science.
On one hand Google is the lesser evil between M$ and Apple. But they are not reliable.
Not sure if anything in tech is really good long term unless you DIY. Not sure how I can DIY a phone in any reliable or secure way.