Observer1199

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Is the door locking mechanism something you can change? If so you could change it to one that doesn't lock when it's closed, only when a key is used.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 days ago (5 children)

How do you keep getting locked out? Would it not be easier to remember your keys when you go outside?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Make sure the car is in neutral and handbrake is on before starting. It's not strictly necessary but you should make this a habit for safety.

Buckle up. Make yourself aware of your surroundings.

Insert and turn key / press button. Newer cars require clutch and/or brake to be pressed to start, check the car manual if unsure.

Key shouldn't need to be turned for long - if its kept turned when the engine starts you'll hear a horrible grinding noise. Avoid this.

The car should now be started. Take your foot off clutch/brake, nothing will happen (as long as you ate in neutral with handbrake on).

To start moving, press the clutch, put the gear stick in 1st, start smoothly lifting your foot off the clutch. You're looking for the bite point of the clutch - when you start to feel the car want to move. This takes practice and you will stall the car many times before its natural. Once you've found the bite point, its time to release the hand brake*, and start gently pressing the accelerator as you lift your foot the rest of the way off the clutch.

It takes a while for this to be smooth.

*you could release the hand brake before this and use the brake pedal instead.

When you want to change gears, take your foot off the accelerator, press the clutch, move the gear stick to the right gear, release the clutch smoothly, press the accelerator

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

“A few stakeholders were concerned that the release of the report would result in new legal action (criminal prosecution, citizen revocation, or otherwise) being brought against the individuals named in the report,” a summary of the library’s discussions noted.

What a good argument. Can't find any fault with that logic. Let's just get rid of laws that hold people accountable for their actions. Wouldn't want murderers, or war criminals to be inconvenienced in any way and it wouldn't be fair to embarrass the government for looking the other way or being complicit.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

A tl:dr should be added for clickbait titles like that

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Duck eggs are delicious. Taste is often subjective.

Have you ever thought of raising your own chickens?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Oh, you mean like the leader of the fucktards who want to make the world an even worse place than they already have. Gotcha.

[–] [email protected] 154 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Clickbait title for extra sensationalism. Nobody physically forced her to have the surgery to remove the implant.

I sympathize with this woman however it was part of the trial for it to be switched off and removed at the end of the trial, which is what she agreed to, though it does raise a lot of questions about medical trials/procedures involving implants.

If the company no longer exists but let her keep the implant, what happens when something goes wrong? Who is responsible, who do medical professionals trying to help with what went wrong contact for context, who bears the cost, what happens if it's hacked, etc etc. If it was left in and she ended up dying, it's guaranteed that headlines will talk about it being irresponsible and medical malpractice.

Fwiw, reading the MIT review, this device didn't prevent her seizures, but monitored brainwave activity and used an algorithm to predict the likelihood of an imminent seizure. She seems to have been an edge case in terms of successi in the trial.

It seems the issue is that this gave her confidence to leave the house to do things. Prior to that she very rarely left the house because of the unpredictability of her seizures. It must suck to have that confidence, and therefore freedom, taken away.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Who is the king you're referring to?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Thank you! Seems my request isn't popular - just don't enjoy using YouTube if I don't have to

[–] [email protected] -3 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

Any chance you could post something other than YouTube links?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Don't have much personal experience with BX but they're probably fine. But once you have backups of anything you care about the worst that can happen is you need to restore those backups. If its running a service you can't do without then maybe a backup pi?

I have RPis running on SD cards for years with no issues so realistically you probably won't have any either but better to be prepared than not. And it also means that if you mess something up you can restore it to when it worked.

0
This is not ok (lemmy.ml)
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Saw this today and now I'm reconsidering if Boost is right for me. I'm really hoping this is shitty boiler plate that was accidentally copied and over looked because that is some bullshit to say "unless we decide we want to use your personal data for whatever we want".

I know "legitimate interest" is a phrase from the cookies law but there is no legitimate interest justification for this. My data is my data and I decide who has a legitimate interest in it so advertisers can fuck off, as can Boost if this the direction it's going.


Edit to say this blew up. I didn't realise I was kicking as big a hornet's nest and haven't read all the comments yet.

To be clear, what I don't like about this and other provisions in the terms is the language and implications around data use. I've no problem with ads being shown - I want developers to get paid for the work they do and that makes it possible for users to have "free" access to software if they can't afford to purchase.

I also want to add the response from Boost's dev below to make sure it's visible. You'll see that it is boilerplate but required by Google and was present in Boost for reddit. I just hadn't seen it because I purchased it immediately based on a recommendation. It doesn't make me happy about it but does remove some doubts I was having about the direction Boost is heading.

I will be purchasing the app to support the dev because I do like Boost but I understand not everyone can afford everything so you'll see some other suggestions in the comments below that don't have any ads if you're not happy with the free version and ads with their associated loss of data privacy.


Dev here.

The dialog and its content is not created by me, it is a standard solution from Google to comply with GDPR and other laws. More info here: https://support.google.com/admob/answer/10114014?hl=en

The consent dialog is also required by Google AdMob to show ads, and it is shown when the ad network is initialized.

When the app launches, first it checks for the remove ads purchase, and if it is not present, it will initialize the ads sdk. The ad network is not initialized if the remove ads purchase is detected.

Boost for Reddit was using the very same ad networks and consent dialog.

view more: next ›