ouch, butthurt 🤭

no. They could do server-side anti-cheats 🤷 it’s hard, but not that hard. they just prefer to get backdoor access to computers. stop spreading their propaganda

“Javelin, their kernel-level anti-cheat”

this. this right here. kernel-level = bad.

ah. kernel-level means fuck off.

ew. get better server-level protection. stop being lazy

I’d love it - but I dont wan’t this weird non-mod supporting one that they had with oblivion.

Just do pretty much the same but with more explicit mod support, like put NVSE in there natively.

nice! Honestly stoked about the option, this means my next phone will probably be a motorola

so it can guess what’s below the cloud cover? or, reconstruct what is velow the clouds from another picture.

sounds fairky useless 😅 good for maps, but not for anything the article talks about

24 years? the brand of the dvdr is unfamilar but lain is from 98 🤔

yes. it doesn’t make any sense to cap neither upload total or upload speed unless they have some sorta data cap

if you don’t have any data caps then it just doesn’t make any sense to cap your uploads.

Optimism training 🔥

Just check if your plugins got an update on the github list?

username checks out

from the source I sendt up there

“In particular, an outbreak of E-Cigarette and Vaping-Associated Lung Illness (EVALI) brought the short-term respiratory consequences of vaping into question, especially if cannabis or THC-containing products are used[4]”

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1916433 - this is the source they point to (i.e. [4])

I enjoy lotsa unhealthy foods and stuff myself, but on my path to quitting nicotine I did vape - and quit it due to concerning research. carcinogens as in cigarettes (and weed) is well understood. Vaping is not.

anyways! I’ll finish responding now 😅 so enjoy your stuff! just be careful spreading misleading numbers like that 95%, it’s blatantaly false.

allright. keep beiliving that. good luck with your lungs. maybe you’ll be lucky

no, I think you misunderstand your source.

it says that the chemicals are not yet (in 2015) known to cause any harm. the big thing with vaping chemicals (as pointed out in my sources) is that you heat it up a lot and inhale it.

therefore the way these chemicals are used in vaping is very different than in food, and present different risks. so the research into vaping is it’s own risk.

If you really think your source is “quality over quantity” then please do read it again, and look at the dates of the studies ❤️

one of mine is a so-called cumulativte study that looks over a lot of studies to find broad trends, and that one points out that it is for certain dangerous.

back in the day tobacco companies said that smoking cigarettes was not harmful. they even funded research into saying that. I’d be sceptical of companies and the narrative that they profit from.

ah yes, the 1 source against the 4 I posted…

edit: which is also over a decade old! you had to dig back to 2015 to find this.

cool dude.

edit 2: your actual source. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8171a7e5274a2e87dbda91/McNeill-Hajek_report_authors_note_on_evidence_for_95_estimate.pdf

says that the chemicals in vaping “have not been assosiated with any serious risk”. which means they have yet to be found harmful.

most of the ways we figure out that stuff is harmful is later. and when we do stuff with chemicals. this is when they would use these “popcorn factory smells” you’re talking about. back in 2015, the ones you said we moved away from?

yet it’s also so called “95% more safe”…

possibly worse is what I wrote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronchiolitis_obliterans?wprov=sfla1

this is one of the things these articles talk about. also referred to as “popcorn lungs”. I’d call this worse, but it being subjective and all I can’t talk for anyone else.

I dont think I’ve gotten emojies in usernames up? 🤔 maybe voyager doesn’t show it - which user is it?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11580103/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41533-022-00311-w

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10228557/