Some people just have big hands. Looks real to me, it’s obviously just a staged shot for promotion. Get a crew to build part of a fake attic (don’t need a whole attic for this), lay some insulation, have the talent (the guy in the photo) hold the insulation and look nice for photos. He leaves, they break it down and move on to the next project
A web browser is not a computer. A phone is not a desktop computer. Google (and most other large companies) keep many features restricted to their full websites, not mobile apps and mobile versions of their sites. For those who are used to/grew up with smartphones, tablets, and chromebooks, these tactics help to make it harder to leave their ecosystems as they aren’t used to navigating desktop environments.
(Chromebooks do give desktop versions of websites by default, but they have helped reduce technological literacy in exchange for convenience)
They said to try again on a computer. All your screen shots are from a phone. You might get the same result, but we won’t know until you attempt it.
I’m on the side of AI here. A couple babies have their faces merged and it looks like a couple have third ears. Entirely possible it’s real but just too low quality/overedited to make out the details. The end of mom’s tail is also sus, but looks like it could just be dirty.
It doesn’t sound like they’re making more work for you. It sounds like you’re making more work for yourself, and it sounds exhausting.
Ground News. I know it gets sponsored a BUNCH so it might be a turn off, but it really does what it sets out to do
Not uncommon to do during heat waves or summer events. Can be cheaper than buying it from a grocery store
The LDS church is big into genealogy and has a competitor called FamilySearch. No submitting DNA or anything, it’s actual genealogical research. I believe it’s free as well (could be wrong)
It’s not a calendar, it’s an appointment scheduler
This is how I’ve learned to use Linux
You’re so close to seeing the point. Yes indeed that the restaurant should be able to see if reservations are being changed around and be involved in those decisions, such as being able to restrict how they’re transferred and charging fees to do so. Your first paragraph is what is needed and what the law is trying to get these third parties to do.
It’s not illegal to book a reservation and then turn around and give that reservation to someone else (scheduling conflicts, medical emergencies, etc) with the other person paying you for it. To me it’s a perfectly valid thing to do. The problem is that it’s being commercialized and creating confusion for both customers and restaurants who no longer know who’s booking their tables.
That’s just what it looks like now
The problem, as pointed out in the first paragraph, is that these are third party apps operating without the restaurant’s knowledge or consent. The proposed law would outlaw what these apps are doing if they do not have a contract with the restaurant. I’m all for it.
I’ve been loving it for my homelab (just a bunch of docker containers, but learning a lot!). Figured it would be the easiest for me to slide into for a desktop experience since my homelab is headless
Yeah, this is what I ended up doing. I’m surprised that the standard repository has such an old version! Completely removing that one and manually installing the latest version fixed my problems thankfully, minus a few visual glitches that weren’t there in Windows (Not too surprising)
There’s already an update?? I literally installed just a couple days ago, I’m surprised it didn’t give me the latest driver
I’ll take a look!
That’s my gripe with these studies as well. I just got done looking at the actual study and while the sample size was pretty big, I saw no mention of dosage (They mention dose as being how often, but not how much) or ingestion method. Considering they were using anonimized data from healthcare providers and weren’t working with actual people (Comparing those who use and don’t use based on ICD-10 codes), that info would be hard to actually get.
That said, I don’t think this is a bad study. The fact that people who used at all showed higher risks is something to be learned and I agree with their conclusion that the public should be more aware of the potential risks with cannabis use. It’s a good stepping stone on our way to better understanding the drug.
Edit: miss_demeanour commented that they found it states “smoking” specifically, but I do still worry that they may be grouping smoking, vaping bud, and vaping oil.