harryleeming

Yep, one session per day :)

>It's controversial, in part because there are very good reasons that it can cause neurological damage

I'm currently using it to treat long covid brain fog, out of interest, what are these reasons?

5 session of 90 minutes, then a 2 day break. Rinse and repeat. It's a navy diving protocol.

Too early to say how transient the effect is, it's very possible my symptoms return after a few weeks. There are conditions that HBOT can out right 'cure', the bends and carbon monoxide poisoning are the first to come to mind. So I don't think it's out of the question that it's effects can be permanent.

One of the causes of my symptoms will be straight up organ damage, and there's plenty of evidence HBOT speeds up the healing of tissue damage. So any progress in this area should be permanent.

I'm using 2.4ATA 90min back to back sessions to treat my covid induced brain fog, with great results.

It's the first time in a year I can think clearly. Anyone with long covid should seriously look into this as a treatment, it has some solid science behind it and is very safe, albeit expensive.

At this point I've tried 14 different drugs, not a single thing has moved the needle except this.

More info here on it for long covid: https://oxygenhealing.co.uk/covid-19-hbot/post-covid-trials/

I've added a link to Testflight app in the article :) https://testflight.apple.com/join/sEwR2G9J

Nope, not at all. It would be great if they did though, it would actually give them an incentive to protect artists and photographers. Right now they are taking a real back seat with copyright infringement, which is a real shame because it's the creators that bring all the value to the platform and they're the ones that are losing out, whether it's not being properly attributed for their work or brands reposting their stuff without payment.

We haven't considered that properly, I think chasing up copyright infringement is a difficult one, especially for Instagram reposts where the payout will most likely be so low.

Having said that, in the US, the CASE act, which will introduce a small claims court for exactly this kind of use case (excuse the pun) made it through the House of Representatives yesterday. So it's an interesting option for sure!

https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/22/20927545/copyright-bill-...

I'll look into this, but I don't believe they have an image license specifically for Instagram reposts only

Urgh, trying to fix this now :(

> Do you think there is an opportunity to allow sharing outside of Instagram?

Absolutely. Although I think there is some power, at least initially, in focusing just on an Instagram specific license. But in the future 100% we'd love to add more license options for more traditional use cases

try the homepage sharefair.co/ :)

I thought it would be more interesting to link to an actual licensing page for an Instagram profile, than the homepage.

But I appreciate the feedback, definitely could make some improvements on the mobile side of things!

Hi HN!

If anyone hasn't read Max Dubler's 2017 PetaPixel blog post 'No, You Can’t Use My Photos On Your Brand’s Instagram For Free'. I'd highly recommend it.

https://petapixel.com/2017/07/13/no-cant-use-photos-brands-i...

There is a huge amount of copyright infringement that goes on on Instagram, but to be fair to users there isn't really any decent framework in place to make sure they're reposting legally.

I built Sharefair over the last few months, it currently is only accessible if you have a creator account (currently limited by Instagram's new API). But I'm hoping to include all account types in the next few months.

Let me know what you guys think!