We do! It recognises the 'Do Not Track' sent, at least on FF for me. I get a very small popup telling me it's respecting this setting, and no request for accepting anything else:
> "Do not Track"-Modus erkannt! Es werden nur technisch notwendige Cookies verwended. [Datenschutzerkl"arung](...)
Lovely. If only the rest of the web looked like this.
Hi, do you happen to have to have some resources for someone interested in using red light therapy? Or even just a simple buying tip to get started. As someone with quite high myopia and a little bit of astigmatism thrown in, I'm at higher risk of myopic macular degeneration, so red light therapy might be extra useful!
I'm only seeing this now, sorry. First I'm not a doctor, so I can't give medical advice, certainly not if you believe you are already predisposed to something. I would say that there is no difference between the cheap and expensive devices, as long as they emit the correct wavelengths at the correct intensities. Since that's very low for targeting the eye (you are not trying to treat deeper joints/full body), you won't have to overspend. I think Prof Glen Jeffery mentioned a handheld red light in the 30 euro range for the morning treatment.
You can also look at (670/810 nm LED light strips to hang above your computer monitors and passively absorb some while starting at your monitor all day if you are getting an excess of blue light). I think that is another protocol though, but it might help.
I am sure though that it's more about consistency and treatment time (as in, you can't double the intensity to halve the treatment time). Furthermore, more is not better, it's more like an on/off switch after 2-3 minutes. You can do it every day, just like the solar spectrum is relatively higher in the required part of the spectrum at early morning sunrise every day.
But honestly, listen to Glen Jeffery, perhaps read /r/redlighttherapy
Hills, sure, not too many of them. But there are sooo many bridges that require shifting. And the flat landscape can also give you terrible headwinds where again, shifting is very handy. So I don't think that /that/ is the reason for the lack of manual shifting.
On some keyboard layouts, pressing the quote mark starts a modifyer and then depending on the layout the following character is combined with the quote mark. Most English layouts don't include ś in this, but some Eastern European (?) languages use that character more often and so include them in this modifyer shortcut.
This is an older article. Today, the coalition decided on a measure with 'urgent advice' to not be allowed smartphones, tablets and smartwatches in the classroom [1]. Starting Jan 1st 2024, and so far only for secondary education, though they're deciding on primary education today.Schools are free in how they implement it, could be in the entire building or just classrooms. I don't expect any hard rules any time soon, with the coalition being so divided on the topic.
There's been interesting debates in parlement preceding this measure, with several interesting position papers on the topic from researchers, and even student associations [2].
The researchers emphasize that adolescents are much more susceptible to the bad effects of smartphones, due to inexperience with dopamine and its effects on dopamine production, being easier to condition, FOMO.
The main adverse effect they name is what they call a 'crumbling brain', with a short attention span unable to focus on one thing for a longer time. An often-repeated soundbyte is that students using smartphones often score in average 1-1.5 points less on tests, on a scale of 1 to 10.
I dunno what to think about it. As noted by the student association, it seems like children won't get the chance to learn how to handle the traps smartphones pose. Then again, I was free to use mine in high school and I'm still addicted to the thing :/
> due to inexperience with dopamine and its effects on dopamine production, being easier to condition, FOMO.
I don't understand the reasoning in performing this type of deep analysis. If the purpose of the device is to enhance education, it can be in the classroom. If it it's not, it's essentially a toy, and it has no place in the classroom. Why even bring dopamine in to it?
Perhaps schools should simply have an extra set of mobile phones that are specifically designed for education only.
That way, every student has access to the device, and every student will have the same device, and there is no risk that the device is used for e.g. watching tiktok.
Mobile phones are cheap enough for this to be a reality.
A device made with the best of intentions and with many helpful features for enhancing education may turn out to have harmful consequences in practice. Those harmful consequences typically include temptations to have fun instead of productivity and learning. And that's where all those concepts you quote come in.
outcomes matter, intentions don't really. if a device leads to bad outcomes, then it's by definition not a good tool for education in the typical classroom setting.
of course it might make sense to then have a very different class that deals with the whole problem of supercharged dependence forming devices and activities.
A program designed to be fun while also being somewhat educational will never outcompete a game designed to be as fun as possible without regard for educational value.
Because they are a bunch of willful ignorants following buzzword-infused neo-puritanism? Not only is anything pleasurable bad for you so is pleasure itself!
> inexperience with dopamine and its effects on dopamine production, being easier to condition, FOMO
I know this is an unpopular opinion, but this is entirely in the hands of the parents and far from new. You build their mental toughness by taking them under your wing and introducing them to the offline world beyond the walls of home and school.
I’m not sure what’s worse, the damage done to your child by letting them use a smartphone, or the damage done by not letting them use a smartphone while of their friends use one.
I didn't say to take away the smartphone. I'm saying that if all they know is home, school, and the internet then they're basically living under a rock. That's not how you should raise a person.
I don’t know if this is the case, but I’ve noticed questionable news outlets reposting their own old articles, possibly to game google news search or something
> it seems like children won't get the chance to learn how to handle the traps smartphones pose.
No one learns. The bitter fact no one even wants to think about: Almost everyone in the modern society is an addict of digital screens as much as their real life obligations allow them to be.
I don't have a kid in school yet, but I see no reason to even give them a phone until they're 12 or so. Reading these messages makes it seem like that no parents do this: these kids always already have phones.
How realistic is my intention, parents with schoolgoing kids?
Make it until 18. Or even better, until someone finally makes a smartphone that runs necessary apps and opens necessary websites (think Whatsapp, govt websites) but no other app or website (games, social media).
I have a hard time believing such researchers. It's just way too politically convenient that they can pull such explanations and numbers out. It always feels as though that these policy advisors can support any position and if it eventually goes wrong then nobody will blame them anyway.
I personally think phones definitely shouldn't be used in a classroom. I don't even see what benefit you would get from it, but it definitely shouldn't be legislated over. If a teacher or school wants to ban it then they should be able to.
It's political because the people pushing for it usually are conservatives who don't like the modern ways of life and/or education. It's questionable whether they actually want to help the society or just force people into their own ways. They might even think they're helping, but actually do the opposite.
Researchers often do research based on their world view. Did these people also try to research what happens if they integrate the technology into education and teach children about the possible dangers of it, or did they focus on just whatever could confirm their world view?
Thanks for your explanation. I am just suspicious of anyone disregarding a study for perceived political convenience without any explanation at all. But I get it now.
That's preposterous. I'm as left-wing as can be and I think that smartphones and social media are a plague. Anecdotally, in my experience my left-leaming acquaintances are the ones more likely to be aware of the dangers of social media.
Then you and your acquaintances are unusual. In my experience, the left-leaning people are pushing for more digital learning. In my country, every left-leaning political party has it as a part of their program. In EU, there's an entire left-wing party based around digital stuff (Pirate).
The Establishment wants to be the only channel into young minds, that way theirs is the only ideology to get into their minds.. with phones and social media, young people can get other ideas, Ideas that the establishment considers the wrong ideas
This is just about school hours... Kids can do whatever they want outside of the classroom. They didn't allow me to play my gameboy in class either, but I still played that thing for many many hours.
Independent of any judgement of the particular research at hand: everything about this is political. Lots of people, in particular parents but also others, dislike and fear that young people are losing their life on "screens", i.e. mostly smartphones, gaming.
Note the "dislike and fear", which is fully subjective and fundamentally not based on evidence. This is regardless of whether there actually is data to support this position; the fear exists nonetheless, and data can only back it up or contradict their intuition.
Most politicians have children, and most of the voting body has children.
No idea how things work in Europe, but over here if a teacher or school wants to ban (or heck, even allow: see “banned” books) something — even if it’s for good reasons, the loudest local parents that disagree will show up to school board meetings screaming at them, and challenge them at the next election. Perhaps the local officials would rather have the cover of a law than look like they’re being capricious.
Belgian perspective, but what they use in various nations around Europe/the world is likely closer to our system than to the American one:
We do not have school board meetings the way you do. We do have parents' councils, and parents' councils have delegates that represent all parents at school councils, and school councils additionally have delegates representing the local government, the school employees, and the students. The school council then negotiates with the school leadership (which is not elected, but appointed by national organisations). This is a lot more reflective of the "indirect democracy" principles that are common here in Europe.
What this means, practically, is that unless you've got broad support for your initiatives you can go pound sand if you disagree with how your kid's school is run.
That's like saying you shouldn't worry about reducing your personal wasting of food because it doesn't solve world hunger—like when choosing not to fly often there's a small impact that is very much noticeable on a larger scale if more people did it.
Even if the industries, the western world, developing countries forced to use coal plants for cheap energy (and you can choose many more actors that play a larger part in causing the climate crisis) contribute to the problem more than you as an individual, at least you're not actively making the world a worse place.
Oh man, I know that feeling of dread as you're waiting for the next shout or clank. It took some time to try out various earplugs, which at first made me sleep even worse, but once I was used to wearing them while sleeping (after 2 weeks) the difference was night and day.
The pins usually don't fit exactly (because they still need to be able to move up and down), meaning that you can turn the lock slightly even without the pins at the right positions.
If a pin is pushed up completely, and you turn the lock slightly, the pin can get stuck in the right position.
This is done with a torsion wrench, keeping torsion on the lock while trying to get the pins in the right position with picks, hooks, or rakes.
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41891694]
reply