Mine are due to be replaced, and I’ll definitely keep my eye on this. But, if that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t be running to replace windows before end of life.
I’m doing “well” by most standards, and I won’t insult others by denying that. But it’s definitely more of a slog and it’s impacted our spending choices.
I simply can’t justify restaurant spending right now, for example. No way I’m buying a new car with 7% interest rates.
And there was major hubris from the makers. They were arguing that because it was all totally above board Apple wouldn’t be able to block the service without impairing iMessage entirely.
Blood flow is the most likely explanation there. The simple act of activating those muscles forces blood flow, which can often be restricted in a healing area. Same reason we apply warmth to an area and encourage light massage.
A lot of “injuries” we have can be fixed with exercise.
This is why a lot of what PT’s do is teach you simple exercises to work ALL of your muscles, including those that might not get activated in our day to day existence, leading to problems.
Lawyer here. Not legal advice. Really not that much by way of law to consider. If everyone agrees that an E-signature is good, then, generally speaking, an e-signature is good. I’d suggest it’s more on the people actually drafting the documents being signed than the software layer facilitating.
The backlash is funny. USPS does the same thing for mail forwarding to verify identity and legitimacy. It’s not like this is some crazy money-making idea from Elon.
This is an interesting take, and a very salacious headline.
I’m a lawyer who represent a number of disabled individuals (including the blind). My clients with vision impairments as all in on Apple products, saying that the accessibility features are head and shoulders above other options.
Also, folks need to appreciate the role that govt has in our lives (or that we want it to).
I don’t want the gov’t to implement my personal moral worldview. I want the gov’t to assure a basic level of law abiding and morality (I.e don’t kill or steal), and stay out of the rest.
Except that iMessage is a perpetual source of security concerns. Once that becomes unsupported, you’ll likely have exploitable code, where the exploit is publicly and widely known (but patched on newer versions).
Except, if you read the headline, the law is protecting this guy. It’s not like this person is barricaded in the house with guns and ammunition holding off a siege from the police.
That’s what makes the story noteworthy. Somehow a person can do this and NOT go straight to jail 450 days ago for trespassing
As a person who fits within your example, this is what I always come back to. I can completely understand a person’s position in support of abortion, but no amount of talking through the issues will get us in alignment.
Many of these big issues (homelessness, immigration, universal income, abortion) come down to one’s particular viewpoint on humanity and human rights, and if folks aren’t in alignment from that foundation, no amount of dialogue changes the disagreement that flows from the foundation.
this is a valid definition of “working class,” (I.e. non-owners), but it’s not how the phrase is typically used.
This phrase would include any non-owner professional like lawyers or doctors or even upper management.
On top of that many tech workers don’t fit even your definition because equity is often an important part of comp. That’s not the case for lawyers or doctors or management in other industries.
Using standard and customary vernacular, tech workers are not “working class.”