You are correct - I had forgotten (been quite a while). I still think it’s funny but thanks for pointing this out.
But 宝 (Bǎo) means “precious” or “treasured” and 红宝书 probably only gets translated as little red book because it sounds better in English.
Wow. They really went with Xiao hong shu?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotations_from_Chairman_Mao_Tse-tung
Then who?
Don’t tell me what to do.
Yeah, Nebula is quite good. Really like Curiosity Stream too… I subscribe to both.
But alas, most channels I follow are Youtube only and not likely to change :(
But do you have a viable alternative in your back pocket?
In my experience pretty much all IP cameras phone home in some way at some point, so yeah, you are best off putting them on a separate VLAN and routing appropriately.
The only brand I’ve had a good experience with is Reolink. I don’t think the quality is appreciably different than a brand like Hikvision and the firmware and support is vastly superior.
Edit: Some good info on using Reolink cameras with Frigate. I use Blue Iris but would vastly prefer OSS.
Wart Under
I would interpret the American Academy of Pediatricians stance as being supportive. But that’s open to interpretation, I suppose.
It’s literally cited on the HHS page about it: https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/youth-mental-health/social-media/index.html
So you acknowledge that you don’t have the skills necessary to interpret papers so… what, you decide that Nature adequately represents their findings enough to dismiss them? Even though you say there is little evidence of a causative link? Even though the surgeon general says they feel there is and cites that evidence to back it up?
I mean… what?
It’s a pity you aren’t worth responding to. Have a nice day!
Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me.
Why would you conclude that? Because it conflicts with your “vibe”?
Do I really need to point out that you yourself are “literally just posting vibes” ?
You didn’t even bother investigating whether or not they had justified their stance with science. I’m not convinced you made it past the headline, much less read any of the content that article linked to.
The funny thing is I actually did read two of the studies I quickly found and which you too can find. But you seem more interested in adhering to a certain… vibe.
Have a nice day.
Edit: You know I was busy and totally forgot.
The very first result on my search engine, if you search for “effects of social media on children’s mental health” is the HHS.gov website, specifically this page: https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/youth-mental-health/social-media/index.html
And wouldn’t you know, right there are 5 separate papers cited to support 1. that social media is widely used; and 2 it “presents meaningful harm to youth”
No, it’s just based on vibes.
You didn’t bother looking, clearly.
Edit: I’m not saying I’m familiar with what the studies say, although some draw a clear link with adverse mental health impacts on kids. Not sure how far that goes. I’m also not saying I agree with the SG or the need for warning labels, but to say this is based on “vibes” is, ironically, speculative at best.
I live in rural California. We only just this year are able to pick up a faint LTE signal. I think it might get us a very unstable 1-2 Mbps if we hold the phone just right. We have no cable, DSL or other land-based options and because of the topography can’t pick up the local wireless provider, which is very expensive anyway - like $175/month for 50/5
So without Starlink our only options are crappy regular satellite providers like Hughesnet which impose very low quotas - 10 GB monthly for day time usage - and have insane latency.
It bugs the shit out of me I have to give money to that fuckwit but without it we live in the dark ages.
WTF?
What’s next a background check for breathing? Because, you know breathing is a clear and obvious pre-cursor to criming of all kinds.