Readit News2) You have to be an idiot to visit currently. The rule of law is now nothing more than guidelines and Trump and his ilk have publicly stated they alone can decide what's right or wrong.
Edit: Somebody fucking explain. She tried to cross the border on the 25th, 5 days after Trump's presidency started and after he started rounding up and deporting people.
I agree. It seemed to me like Zelensky initiated the public display. Both trump and jd Vance we also commenting on his inappropriate public statements.
How about SSRIs, for which much of the research does not provide supporting evidence? E.g. there's a 2022 meta-study by Moncrieff et al that shows there's no consistent evidence tying serotonin to depression. An earlier 2008 placebo-controlled study by Kirsch et al shows that SSRIs are barely any better than placebo.
IOW, SSRIs are useless horseshit for the vast majority of people (especially in the absence of e.g. CBT) and the theory behind them is not supported by evidence. Why are they still prescribed?
It's easy to look at studies and say "this shit doesn't work" (despite there being plenty of studies that show they're clearly effective and they're one of the best treatments we have). But when you talk to people taking it, clearly there are way too many that benefit from them to just say we need to stop prescribing them. That's just deciding due to your own biases that countless people need to suffer unnecessarily. Why? Why would you want to do this to people? Or do you not actually care about the suffering or wellbeing of the people affected and you just have this vague idea of "SSRIs bad"?
I spent a lot of time reading studies before going on SSRIs to decide whether it was worth it. The literature unambiguously said that SSRIs are absolutely a valid form of treatment that can help (even though it won't help everybody). Who are you to say they're horseshit?
I'd prefer using Tailscale so that I can also access it in their native apps on Android and Android TV.
They knew the insurers were leaving and why. Yet didn't fund FAIR correctly at the time? Or what's the excuse?
Of course now there is a massive deficit. Maybe they'll pay us back on the next surplus...
It would say something like, "This text attempts to summarize the entirety of human knowledge".
Still, IMO summarizing videos is useful. Even if the summary is not accurate or a 1:1 representation of the content, you can mostly get the gist of what is being said without being baited into watching advertisements.
Although, this site doesn't seem to do a great job at summaries. Kagi's universal summarizer has much better results, https://kagi.com/summarizer/index.html . However, it requires transcripts to be available for videos.
How do you read a book effectively? You skim the table of contents. You skim the contents of each chapter and mark interesting paragraphs. Then you go through the book another 1-2 times, each time getting deeper into the text and cross-referencing information between different parts of the book.
What tools like this will do is allow us to apply this same workflow to videos, which can greatly enhance our understanding of videos we're interested in and help us contextualise it with the rest of our knowledge.
I've already been doing this and it's helped me expand my knowledge and understanding in ways that wouldn't have been possible without an unreasonable investment of time and effort.