The drawback of Ibuprofen is that it tends to cause damage to stomach and intestinal linings. That's why you are advised to take with food and/or lots of water. You don't want it absorbing all in one place. Long term use exacerbates the effect, making it more likely to cause ulcers and eventually internal bleeding. My partner ended up in the hospital with a serious internal bleed caused by taking Ibuprofen daily for chronic pain. I'm not saying don't use it, just be aware of the risks.
Ibuprofen is possibly worse than that, it seems that it may interfere with sex hormones. [1]
This 2017 study I found in 30s of searching is seemingly underpowered at n=30 or so, but the (preliminary) implication is awful enough that I won't give my boys ibuprofen at all. Out of abundance of caution.
They can have naproxen or acetaminophen instead -- we keep those out of reach and teach our children not to touch them without adults.
For one, the OpsWorks configuration management tool is being replaced with Management Console, which is more encompassing, but different. You have to manually migrate or rebuild any deployed resources from one to the other.
It's quite configurable, allowing different key combinations for different window arrangement functions, but the most useful one is that it allows you to bring a single window from another application to the top without rearranging the rest of the stack. This is useful if you are switching back and forth between windows from two different apps each of which has several other windows open, for example a browser and a text editor.
The rate of spam to a form is roughly constant over time, whereas the rate of spam to a published email address goes up over time as the site is repeatedly scanned by spam robots and the address added to more and more spammer lists. While spam detection is good, it isn't perfect. As your total volume of spam goes up, so does the amount that sneaks through the filters. Additionally, at a certain point it becomes impossible to look in your spam filter for misclassified real email. Eventually you're overwhelmed and have to change emails. If you're going to publish an email address you have to consider it a burnable resource that you will replace once the volume of spam is too high.
If the author hasn't experienced this, I think it must be because they haven't done the exercise of leaving a live email address on a public website for years.
My email address has been on my public website for at least 15 years, and my spam level is constant and manageable. That may simply indicate that I’m not popular enough to encounter the problem, of course.
Same for me - I do get spam, and it's frustrating, but the level seems to be broadly constant over time. I wonder if it's deliberate co-operation between scammers and other spam senders, perhaps in order to keep the total amount of spam just under the threshold that would cause people to actually crack down on the issue. Certainly, receiving only single-digit numbers of spam emails each day keeps it just slightly away from being my personal number one priority to get some proper filters installed.
In my experience, peak email spam was 15-20 years ago. At some point, I got ~500 messages/day delivered to my spam folder. Today the average for the same address is maybe 2 messages/day. Spam filters flagging legitimate emails as spam or not delivering them at all has long been a much bigger issue than any spam that gets through.
Thanks for reading the article! I agree it doesn't consider this point, and I actually hadn't thought of that.
Semi-empirically, I've run some websites with emails and contact forms sitting on them for 5+ years and I haven't noticed this effect. Although I must admit I haven't studied it quantitively well enough to determine this for certain - I'd love to look over the data to see if this is true. Unfortunately on all these inboxes spam is deleted automatically after some time so I no longer have records. If you do have data here, it'd be great to see someone publish this and would happily add a link to this analysis!
And theoretically, would a contact form link not also be a thing that gets added to more and more lists over time and have the same problem? (Although I also didn't notice this pattern on contact forms, so I'm not claiming this does happen - just a thought experiment on this logic!)
Both Android and iOS, but especially iOS, have made large accessibility regressions by switching to a frequently gesture based interface where all sorts of quite similar swipes do different things changing the screen context and revealing hidden modes. For use by people with e.g. Parkinson's disease this is catastrophic. Voice commands can somewhat compensate, but I think we're all familiar with the many ways in which voice commands can fail to perform even simple requests, and also how sensitive the voice assistants are to changes in both speed and volume of received speech. While iOS does have some good accessibility settings, they are not comprehensive, and overall usability has in some big ways declined substantially, even while more and more tasks have to be done online.
A financial Power of Attorney is the legal document that gives you the ability to act as that person legally in most ways. It requires only the person to sign the PoA document. Using it often requires some bureaucratic hoop jumping, but that's nonetheless what it does. It doesn't prevent the person themselves from taking legal or financial actions – like giving money to scammers. For that you would need Conservatorship which is a higher level of responsibility and must be reviewed by a judge. At least, that's the situation in the US. Things may work differently elsewhere. And also, for reasons to do with the federal system, Social Security benefits are sort of their own thing and have a different process.
Yes but their bar is “readable” not “very readable by all without effort,” so I’m not sure why y’all find this so usage so objectionable. Yeah it wasn’t easy but I was definitely able to read the example text on my phone as-is/without zooming or anything.
The upper case letters are fine (impressive, considering the resolution), but there's no way I could read the lower case if I didn't already know the text.
Same for me! I could definitely understand the upper case text at 100% resolution on a 24" 1080p screen. The lower case text was terrible and nearly unreadable.
I was able to read the lower case on a 6.7” ~2.8k smartphone screen. I imagine they don’t expect literally every person to be able to read it on every machine. This feels rather nitpick-y.
On a 6.7" display, assuming 16:9, the screen is 5.8" wide. With 2.8k pixels across each pixel is 0.002 inches wide. I'm pretty sure you aren't viewing it at 100% resolution on the phone as each glyph would render as a nearly invisible dot.
But did you read it after reading the upper case? And are you an American?
It's the same text as the upper case version and it's the Declaration of Independence, which a lot of us know pretty well. I initially tricked myself into believing that I could read it until I got past the part that I knew well, at which point I realized that I wasn't reading it so much as using the shapes as a mnemonic to help remember it.
(As an aside, it's not nitpicky to say "I can't read this font that bills itself as the smallest readable font", it's just an expression of doubt as to the advertised qualities of the font.)
AR goggles have a relatively narrow field of vision making it less likely to notice peripheral movement, such is critical for driving. They have quite short battery life – just a couple of hours. When they fail, you are effectively blind until you remove them. They can also fail due to a software glitch or crash. Removing the goggles can be disorienting and fiddly. They can be set so that there is little or no passthrough of external video – which would be highly hazardous, even if done accidentally. It's not really possible to establish eye contact with someone wearing AR goggles, which can be important when interacting with a driver. They're also not legal eyewear for driving.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9715832/