Mine just died so it's either buy an exact replacement for $120 or spend $300 and save $200 in electric costs over the new few years. There's so many options out there and they all just miss a different mark.

It's also possible the team saw all the news articles about the law, thought "that's really easy to implement", then implemented it so they wouldn't need to think about it again. Everything doesn't have to be a conspiracy.

It's not really incompetence as it is policy. You cut everything you can and restore the things that people complain the most about. This way you get rid of the waste and the important things stay around. You don't have to spend the time and funds needed to research every program before you cut it. Just cut it now and see if something breaks. You can argue how effective that is, but it is a way of operating.

"Move fast and break things." The problem with doing this on non-software systems is you can't trivially roll back to the non-broken version.

What horrible bank are you using that charges you for failed transactions on an account you no longer own?

I don't think autopay will be a major issue here. I'm more interested in the Sept. 30 deadline. The SAVE plan ends July 1st just as the RAP plan starts. Millions of accounts will be applying to move off SAVE and onto various plans. This discount probably won't apply until you're actually making payments and there's a huge amount of uncertainty about how well those accounts will transition to the other plans. The loan companies already have millions of backlogged account changes. Maybe nothing will happen or maybe it's going to be a huge mess. If I apply for RAP on July 1st, what are the chances that application will go through and my payments will start before Sept 30th? Maybe the people already making payments now will get this discount. Meaning it'll have almost no effect and thus is just a waste of funds to implement and a nice sound piece on the news.

The people pushing those positions in the government also have investments in those schools or are accepting donations from those who do. You don't need a huge conspiracy theory to hinder the population when simple greed is easily explained. It's far easier to nudge people away from college and into poorly paid jobs than it is to educate them then hope they don't notice your scams.

What debt forgiveness are you talking about? Most of the debt forgiveness that was in the news was for groups of people that were suing the education department because they weren't following their own student loan repayment rules. That wasn't extra or new forgiveness. That was forgiveness that was already owed to those people by the terms of the loan contracts they signed.

Biden created a new SAVE program. It had better loan repayment terms than existing plans. However those existing plans already included forgiveness after X number of years. That's not new. Trump's new plan also includes forgiveness after X number of years. It's slightly worse than SAVE, but significantly better than the existing plans. The two new plans are closer to each other than they are to the older plans. If SAVE was illegal (by the way, the courts never ruled that. Congress passed a law which 'accidentally' made it legal and the courts threw their hands up like 'not my problem any more, case over'.) then Trump's plan should be illegal too. Though both plans have been validated by Congress so neither are illegal.

Both of those plans have people paying for 10s of years prior to that forgiveness. If they weren't able to make enough income to pay off the loans in those time frames, they likely never would. Trapping those people into life long debt where they're paying multiple times the original loan amount hurts the country more than forgiving that debt. The government is supposed to support the country, not exploit it for financial profit.

If I skimmed that paper correctly, it points out that those who retire early are likely to do so because they have an illness or injury which of course increases their chances of death. People who are too frail to work retire as soon as they can while probably most other people want more money so they continue working to increase their retirement benefits.

It sounds like we're using different definitions of mental healthcare. Your 'more relaxed' version of mental healthcare fits your posts better than the 'harder' take-meds-to-numb-your-brain mental healthcare I was reading them as. Thanks for the reply.

It hurt my self esteem when my grades were too low to continue in the honors math courses. Hurt so much that I took a summer school math class so I could get back into Honors Algebra II in the Fall. In hindsight, that was a stupid thing to do as I then continued to struggle in the honors classes. I should have just took the normal classes which progressed at a slower place and than took one or two more math classes in college. That way high school would have been less stressful, my grades would have been higher, I would have retained more math concepts, and I would have had a higher self-image of myself. Instead I struggled through honor classes thinking I was a horrible student simply because that's where my peers seemed to be and where I expected myself to be.

I doubt there's many students here, but there's no requirement that you have to enter college at 18 or other related requirements. You'll do better taking the time now to thoroughly understand the things you're learning rather than rushing through them only to have to re-learn them later in life. It doesn't feel like you have a ton of time when you're a teen but you do. Doing something at 34 instead of 32 means nothing as an adult. Doing something at 16 instead of 17 feels like a major accomplishment now, but will mean nothing to you at 25 yet your body will hold on to the extra stress from it.

Open 3720 tabs, leave them running for a day, select 1000 of them then click close. The browser UI will freeze, memory usage will steadily creep up to the machine's max (32GB) as well as chew through your swap space. Eventually it'll crash. The risky spot seems to be around 600 tabs. If I close more than that at a time there's a decent chance Firefox will crash. Keep in mind your browser will be frozen for multiple minutes before it crashes.

Firefox has some design flaw in how it handles tab management and/or session state. There's some non-linear resource usage going on behind the scenes. Closing anything shouldn't cause any meaningful increase in resource usage. Further, changing the state of one tab shouldn't dump the entire window/tab session state to disk. If I've got 8 windows open with thousands of tabs, that's a massive waste of disk writes and is notable in resource monitors. Firefox can do a lot better than it currently is.

Hell, it's 2026. There shouldn't be any new software created where the user can't change all of its shortcut keys. Firefox completely fails that metric. It's a fundamental software design issue if shortcut keys can't be trivially changed. You don't even need a GUI for it. A text file or database would be good enough. You can't claim anything is high quality software if it can't do something so basic as that.

It's in the article: environmental advocate

A citation is very much needed for that claim.

We evolved to efficiently survive in our environment. That means minimizing the amount of work required to survive. Work consumes energy and energy is life and excess energy results in more life which keeps the species alive. Working extra in a time of less available energy means death. Energy is precious. Creatures don't waste energy.

People don't want to feel bored and many want to feel useful as that increases self-worth and pride. Achieving those qualities doesn't require you to work at a job. If you sit down to nothing and feel bored rather than content, then something is missing in your life. Go figure out what that missing thing is rather than waste your life away working to distract yourself from what you actually want. Very few people find that in work.

For those who didn't read the article, his job is being an environmental advocate.

No, stop blaming the victim. Especially since we're talking about young kids who don't know any better. You really expect 3 year olds to say "I think I've been spending too much time watching awesomeness on my tablet. I'm going to meditate instead." Bullshit. What world are you living in?

If I sneakily lace your food with cocaine for a month straight, is it your mental or moral failure when you beg me for another bite not even knowing there's drugs in your food? No. It's my fault you got addicted. Same with smartphones. You are correct in that the physical smartphone by itself doesn't cause those issues. It's how you use it that's the issue and so many things about smartphones and the apps/websites people use on them are designed to enhance those addictive properties. We were already rolling down the slippery slope with TV and movies shortening scene lengths, but smartphones and the quest for clicks supercharged that.

Prior to smartphones, most things were physically limited. You have to go buy that addictive food, unwrap it, and make it. All that takes time and effort with a limited resource. TV shows used to be on at specific times and whatever came next was crap. You couldn't binge watch anything. Video tapes required physical effort to swap and FF until you got to the show/movie and you'd have to stand up to do that every 2 hours and rewind the tapes for next time. Tables/phones are completely different. They're carried with you. They always have a net connection. Battery life lasts a full day. There's nothing stopping you from constantly using them except your willpower and every mass marketed thing on them is designed to maximize your attention to that thing. Kids don't have any defense against that. How they're designed to be consumed turns you into type of person you're claiming is inherently flawed. Those people aren't broken, they're optimized towards a poor path. We're dynamic creatures. We adapt to our environment so nearly everyone using these devices will slide down this slippery path unless you specifically know about it and make an effort not to do so. The counter claim to your argument is that when you remove the devices, people slowly regain their attention spans and self control. If they were inherently flawed as you believe, then they wouldn't be able to get better without meds.

Yes it will. Staring at bright lights in the evening lowers your quality of sleep. Using light to control your circadian rhythm is one of the most effective treatments people with circadian rhythm disorders use. This is all well documented. Not constantly context switching will improve executive functions. Not having your attention constantly consumed by the device will lead you to do something else out of boredom, such as going outside and interacting with other people. Reduce someone's screen time and their underlying issues improve. Granted you may have started using your device in a poor manner due escapism or some other issue, but once you start, it's self-reinforcing. That's true for anyone starting for any reason. Without a smartphone the person might turn to another form of escapism, but the other options have more physical limiters on them. Even if the person ends up glued to a PC playing video games, they have to step away from the PC to get food and piss (well, nearly everyone steps away for that). You never have to step away from a phone/tablet (and prescription smart glasses means you'll never have to look away either).

In conclusion, you're blaming the victim to make yourself feel better and stronger than them. You're not. Use your device the same way they use theirs and you'll end up with the same issues. The issue is also way too wide spread and popped up too quickly for it to be some type of genetic issue. You can claim nutrition is an issue and it is (willpower is directly tied to your energy which is tied to your nutrition), but you didn't make that claim. You have to know you have an issue, have a reason to fix yourself, have the knowledge on what to change, and have the willpower to do that in order to fix your issues. Kids don't have any of that. They can't fix themselves without outside aid because to them there's nothing to fix.

Well you've got a point that every news agency sensualizes everything. They kind of have to when their income is based on click rate and they're in a zero-sum game with other people doing that. Once someone starts, everyone has to follow.

I assume the younger generations have learned to ignore most of that but I could be wrong. If I see a title like "Politicians in outrage over XYZ" then I assume they had a slightly stressful conversation about XYZ and that's all.

The screenshoting feature is annoying. It doesn't capture what you exactly see on the page. Judging by it's output, it looks like it pages up/down over and over again then stitches all that together. The issue with that is as an increasing number of websites have floating headers/footers, those elements end up on every page in the screen shot blocking what you wanted to capture. Same when you try to print the page too. I hate having to be a webdev in order to capture a page.

You also can't screenshot the entire contents of a scrollable area. The browser knows how to render every part of a website. It should let you capture any subsection of it.