Falling3

Earbuds with earrings attached. You can kind of guess it from the pictures and videos - it's clearest at the 1:10 minute mark.

They do sit in the ear like a low-profile earbud. You can kind of tell from some of the photos (but the video makes it more obvious) that these aren't using the pierced hole of the model's ear. They're sitting on the ear canal opening. The video also shows some of the interaction similar to an airpod tap.

edit: Yea, I assumed wrong as several commenters pointed out.

No, I've lived in each state and tipping was never expected (or practiced as far as I'm aware).

Funny enough the latter is my home state and the former is my current residence. I don't remember about NJ, but in Oregon, motorcyclists can legally pump their own.

The edible part of biological entities regardless of consciousness? Not all animals are believed to be conscious - even on this planet.

On your second point, the article seems to get some of the specifics wrong. There are links to both a video and the original paper that go into more (and better) detail. The detergent widget is actually a flow sensor to measure usage.

There is such an astounding amount of bad faith commentary in your reply that I'm just honestly shocked you can put so many ridiculous words in the mouth of a stranger based on a single sentence while simultaneously taking both the intellectual and moral high road. I'd try and discuss this further, but you clearly have zero interest in an actual discussion or in examining your views.

Well Henry Cavill is a pretty high bar to be fair.

So would extending them to farm animals. (I'm aware there are ostensible protections for farm animals, but they offer very little protection even if they were consistently enforced. Animals raised for food are often explicitly exempted from animal protections.)

> I don't know about Costco, but the big box stores don't carry any risk. If the product doesn't sell then they return it and deduct that off your next invoice.

That clearly does not apply in many instances, otherwise we wouldn't have clearance sections. There are all kinds of scenarios where it's either not possible, not feasible, or just not economically viable to return products to the manufacturer.

I'm inclined to agree, but I'm wondering if there's any data to support that.

Another white man here that disagrees with your assessment. How can pointing out the lack of representation on the nation's highest court with a desire to fix (the Biden quote) ever be construed as "overt and open sexism"?

The earlier versions of this technology that I can recall used an oral interface. So this is definitely a big step up from that.

"The government" and "criminals" are not distinctly separate sets.

I've thought about the same thing, but I don't think it's feasible because you essentially need to play the video in both places and ensure it stays in sync. The easy solution is to hook up a Bluetooth transmitted to your TV.

Octopus entomology sounds a lot more interesting

> but far from what anyone knowledgeable would consider proof.

Which is why the comment said "evidence" and not "proof".

Forget political allegiance and let's be honest. By what metric is the blatantly hypocritical choice better?

I particularly appreciated the alt text.

So why call out the side that's at least honest about its intentions? If you think government intervention is a bad thing, isn't the side that's upfront and honest about its desired amount of intervention still better?

Completely disagree. Tje richest 10% of the world is responsible for 50% of CO2 output. I don't know about other metrics, but that I'm sure that pattern isn't just limiter to carbon footprint. We don't have a population problem. We have a problem with Greer and resource use that slashing ourr population - even drastically - will not in any way solve.

Recycling is unfortunately not a guarantee even when consumers do everything right. Plenty of curbside recyclables end up in landfills.

My original comment certainly didn't have much nuance in it, but I would certainly draw a distinction between a reasonable need to schedule bathroom breaks around job duties and the need to raise one's hand and ask someone's permission, which they can arbitrarily deny.

"Most of us"? Really? I absolutely acknowledge that some jobs do this as other commenters have noted. But "most" sounds like an extreme stretch. I've he;d plenty of low-paying, manual labor jobs and never even heard of the practice until the last few years. It's the overwhelming norm at schools and - as far as I've seen - fairly exceptional at a job.

I genuinely do not understand the sentiment behind your first sentence after reading your last.

> However, isn't work also "a prison like setting

I've never worked anywhere that I needed permission to use the bathroom.

Where did it let you down that made you want to return it?

There are absolutely no demands being made here.

Imagine framing someone else's personal experiences and preferences as an exaggerated death wish for yourself.

I responded to the point you tried to make; let's not pretend otherwise.

I have a lot of problems with your analysis. Your original comment argued that conservative policies towards the poor are out of some concern for the future unintended consequences. I replied because we have mountains of evidence that is not the case. You then go on to straw man me with a false dichotomy that the Right's policies are either done out of some genuine altruism or that "they're monsters". We can acknowledge the reality of the situation without resorting to such ridiculous reductionism.

And finally, I'm not looking for a fight about my political convictions. I'm correcting one more instance or a narrative that has plagued modern political discussions for decades. Both sides are not the same. And it's either ignorant or disingenuous to claim otherwise.