Also got pressured in the sub…

(I’m sorry. That was terrible. I also feel for the kid but I couldn’t pass on the pun.)

Ah, so there is a subscription for guided workout sessions through Apple Fitness. I have that as a part of my subscription and it doesn’t have any kind of recommendation feature though; it’s just a subscription to watch guided workout sessions if you want to go seek them out.

The watch still has all of the health and workout tracking features available without it. Garmin is slated as more of a fitness-based watch so it doesn’t surprise me they might have different features than the Apple Watch does.

I’m trying to think of what Apple Watch features are paywalled and other than buying apps that aren’t necessary or a part of the core device, I’m not thinking of anything. Are there particular features you’re thinking of?

Unless fines become a % of a person’s wealth. Make everyone feel it equally.

That’s hard to deal with. You are clearly an empathetic person with deep concern and care for this friend.

When dealing with grief, the best practice is to not seek solace/comfort from someone on a more inner circle of the grief (with the circles being like immediate family > close friends > extended family, and so on). Like it would be generally seen as inappropriate if a man’s wife died and her coworker went to him to process their grief.

Your friend’s ‘joke’ about murder summarizes simply how a lot of victims feel like rape is a loss of self, of personhood, in a way that parallels the loss of that in death—except the victim has to live through it and process it. So getting back to the grief circles, with rape those same circles may exist except with the survivor at the center. And it seems like you needed your own space to process the grief but you were trying to respect the circles and so you didn’t have support in that.

I’m just rambling thoughts that all mirror what you’ve said—I think I’m just trying to acknowledge what you experienced in my own words.

I hope you and your friend are more at peace now or at least on your way to it <3

I appreciate your thoughtful response and consideration of how you phrased this originally. I know you are making the point with the best of intentions in trying to ensure that the word “rape” isn’t diluted down.

I struggled for many years to move beyond my experiences of being raped. I’m in a good place now, but it took time. I generally wouldn’t say I’m suffering from it any more (even if there may be moments where I’m triggered), so I think the comment here just hit me hard.

I also know there are other victims who have gone through weird levels of guilt and self-doubt because they haven’t felt the level of suffering that’s “expected.”

We both have the same desire here, but slightly different stances on where that line should be drawn and that’s ok.

I’m responding a second time because I think this is an important point to make as a top-level response.

the suffering of a living victim is an essential part of what makes rape rape.

This is a fucked up take. This says that a rape victim must suffer, and if they aren’t suffering, then it wasn’t rape. Just, no. People process things differently. Some will be more and some will be less traumatized by being raped.

Forcing a particular experience onto a victim, saying they must feel a certain way, is just so incredibly problematic. A victim can feel whatever they feel and process a crime against them however they want. And the way they do so doesn’t change whether a crime was committed against them.

Edit: And with a very literal reading of the statement, it also says that if someone kills their victim after raping them, then it’s not rape—because there isn’t a living victim who is suffering. I’m sure that’s not what you meant, but it’s important to think about these things and how we convey them.

From the details given, it’s not clear if the person was dead or only unconscious at the time of the assault and it’s not clear whether the attacker knew either.

I’m not clear on your second point; you say that it doesn’t seem right that defendant knowledge matters in one case and not the other. So if:

1. Defendant commits arson not knowing they kill someone in the building > call it murder
2. Defendant sexually violates a body not knowing if they are dead > don’t call it rape?

It seems like not calling it rape is what would apply a double standard here based on defendant knowledge.

Our society treats bodies as an extension of a person; for example, we do not harvest organs from a body if the person didn’t consent to be an organ donor while they were alive.

Your focus on the victim’s suffering as what determines the severity of the crime seems problematic to me. If a victim doesn’t let being raped destroy their life, do we not punish the rapist as severely? We distinguish between manslaughter and murder based on pre-meditation and intent, even though the victim is still dead in both cases, and similarly I think that focusing on the attacker’s actions and intent should be the key factor in calling their actions rape.

If the defendant were going to a morgue or funeral home and defiling bodies, I may feel differently but given the timing here it feels way too grey to not treat it as rape.

FWIW, I’m coming at this conversation as a rape survivor myself. I know the level of mental devastation it can cause. And personally, I don’t think that treating the sexual assault of someone who may or may not have been dead yet (and if they were dead, had been so for no more than 30 minutes) as rape takes anything away from the severity of the crime or my experience as a victim of it.

And anyway from a semantic perspective, according to the article it is being charged only as attempted rape.

I mean, the dead can’t consent.

Also the article says “unresponsive passenger.” We know now the person was dead, but that doesn’t mean the rapist was clear on that fact at the time.

I agree with most of what you said, but you are severely overestimating the cost of t-shirts at Walmart. They start at $4 for plain or $7 for graphic tees from what I can tell. Even band tees and things like Mickey Mouse are in the $9–14 range based on a cursory glance on their site.

Yeah, that’s on OP. The article is actually titled, “Understanding Aggregate Trends for Apple Intelligence Using Differential Privacy.”

Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me you didn’t read the article.

The entire thing is explaining how they are upholding privacy to do this training.

1. It’s opt-in only (if you don’t choose to share analytics, nothing is collected).
2. They use differential privacy (adding noise so they get trends, not individual data).
3. They developed a new method to train on text patterns without collecting actual messages or emails from devices. (link to research on arXiv)

The problem is with receipts on thermal paper, not those printed with normal ink, so [edit: many some] receipts are not an issue any more.

If you want to tell the difference, you could try applying heat (like a hair dryer or iron) over the receipts and see which ones change color (usually turning grey or black where heated).

Once you find a few, you’ll likely get a feel for which ones are likely to be thermal paper just by looking and you can practice extra care with those. (Tip: they are usually the ones that appear a bit glossy.)

The idea that vaccines cause autism and therefore we shouldn’t give vaccines inherently implies that autism is a worse scenario than any of the diseases vaccines protect against. We have a measles epidemic killing children, and people would still prefer to not vaccinate because of a fear of autism.

If people think having a dead child is better than having an autistic child, that doesn’t bode well for autistic folks.

I agree the wall is convincing and that it’s not surprising that the Tesla didn’t detect it, but I think where your comment rubs the wrong way is that you seem to be letting Tesla off the hook for making a choice to use the wrong technology.

I think you and the article/video agree on the point that any car based only on images will struggle with this but the conclusion you drew is that it’s an unfair test while the conclusion should be that NO car should rely only on images.

Is this situation likely to happen in the real world? No. But that doesn’t make the test unfair to Tesla. This was an intentional choice they made and it’s absolutely fair to call them on dangers of that choice.

I’d combine both metaphors: police have keys and deadbolts are banned.

The “good guys” CAN get in, and the bad guys can easily break in.

The other thing I’ve recently seen pointed out is that they don’t have doctors administering it. Given the doctor ethos of “do no harm,” they can’t be involved and keep their license. So it’s just a bunch of underqualified people trying to figure out what to do.

Full transparency: I haven’t fact checked this myself, but it seemed feasible when it came up so it stuck with me.

You must live in a big city and not fly a lot of places then… Flights from where I live are nearly always that size or smaller.

Fair enough on your use of air quotes!

This disease is stupid. Before my first surgery I had six tiny little lesions, like smaller than a cigarette burn. And yet they caused debilitating, near constant pain.

Small correction as one of those women: hysterectomy is rarely a cure for endometriosis. What’s necessary is a skilled surgeon fully excising every endometrial lesion, which are frequently places other than the uterus. If there are endo lesions on the uterus, it can help.

However, adenomyosis is commonly comorbid with endometriosis and can be just as painful, and the only cure for that is a hysterectomy. And the only way to actually diagnose adenomyosis is to do a biopsy on a uterus after a hysterectomy.

(I say as someone in the process of planning my second surgery for endo, with a hysterectomy this time because I don’t want babies and might also have adenomyosis.)