Rusty shackleford, checking in

You’re giving the guy a lot of grace. Admitting that there could be other reasons why tall guys can be partnered with short girls, especially when given objective evidence supporting these other reasons, is not impeded by a language barrier, not at the fluency level at which they’re otherwise communicating.

Nowhere in this thread do they admit it could be for reasons other than their personal theory.

That’s just having a poorly justified opinion and doubling down on it when confronted with evidence to the contrary, which deserves to be called out.

Again. Someone pointed out that in general women prefer men that are like 8" taller whereas men prefer women who are 3" shorter, and you refuse to talk about how it might not be the man preferring a very short wife, but the wife preferring a very tall man.

Instead you double down on “damn, them be some child-like features the men are going for”.

What does that tell everyone? You are CHOOSING to interpret a height differential to be about child like features, ignoring evidence to the contrary.

Why would you choose that?

I don’t personally think that’s what you’re into. But I think you have a poorly justified opinion.

You can have stupid feelings, especially once they concern how you treat others. There’s a big difference between “idk why, but I really like cherry flavored ice cream” and “idk why, but these people make me feel uncomfortable”, because the latter opens you up to treating others with prejudice.

It’s your job to wrestle with them and make sure your feelings are justified, or to change your mind.

You didn’t address it, so I gotta ask, did you read the part about causation at all?

How do you handle the plex metadata side of things? I’m trying to do something similar.

I love framework computers, but unless you’re working with LLMs and can leverage the high VRAM, you’re better off building your own desktop if you’re comfortable. The desktop represents a very specific niche, and the repairability of a traditional ITX desktop handedly beats that of the framework desktop.

Kpop demon hunters

Fwiw I use a fork called Apollo because it enables a headless setup

I believe this is where reusable water balloons can come into play

You got it! Best of luck with the baby

There are multiple wifi-connected solar powered cameras that will do the motion-activation, IR night mode, etc. thing that you’re asking for, that you can just drop into a location, but they won’t be self hosted.

Unfortunately pretty much everything you’d self host takes time and finagling, it’s just the price of privacy/independence. I know you’re asking for a self hosted solution but that will be difficult with little free time. I’ve been running frigate for a year and I still can’t get some object detection masks to properly ignore detections.

You’ll want to be running frigate, a self hosted nvr solution.

Camera wise, you’ll probably want a power over Ethernet (poe) amcrest or hikvision camera for continuous video to be sent to the nvr to do the detection. A list of recommended hardware is found here.

I’ll be honest though, depending on where this is you might be better off with a non-self hosted setup. For example, reolink makes several battery/solar powered wifi cameras that record on motion, shooting notifications to your phone. No cables to run

“fuck them kids”

Please don’t tell me I was the only one hitting the unmute button like an absolute buffoon.

The only annoyance I’ve had with it is searches will sometimes default to another language, even though I set the language to only return English results.

Also, I’ve found that the image/map search capabilities are less performant than googles.

But I still use it because the search results are so clean and no-frills.

This seems like a great way to be fired for a misunderstanding. It’s not worth it.

Magic smooooke

It’s not mentioned in the reporting, but according to the source they say it is going to be opt-in (or at least something with opt-in in mind)

I may as well call you fixating on the promotional pricing nit a redirection from you being unable to admit you were wrong about what the average cost of cellular and Internet in the US is.

It was an edit, so understandable that you missed it, but I did add to my last comment that fwiw I did agree with you that we should also look at averages.

If we’re being crystal clear, you also called it a promotion, their website called it a promotion and made it explicit that they were discounting the Internet plan and that the introductory rate expired.

Let’s play a game. Can you tell me what their non-promotional rate for internet is? If it’s within the $40-$50 range I provided, you’ll owe me a dollar?

So here are my thoughts on averages - the article you linked arrived at its number by looking at the average price of plans offered. IMO that doesn’t capture “affordability”, because it doesn’t make sense that adding Kanye Wests new ISP offering a 5gbps gold-plated modem equipment rental tier for $2k/month should impact “affordability”. What would really be helpful is the the average, most affordable internet plans offered around the nation. I couldn’t find that, though as a close second I did find surveys suggesting that the average American pays $89(again, there’s a difference between average plan offered and average amount paid), which blows my mind.

That got me thinking, what does the average American pay for cell phone service? Most reporting I found covers what the average bill is, which ignores number of lines - a crucial statistic. However, this article refers to a JD power report saying the average cell bill is $144. Hard to contextualize this without knowing how many lines that sum represents.

Earlier, you asked if I think the vast majority of Americans are picking more expensive choices for no reason. I actually do - and I have two pieces of evidence that led me to that conclusion.

1. The average price paid for internet ($89, according to the study I linked) is higher than the average cost of internet plans offered ($60s-70, I think, based on the article you linked). This suggests that the average American is heavy on consumption and makes the choice to go with the more expensive plans even though cheaper plans are offered.
2. This second point is, to me, the most telling data point. In the cell phone service article, we were unsure about how many lines the average of $144 represented. However in the same breath. JD power also said that by switching to an MVNO, the average bill was halved - going down to $77, presumably a study done under the same conditions as their previous, name-brand carrier study. Here we have clear insight. The name-brand carriers and MVNOs have exactly the same availability - MVNOs literally run on the same networks. In theory there’s some issues like you might get deprioritized if there’s a lot of network traffic, but that rarely happens, and I’m sure most Americans couldn’t even tell you what deprioritized means. I’m going to suggest that MVNOs offer basically equivalent service to the brand name carriers. If they do, then why are Americans paying double for the brand-name carriers? I’d suggest it generally falls down to incumbent advantage. People not doing their homework on what carrier to use, or not wanting to make the switch due to potential hassle.

So yeah, I think people do pay more than they could, for no reason. So while the average costs might be high, that is at least partially due to overconsumption or market inefficiencies, and not necessarily due to lack of affordability. This is why when answering someone asking about affordability, it’s good to share cheap, nationwide plans in addition to the average costs for said items.