I don’t think apps can read keystrokes for other apps on Wayland.
Some religions believe that they should proselytize as many people as possible, so really not letting them convert you is disrespectful to their beliefs.
I agree that there’s a difference, but I’m not sure a simple argument like this really works since it is difficult to say one belief is ‘better.’
I see; I can’t imagine willingly submitting to ads, but whatever works for them.
Where are you viewing Lemmy posts that you have ads?
I was actually wondering about this recently and I started thinking about how loud of sounds people working on the deck of an aircraft carrier would be exposed to. I found this interesting article about improving the hearing protection for them, because it turns out even for people who actually use both forms like they are supposed to (most of the people in the jobs exposed to the loudest sounds do, it would likely still be at the pain level for them if they only wore one so they have good motivation) it still isn’t enough for a full workday of exposure.
Here’s the link: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA455113.pdf. The exposure is something like 145-155 dB. They say a final checker will get to the safe limit in only a few takeoffs, and that assumes that they can recover in a below 84 dB environment when they aren’t working, which apparently also doesn’t happen. It seems like it isn’t really a solved problem of how to protect people being exposed to this kind of sound level.
“As I have stated publicly, I had nothing whatsoever to do with the flying of that flag,” Alito wrote of reports and photos showing an upside-down American flag flying outside of his Virginia home after the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. “I was not even aware of the upside-down flag until it was called to my attention . . .”
Claiming not to be aware of a flag outside his own house, I would say it’s unbelievable but these are republicans we’re talking about.
Voyager works great for me.
I looked at the paper they’re talking about (which has not yet been peer reviewed), and I couldn’t find any past peer reviewed research from the author. The paper also doesn’t really explain any of its arguments past referencing sometimes unrelated stuff that “sounds scientific,” so I suspect it will be rejected from any reasonable journal. One example is the statement that the Van Allen belts protect earth, they are just belts of captured particles that could have been harmful to earth. There have been proposals to eliminate them to protect satellites (see https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD1095699.pdf). Also I don’t like how they keep using their quoted van allen belt mass of 180 mg to make other numbers seem very large, what makes the Van Allen belts relevant is their electrons have a lot of energy (moving at >0.2 c), whereas the particulate from reentry is much lower energy. The paper doesn’t explain how lots of low energy particulate is related to a tiny amount of captured high energy radiation, so mass comparisons between them (“a billion times heavier”) don’t make sense.
When you’re an enterprise client paying serious money for the service, there are often data protection requirements. They have the capability to support things like export controlled information or HIPAA compliance in office, and appropriate legal agreements ensuring data protection. It’s the power of collective bargaining (they are buying 100s++ licenses instead of just one).
The reason given in the article the co-pilot accidentally fell asleep is because he has “one-month-old twins.”
It’s not what free speech means, but they’re using his own words against him. Of course we clearly can’t expect any consistency from conservatives, “free speech for me” etc.
This happens to me too.