I’m currently using a pixel 6 pro. I took a long break from Androids. The last one that I owned was a S9 Plus.
I love the screen with the high refresh rate and it’s really responsive. I also love the live translate feature and all of the neat AI tricks that it has as well. I also was very hesitant because I’ve heard a lot about the battery life being bad, but the battery on mine is really good, as well as the fingerprint reader.
The only thing that I dislike would be the grip of the phone. I played around with both the pixel 6 and the pro and I would have to say the regular pixel 6 has a better grip, but I love the higher refresh rate and display on the 6 pro.
I’m still using my S9. Size is about as big as I want to deal with. Indicator LED is great. 3.5mm jack is great. SD socket for local storage. Camera is still fine. Qi charging is one of the few gimmicks that hasn’t turned out to be useless. Screen is drastic overkill. Design is a stupid friction-less glass egg, but that’s easily fixable with a minimalist case. Performance is still perfectly adequate.
It’s long out of support, but I’m finding the market wildly un-compelling, and will probably just roll with it until something renders it unusable.
Ah, yes. For one handed typing. It’s probably pretty accurate if it’s just learning off of the few phrases you type one handed. I’m sure it’s the same few pretty frequently.
Note that moderate intake of alcohol can be beneficial to health.
More than 100 prospective studies show an inverse association between light to moderate drinking and risk of heart attack, ischemic (clot-caused) stroke, peripheral vascular disease, sudden cardiac death, and death from all cardiovascular causes.
But if you’re only considering cancer, then as some of the other answers suggested, cutting alcohol intake to zero could reduce the risk of getting cancer, although the reduction is likely very small that’s neglectable.
The better conclusion is "people who drink in moderation have a decreased risk of cancer", which is different. Causation is hard to prove, especially when we can only ethically do observational studies. It's likely that people who drink in moderation are more likely to make healthy choices in other areas of their life or have other factors that reduce risk.
Not so much of a joke as a cute story. There was once a programmer with a dog named Biff who would bark at the mailman every time he delivered the mail. The programmer wrote a program to monitor incoming email and beep when you got a message, and named it biff.
It means you have the absolute right to say anything you want to say. It also means you can say something without being a hypocrite, as you are free to speak on a particluar topic you have knowledge on or have not committed whatever you are condemning.
Many people misunderstand the term freedom of speech with regards US federal law. That law is a specific protection from the federal government for citizens, businesses, and other organizations. It is specifically to protect them from retaliation by the federal government.
It is important to note that the law does not protect citizens, businesses, or organiztions from each other. Such protections would be from local laws regarding defamation or libel.
Well, if you’re saying things everyone agrees with, you probably won’t have problems, and it won’t even come up whether you have the right to speak. Freedom of speech only comes up as a concept when it is in conflict with other interests.
Many legal issues are defined by their extremes. That doesn’t mean they only encompass extremes. Just that it’s the extremes that delineated the actual boundaries.
As a Samsung user, One Handed+ is a game changer. Placed on either/both side of the phone, I don’t need to veer towards the bottom of the screen. Much faster and ergonomically superior to buttons or stock gestures.
I would have to try that. I have a Samsung tablet and oneUI’s interface and functionalities are really great. My phone is a Poco F3 and even with miui.eu the gestures on those devices have always felt a bit off for me. Most likely where I get most of my opinion from.
Characters wander in and out of the story with little logic, the Dominion plot line just kind of trails off, and all of Starfleet vs Starbase 1 was kind of silly.
But Shaw is an amazing character, Vadic is fun to watch, the TNG crew got a far better send off than Nemesis, and the acting is fantastic. The fanservice of seeing the Ro, Shelby, Moriarty, and the E-D again was also fantastic as someone who grew up watching TNG with my dad.
Oh a good character- or even actor coughmichaesheencough can absolutely elevate. And like you said, damn, that proper sendoff Nemesis denied us.
The main issue i have is it’s got the common problem witha lot of Kurtzmann treks (and into darkness) - cherry picking the high notes from the franchise, then misusing them.
Reusing trek threads can be amazing - what voyager did with Borg lore, hell, what WoK did with space seed! but there needs to be actual solid progression and daaamn did it fail. The fallout of the dominion war is something i would love to see handled properly, especially the implications of the fall from ideals under duress DS9 ran with. But Picard didn’t deliver. And as awesomely horrific as that Giger queen was, it was all sizzle very little steak.
Because people don't grasp what "free speech" means, at least in the US context.
Freedom of speech (expression) protects one against government interference with expression. The US government can't stop you from saying bigoted, racist, or sexist things because you have the freedom to express yourself.
But.
Freedom of speech doesn't require anyone to offer you a platform to share your views, nor does it mandate an audience. If your views are unpopular, freedom of speech doesn't prevent others from denying you business or employment generally either; the ol' "consequences of your actions" principle.
Bad actors want the right, a mandated platform, and no consequences for being shitty. They get upset when they find out that they're entitled to neither a platform nor protection from consequence.
People seems to be under the impression that freedom of speech means freedom from consequences, that you're free to spout all sorts of hateful nonsense and not have to deal with the hurt they cause.
People constantly thinking they can say what they want until they encounter that person that’s willing to get arrested for assault when the wrong thing is said to them. That’s freedom
Or arrested for saying free stuff that calls for harm of other people. Your freedom ends where someone elses freedom starts vice versa. If you harm someone you are no longer protected
That’s really not a lot of drinking. I guess technically, yes, it would decrease the risk but your risk is already really low at 3-4 servings of alcohol per year.
kbin.life
Hot