So as someone who spent the last few years caring for a kid with a genetic defect.... I really don't wish that on anyone.
If there is a way to detect or prevent genetic defects before the kids are born, we should really allow people to make a choice.
And I really don't care if doctors mix genetic material from 3 people to make a healthy baby. It's still a form of evolution. I'd think we should really try to give two people who really want to have a kid a chance to have a healthy kid...
Austrian newspaper Der Standard [1] is reporting that he was using a camera attached with a string, and authorities are considering the possiblity that it got caught in the propellor, leading to a collapse of the parachute.
Allegedly he tried to open the emergency chute, but was already too low.
Do you get useful insights from blood oxygen data? The measurements seem pretty erratic on my Series 8 watch, and I'm not sure what conclusions I should draw from them.
Do you suffer from a health condition that requires monitoring O2sat?
Due to spending more time in a chair than being active I have a bit more interactions with Gravity than most. :) This has led to fairly significant sleep apnea, which is most easily tracked via monitoring of O2 saturation.
The Apple watch data isn't really useful for this at all as the frequency of monitoring is just too low. There are a bunch of ~$100 devices that you can get from Amazon that do a fantastic job monitoring O2 Sat for a night and have nice integrations into Apple/Android.
I do wish the CPAP's offered this type of integration - that is, they had a Bluetooth receiver to which I could pair an O2 sensor, and have the data coupled with my breathing analysis. This would be nice to have in OSCAR (the open-source analysis package) or even in Apple Health.
Instead, the manufactures like ResMed treat this data as a walled garden and try their hardest to require everything to go through a Sleep Doctor who pays them a non-trivial data subscription.
I really like collecting as much data as possible with my watch. I have found Apples analysis in the health app to be pretty helpful over longer periods of time. o2 probably the weaker of signals and to be honest I just like having it when I am sick. I will convince myself sick in bed I have Covid and then check my o2 and feel better.
Day-to-day, no value at all (I have it on my Garmin). Only in combination with respiration rate + HRV + RHR does it become a useful signal, and frankly, if all four of those are out of whack then the odds you feel sick or run down and don't need metrics to tell you so are very high!
It's relevant because that's what most people in Austria remember him for.
First he got famous for the Sky Dive from space
Then he made headlines for his facebook posts, sharing questionable opinions with the media, and supporting right wing politician like Strache (who is currently on trial for embezzling party money to fund his lavish lifestyle).
It's a part of his public persona, not mentioning it would be weird. It's not like he shared his questionable views in private.
I don't get why people can't just keep their stupid opinions to themselves.
That guy achieved some pretty amazing stuff, and I loved watching him, but then he starts publicly talking political bullshit to the media and it gets a bit hard to ignore that he is an asshole.
A lot of accomplished people are probably assholes in private, but they don't talk about it in public.
I wish Baumgartner would have just stuck to talking about the stuff he really knew very well.
It sucks when you find out an artist you like or someone who accomplished something you find impressive, is actually a terrible person. I suppose it's useful to be able to separate the artist from the art, appreciating the thing while acknowledging the person is flawed. This happens all the time with historical figures, authors, musicians, and so on. They build up this library of great work and achievement, but they somehow can't keep their opinions to themselves and end up outing themselves as bigots or worse. We can admire their works while condemning their beliefs.
Celebrities voice their political opinions in public for the same reasons you are right now. They have a strongly-held belief and want to improve their city, nation, or world. And given that they are well-known, feel a duty to use this platform to advance their beliefs.
In summary: "Why does this guy have to have his own mind, filled with opinions and beliefs that I happen to not like, and then actually talk about them publicly?"
Grow up. One isn't an automatic asshole just because they don't share your worldview.
I disagree - it's not really a horrific opinion to feel that both democracies and dictatorships are absolute catastrophes at the moment. Clearly there's a correct choice among only those two options, but something in between might be even better. Of course I have no idea how you would make a dictatorship "moderate", but I'd love for it to be a real thing, and it doesn't feel reasonable to imply a person is a monster for agreeing with me on that particular thing.
For all their failings, there is nothing catastrophic about democracies at the moment. Not compared to the actual catastrophes that autocracies commit. Lumping the two together as equally failed is ridiculous.
There's some things I know a bit about... But if I was spouting off about skydiving when I know little about it, that makes me an asshole. Especially, to extend the metaphor, if I was spreading misinformation that led to people being hurt.
Anyways, like I always say, parachutes are optional really.
Having a general opinion about things outside your very specific area of expertise in the world does not make you an asshole. It makes you a human being, and just as the comment above is also spouting an opinion outside the poster's area of expertise (unless he's an immigration policy and political analysis expert), the same right applies to a skydiver. I have a profession, but I also have opinions on many subjects I've read about in some depth. I should keep my mouth shut about them due to a lack of professional certifications because some people find it convenient to harp on that out of their own ideological fixations? Absurd nonsense.
Also, an opinion that doesn't tick all the check boxes of pro-immigration and open borders isn't automatically "hurtful misinformation" You should really qualify that particular line of censorious bullshit. More recently, the biggest fans of narratives about hurtful misinformation that I've seen tend to be authoritarians on the right, curiously enough.
You shape your public image by deciding what you talk about.
Do you want to be known as a legendary skydiver? Then talk about the amazing achievements and plans for the future you made.
Do you want to be known as a former athlete with questionable political views? Then go talk to the media doubling down on stupid memes you posted on facebook.
I have no interest in learning more about the latter. I guess that's why most of us eventually forgot about him until he tragically passed away today.
I can't think of a more bland misuse of a public image than keeping it strictly neutral so that it doesn't offend the ideological fetishes of people who just want you to shut up if you deviate from whatever they indulgently decide is correct.
Like any human being, an athlete can have other opinions on other things and all the right in the world to express them without having to be a certified expert. You're doing the same now, as did the comment above. That's the only qualification necessary.
I think we disagree on what we consider bland. I consider people reposting right wing memes on facebook extremely bland. People who blame all the problems on "the foreigners" are so common that I just don't care to listen to them.
If thats what you want to read about in the media, good for you, because that's what social media (and traditional media) provide plenty of.
I just wish that people who accomplish exceptional things would focus on those exceptional things instead of using their enormous publicity to stir controversy by sharing bland right wing talking points.
Yeah, non-sandboxed apps can iterate over open file descriptors. It's quite useful to detect eg. which app on your local machine is connecting over TCP. I hope they don't lock it down. It doesn't allow intercepting traffic, but you can see what connects where.
> If you don't want people to crawl your content, don't put it online.
I sometimes put things online for specific people to view/use, or for my own purposes. That gets an “all crawlers can do one” robots.txt and sometimes a script or two to try waste a little the time of those that don't play ball.
It is online because I want it online, not for some random to hoover up.
I consider robots.txt as a garden gate. I know it isn't secure, but likewise someone peering directly into my back bedroom window knows just as well that I don't want them there.
I could put stuff like that behind authentication, but that is hassle for both me and the people who I want to be accessing the stuff. I usually use not-randomly-guessable URIs though sometimes that is inconvenient too, and anyway they do sometimes get “guessed”. I must have at least one friend-of-friend who has an active infestation which is reading their messages or browser history for things to probe because the traffic pattern isn't just preview generation, I've had known AI crawlers pass by some things repeatedly.
TBH I don't really care that much, much at all in fact, I just don't like the presumption that my stuff is free for commercial exploitation.
I'm sorry but airpods and a 1080p screen from your couch are on a different planet compared to theater sound and even liemax or smaller formats. You can't feel sound from an airpod in your chest.
We watched a lot of films in divx or xvid or whatever that format was called where you could compress a movie on a CD. Quality was atrocious, but a good story is still a good story...
If there is a way to detect or prevent genetic defects before the kids are born, we should really allow people to make a choice.
And I really don't care if doctors mix genetic material from 3 people to make a healthy baby. It's still a form of evolution. I'd think we should really try to give two people who really want to have a kid a chance to have a healthy kid...
reply