Pretty sure that’s a mask. I saw one with just that face at the 99 cent store.

Greetings comrade!

Biden had more than “a bad night” the dude looks like he’s aging out of the ability to stay awake for 90 minutes at a time.

You have completely bought into the long GOP build up of a fundamental lie. Congrats I guess.

Or have you convinced yourselves this inane rambling isn’t a real, long term issue?

Inane rambling? You are talking about Trump, right?

It’s funny how the standard by which we judge Biden is so high, and the standard for Trump is so low. Like… “oh wow, orange man form complete sentence, he’s really killin it” vs “omg Biden stumbled over his words and had one bad night, his candidacy is over”.

I would interpret the American Academy of Pediatricians stance as being supportive. But that’s open to interpretation, I suppose.

https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/media-and-children/center-of-excellence-on-social-media-and-youth-mental-health/youth-advisory-panel/youth-advisory-panel-feedback-to-policymakers/

It’s still “bad” for some values of bad. I’ve demonstrated on my own farm that it’s possible to employ permaculture-ish principles (permies freak out when I say that) and make an adequate living. But make no mistake, you are supplanting nature and interacting with it in competitive and often adverse ways no matter how what practices you use. It’s kind of a spectrum - the better the interface with nature is, the less viable it is financially and vice-versa.

It’s literally cited on the HHS page about it: https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/youth-mental-health/social-media/index.html

So you acknowledge that you don’t have the skills necessary to interpret papers so… what, you decide that Nature adequately represents their findings enough to dismiss them? Even though you say there is little evidence of a causative link? Even though the surgeon general says they feel there is and cites that evidence to back it up?

I mean… what?

It’s a pity you aren’t worth responding to. Have a nice day!

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

Why would you conclude that? Because it conflicts with your “vibe”?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

Do I really need to point out that you yourself are “literally just posting vibes” ?

You didn’t even bother investigating whether or not they had justified their stance with science. I’m not convinced you made it past the headline, much less read any of the content that article linked to.

The funny thing is I actually did read two of the studies I quickly found and which you too can find. But you seem more interested in adhering to a certain… vibe.

Have a nice day.

Edit: You know I was busy and totally forgot.

The very first result on my search engine, if you search for “effects of social media on children’s mental health” is the HHS.gov website, specifically this page: https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/youth-mental-health/social-media/index.html

And wouldn’t you know, right there are 5 separate papers cited to support 1. that social media is widely used; and 2 it “presents meaningful harm to youth”

You are manually caching web content. Were you aware that (a) your browser does that for you; (b) the internet does that for you ?

I’m as guilty of this as anyone and can tell you from experience that it’s sutpid.

“pulsing sonic sound”

No, it’s just based on vibes.

You didn’t bother looking, clearly.

Edit: I’m not saying I’m familiar with what the studies say, although some draw a clear link with adverse mental health impacts on kids. Not sure how far that goes. I’m also not saying I agree with the SG or the need for warning labels, but to say this is based on “vibes” is, ironically, speculative at best.

This is because farming is fucking exhausting and he just couldn’t make it back to the house.

I live in rural California. We only just this year are able to pick up a faint LTE signal. I think it might get us a very unstable 1-2 Mbps if we hold the phone just right. We have no cable, DSL or other land-based options and because of the topography can’t pick up the local wireless provider, which is very expensive anyway - like $175/month for 50/5

So without Starlink our only options are crappy regular satellite providers like Hughesnet which impose very low quotas - 10 GB monthly for day time usage - and have insane latency.

It bugs the shit out of me I have to give money to that fuckwit but without it we live in the dark ages.

“Oh come on now! How else am I supposed to play provider and protector while I assuage my feelings of inadequacy and quell my FEAR?”

/s

Are you on the spectrum? I ask because your “but it isn’t 100% literally this thing” is the sort of overly pedantic and literalist thing I would do myself.

Would it make you feel better if you noted that the scrolling red banner at the top of the website does in fact have “this water ain’t woke” among other similar sayings? And there is a “This drink ain’t woke” Yeti cooler.

Does that help?