Blocking is not an option. Gmail actually doesn't have such feature to let you block some senders, the "block" button in Gmail is just send those emails to Trash folder when receive them, which didn't help in my case, the email still goes to my account, and there are too many of them.
You are being chronically poisoned by snake venom peptides produced by lab-modified E Coli/yeast that have taken hold in the body. This is what "long covid" is.
You can megadose Vitmain C or find a service offering EDTA chelation therapy (or Vit C IV). This restores the condition of the blood, the body removing the peptide-producing organisms on its own. If they have taken hold in the gut, other modalities will likely be necessary. You may also experience temporary relief by using nicotine patches (this occupies nicotinic acetylcholine receptors targeted by the peptides).
If think the idea of _in vivo envenomation_ being "long covid" is absurd, then I DARE you get a simple toxicological test done on your blood, testing for venom.
Yeah, if that was omnipresent before the pandemic, right? But suddenly, to observe something that's not supposed to be present increases the odds of causation.
We basically bought 5 Italian Officer blankets off Ebay (They are roughly the size of a queen bed), and then a bunch of wool batting from a website that sells pre-made wool mattresses, but also just bulk wool.
I think I looked into it recently and we spent something like $700 on materials.
But then you just put down the first blanket, lay down a layer of the batting (I don't remember for sure, but I think it maybe came in queen size bats already from where we bought it), and then repeat.
We stitched around the outsize with yarn using a baseball-style stitch to keep everything sort of fixed in place.
That is how it looked when we first made it, so its a bit more worn in by now. The reason it looks like there are only two layers is because of how we stitched it and how the excess batting was spilling out past the blankets a bit.
I've never tried to actually roll it, but you can fold it in half pretty easily. Folding it half again would probably be doable, but I think that's about as small as you would get it. Rolling it might work better, but I've never had a reason to I guess.
> if he hasn't been hanged by Thursday, there is only one day left - and so it won't be a surprise if he's hanged on Friday.
This belief is FALSE. The moment of surprise for a Friday hanging takes place at 12pm on Thursday. Of course, this also happens to be the moment of surprise for a Thursday hanging. In other words, at 11:59am on Thursday he will not know if his hanging takes place on Thursday or Friday. At 12pm he will be surprised to know for certain which one it is: it will be Thursday if he hears a knock and it will be Friday if there is no knock.
The prisoner holds this belief because he makes the FALSE assumption that his moment of surprise MUST occur at the sound of the knock ON THE DAY of the hanging. The prisoner correctly understands that there cannot be a moment of surprise on Friday but, due to this assumption, incorrectly reasons that a Friday hanging cannot be a surprise. It will be a surprise, but he will experience that moment on Thursday, not Friday.
The prisoner pictures himself at 12:01pm on Thursday wondering how he could possibly be surprised for a Friday hanging. He doesn't realize he has ALREADY been surprised by the news of his Friday hanging. That moment occurred one minute earlier (12:00pm)!
The remainder of the "paradox" text is rendered nonsensical because the reasoning is based on the apparent impossibility of being surprised by a Friday hanging.
TLDR
The prisoner makes the following faulty reasoning:
1) The moment of surprise must occur on the day of the hanging (FALSE)
2) There cannot be a moment of surprise on Friday (TRUE)
-> Therefore, a Friday hanging cannot elicit surprise
-> Therefore, Friday cannot be chosen as the hanging day
-> Therefore, Thursday cannot be chosen as the hanging day, etc
#1 is assumed to be TRUE by the prisoner. Unlike the other days, the moment of surprise for a Friday hanging occurs the day before when he does NOT hear a knock at 12pm. Therefore, #1 is false and leads to the false deductions
The main issue is the definition of surprise for perfectly rational entities. Your argument doesn't really add much as you can just fix that time of day when all executions occur, and you've just restated the paradox.
The main issue is not the definition of surprise. The main issue is given to you plainly: the prisoner's reasoning is wrong.
I encourage you to give an example where the execution times are changed and I guarantee you it will suffer from the same assumptive traps as the original "paradox".
> Despite significant academic interest, there is no consensus on its precise nature and consequently a final correct resolution has not yet been established.
The judge says the prisoner would be surprised exactly when the knock on the door happens (not before). As a consequence, the prisoner is right to believe he won't be hanged at all (following his reasoning), but as a consequence of that, he is surprised when the knock happens. In turn, as a consequence of that, the judge turns out to be right. Therefore, both the prisoner, and the judge are correct. Thus the paradox.
My post is all about how the prisoner's reasoning is WRONG. My mistake: I obfuscated it by having the reader take the perspective of the prisoner. I reworded the OP, but I can't edit it anymore. I have a simpler revised version that I'll include below:
.
.
.
The prisoners reasoning is wrong.
> if he hasn't been hanged by Thursday, there is only one day left - and so it won't be a surprise if he's hanged on Friday. Since the judge's sentence stipulated that the hanging would be a surprise to him, he concludes it cannot occur on Friday.
What the prisoner doesn't realize is that, by noon on Thursday, he would have ALREADY been surprised by the news of his Friday hanging. That moment occurred when he did not hear the knock!
The moment of surprise for a Thursday hanging or Friday hanging happen at the SAME point in the future. In other words, at 11:59am on Thursday he will not know if his hanging takes place on Thursday or Friday. At 12pm he will be surprised to know for certain which one it is: it will be Thursday if he hears a knock and it will be Friday if he does not.
"If he hasn't been hanged by Thursday" (ie. has not heard the knock) IS, ITSELF, the surprise of a Friday hanging. He wrongly assumes that his moment of surprise can ONLY happen following a knock. He doesn't realize that this assumption is true for every scenario EXCEPT a Friday hanging, where his surprise will happen in the ABSENCE of a knock on Thursday.
Because he cannot envision himself being surprised by a Friday knock (correct) and assumes he can ONLY be surprised by a knock (incorrect), he wrongly concludes that a Friday hanging is an impossibility, and subsequently concludes the same for a Thursday hanging, etc.
Here's that line again: "He will not know the day of the hanging until the executioner knocks on his cell door at noon that day".
The judge not only said that the prisoner will be surprised, he also said precisely when the prisoner will be surprised, which is noon on Friday, for Friday execution.
It does not matter if he gets surprised by the absence of the knock on Thursday. All that matters is that he would not be surprised when the knock happens on Friday.
What the...the problem is the contest winner not trusting the operator with their information. How does giving the operator an envelope containing their SIN solve this problem?!
