MangoCats

I keep hoping that this cycle will be the one that demonstrates that we need real transparency, real accountability, and real limits of power to screw around in the name of "national emergency."

Of course, when half the people who vote vote for lunacy, lunacy is what you get.

Kinda how we never go to the dentist when nothing hurts even though we really shouldn’t wait until it does

Now I find that this all depends on the character of your dentist...

Regular visits to many dentists I have known in my life result in un-necessary procedures, additional pain and lower quality of life in general as compared to if you had just stayed the hell away and taken decent care of your own teeth at home. Yes, this is unethical, but in my life experience 9/10 dentists I have visited are unethical and do push any procedure they think they can sell you, particularly if the procedure is covered by your insurance.

If we could get a "real" dentist rating system going where you could judge them before experiencing the high-pressure sales pitch from authority while you are in the chair under the light, we might make some positive progress. Good dental practices are good for the patients. Un-necessary deep scale cleanings, recession reconstructions, drill and fill of not-really cavities and so many other things have given dentists in general a bad reputation IMO.

Basketball is a bad analogy. Life is not a game played for points where the "loser" is the one with just one less point than the "winner."

I would lean in more on bankruptcy. Bankruptcy should not be used as a strategy in business: run 10 risky businesses and bankrupt 9 of them to stem your losses while getting lucky with the 10th. In one sense, your creditors are fools for continuing to deal with you after you have demonstrated a pattern of serial bankruptcy, but that doesn't stop the harm you are doing to all the creditors of your bankrupt business (like: unpaid employees, suppliers, etc.) who didn't get a whole lot of option to not do business with you, or opportunity to research your credibility before accepting your promises to pay.

Sociopaths would say: it's a clearly precedented legal maneuver, it's "smart business" to take advantage of bankruptcy laws, screw the creditors, they took a risk and it didn't work out for them. I would say that bankruptcy laws need to become more aggressive about protecting creditors from harm, especially when dealing with "fake people" corporations.

I typically pay US$250 for unlocked smartphones, and they are fine for me, my wife, my kids, friends and family...

If the screen is 100€ and the labor to install it competently (I suppose this is a DIY serviceable phone, but the screen?) is another 75€, that's 80% of what I would be paying for a brand new phone.

Yeah, that plus labor is 80% of what I typically pay for a whole brand new phone... I know why it is this way, but it really is this way and that makes it very hard for low volume players to enter the market.

What's the cost to replace a cracked screen?

Any coincidence that 2012 e-mails are finally coming to trial today?

They “trust” me.

Dumb fucks.

If there ever is anything remotely competitive to Netflix, I'm gone like a shot.

Their "suggestive sell" interface is such garbage. We, the paying customers, should be able to default to a genre search without having to jump hoops every time. We, the paying customers, should be able to hit "not interested" and actually not see suggestions to watch the "not interested" title again. We, the paying customers, should be able to view the available catalog as we choose, not as their manipulative algorithms choose. The only reason we're still with Netflix is because the ad-free version is still affordable, but their content selection system is heavy advertising in and of itself.

Honestly, folks, if you want to watch a couple of movies a week I bet your local public library has a better interface allowing you to choose from new releases and a deep catalog, all for free - you just have to drive by once a week to pick up / drop off your selections.

When "parenting" consisted of making sure the rugrats were off the streets by the time the streetlights came on in the evening, it was a little lower maintenance than today.

Now, they have multiple global access terminals in the home, open 24-7-365, that can connect them to anyone/anything anywhere anytime. The physical threats of broken bones, abduction, etc. are less than in Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood, but these days you don't have to worry about the one drug dealer that got chased from the neighborhood last year, these days they can have anything delivered "in discrete packaging" if not to your home then to a convenient parcel pickup box not far from the school bus stop.

They can get into video-chats with law enforcement agents trolling for child-sex, they can access porn you didn't know existed, and they can do it all from "safe mode" of their phone browser after "lights out." Smuggling a porno mag to look at under the covers by flashlight has gone far far more more interactive and easily hidden.

My approach is to confront the challenges in the open. When the OnlyFans.com charge shows up on the bank card, sit down and talk about how paying for sexy things isn't good for either party. Don't take away the bank card, don't take away the internet access, try to teach why the whole thing is a bad idea. I suppose if it gets to be a habitual problem then denying access is the next step, but with respect to internet problems, I don't think we've had that issue yet (after 45 child-years...) Other habitual problems requiring access denial? Sure. All depends on your particular circumstances, but attempting to deny internet access seems like a seriously losing battle in today's landscape.

My kids are savants about media control systems. You don't need to explain anything, they've got it figured out before they touch the first button.