Understanding the limits of the tech is key - I don't equate the sleep tracking to the quality of the same I'd receive in a sleep lab, but I do value understanding my perception of sleep quality (i.e., totally subjective and rarely valid) vs the partially objective tracking I get from the watch.

Non-engineer here, thank you for a strong ELI-average-adult.

Good for equity. Bad for company debt.

Can't imagine that this was planned to work out exactly this way...

This - while I'd argue that feeding raw milk to children, for instance, is probably in violation of local statutes in most of the US, the overall premise isn't necessarily invalid - the idea of forcing it on others and packaging/selling it as an influencer is what's flawed.

My wife and I have a carefully negotiated relationship that is nowhere near tradwife, but not necessarily contemporary traditional either. I ended up in the hospital recently, and all that went out the window - she spoke for me, signed various forms of consent on my behalf, and the like as/when necessary.

The "tradwife" package seems to ignore that such moments will be necessary in any life, especially one with kids involved, and certainly any life that involves the risks of e.g., farm work. People get hurt and need consent for treatment, folks get sick and need to handle business over the phone but are unable to speak on their own behalf because they're sick, etc.

From where I sit, anything resembling what the tradwife influencers are selling is completely invalid/impractical without an 'escape hatch' allowing the (generally) submissive spouse to take the reins as an when necessary and of their own volition... along with ensuring that said spouse has a functional understanding of how and when to do so, per the laws of their particular state.

Without that, you're just playing a damned risky game that has a realistic chance of causing serious injury to one or more involved parties in the medium term.

There's also zero reason for me to ever set foot in a Chipotle when we've two different local chains, one primarily sit-down and one primarily food truck-based, offering broader menus, safer food, and better food - along with all the miscellaneous one-offs that one would expect in a city of any size.

(Shout-out to Moe's, for anybody in Chambana!)

There are three restaurants I distinctly remember long-term as health risks: Chipotle, Chi-Chis (decades ago), and Jimmy Johns.

The first, I still consider a risk. The second is long gone, and exists only as branding for salsa and the like. The latter, made a concerted effort to get rid of the one risky part of their product which couldn't be cooked or otherwise sterilized (sprouts, by definition) and to my knowledge hasn't had a large-scale problem since.

JJs is the only one that handled it even remotely correctly, after either the first or second outbreak, by straight removing the risk. They're also the only one of the two remaining above that I'll patronize. I've never eaten Chipotle, and it strikes me as highly unlikely that I ever will.

Right there with you, I make an effort to plan trips around those sorts of criteria. I'm from IL, but still have family (barely) across the IN state line. I can easily enough visit without spending a nickel in IN.

More difficult to go other directions sometimes, but as a matter of course I tend to stay north of the Mason-Dixon with precious few exceptions. That doesn't solve the problem entirely, but eliminates some of the worst offenders.

Nebraska isn't exactly on my bucket list, or 'states I must drive through to get to x' list, so I'll probably be fine avoiding them, but it becomes more and more difficult to track those lists mentally as time goes on.

Particularly since most Lemmy instances have (IIRC) built-in image hosting (unless disabled), and there are a wide variety of alternatives as well.

Seems to me that a defense attorney would have a rather more difficult time claiming that "gluten free" is a cooking style, and that x food contains gluten by definition.

On the other hand, this via Ohio, so... Such a holding wouldn't particularly shock me either.

Dan Quayle is the infamous "potato" politician.

English isn't a particularly easy language, on a relative basis, at least for those who don't study it academically at the post-grad level. "An" vs "A" is one of the last errors I'd ever fault someone for, because it's poorly defined and tends to have precious little impact on the actual meaning of the overall sentence.

Is it a marginally annoying error when I "know" what's correct in my head and I'm listening to someone else make the error? For sure. Would I ever point it out to someone on their second, third, or fourth language? Not a chance, because it's largely an irrelevancy and also damnably difficult to explain efficiently as a "rule".

I guess one could but... that just sounds expensive and weird-tasting to me.

I'll see your handfuls of nuts, and raise you a couple spoonfuls of peanut butter.

It's a) relatively cheap b) delicious c) easily edible on the fly with a spoon, time constraints be damned. It serves the purpose quite well, and even throws a bit of sugar in there too.

Not exactly a balanced diet, but it does accomplish the goal reasonably effectively and frequently is already in the house.

Also good when not medically quite at 100% - when not at my best, I do everything I can to follow dr. orders, ofc, but sometimes it's more efficient to throw a tiny bit of sugar at one's brain in a (relatively) healthier way, than to keep fighting it during recovery.

Sounds like a ton of fun, might just put that on my list of possibilities for getting more exercise once I get done healing and fixing my shoulder.

Can’t afford to risk falling on the damn thing even once more until I actually get it repaired, but really hoping to get into some cardio once that mess is behind me.

Hopefully recovering a bit more day by day from unexpected medical stuff, maybe a lil gig work because it seems to be the only exercise I get, otherwise just hiding from the heat abd holing up in the AC with my wife.

Doesn’t sound exciting, but it’s a significant improvement over where I was a couple weeks ago abd that’s definitely not lost on me.

No pot because legal state but one of my docs is in a non legal state. No booze because bad combo with recent ish stomach surgery. That’s not necessarily a negative, but having a hard stop on both is certainly different. Opportunity for a bit of reflection though, which is never a bad thing.

Right there with you on “just works,” as well as the simple fact that the config snippets you need are readily available - either in the repo of whatever you’re putting behind the proxy, or elsewhere on the internet.

I consistently keep in mind that it’s ultimately an RU product, of course. But since it’s open source and changes relatively infrequently, that’s mitigated to a large degree from where I sit.

Nothing against Caddy, though Apache gets heavy quickly from a maintenance standpoint, IMHO. But nginx has been my go to for many, many years per the above. It drops into oddball environments without having to rip and tear existing systems out by the roots, and it doesn’t care what’s behind it.

Ages ago, I had a Tomcat app that happened to be supported indirectly by an embedded Jetty (?) app that didn’t properly support SSL certs in a sane way on its own.

That was just fine to nginx and certbot, the little-but-important Jetty app just lived off to the side and functionally didn’t matter because with nginx and certbot, nothing else gave a crap - including the browser clients and the arcane build system that depended on that random Jetty app.

We can’t pass an equal rights amendment, and we are, if memory serves, ONE state away from a convention of the states. This unfortunately isn’t going anywhere.

Doesn’t mean there isn’t value in introducing it, of course. Just that it’s not a serious, practical proposal.

I've never known anyone who actually received a livable amount of money via SSDI.

I have seen some screwy situations as a result, there just isn't enough money involved for one person (much less 'and child') to survive.

As others have suggested, there's the vanlife route, but that's dependent on being able to maintain said vehicle, pay for camping and gas, and cover the other relevant expenses such as insurance.

I've seen people share residences, make use of temporary accommodations, get subsidized housing, and a variety of other things. None of those are necessarily quick fixes, unfortunately.

To my knowledge, there is not a single location in the continental US where that would be sufficient money to live on. I'm genuinely sorry, though glad you got approved.

There are parts of the country where your back pay could go towards purchasing a home, land, a trailer, and/or similar. Trailer parks charge lot rent, property taxes cost money, and then there are maintenance costs as well so that may or may not be viable for you.

Here in east-central IL, one might well be able to purchase a trailer already on a lot, and pay the lot rent and have enough to live on given back pay. Other parts of the country, YMMV. On the other hand, in addition to maintenance and utility costs, you're also on the hook if the park has issues and/or the company/group running the park has issues - as well as potentially for collective expenses such as sewage infrastructure maintenance. Not to discourage this line of thought, just to point out that there are potentially significant expenses involved in the future, just like with any ownership interest in any home.

That matches my understanding and the experiences of people I've seen be successful with legal representation.

I also understand that both success and odds of back pay are greatly enhanced by having representation (Who takes a cut, you don't pay up front generally)

Share?

I do not know why these two concepts are so frequently conflated and misunderstood, but they absolutely are.

Thanks for the solid clarification. At-will and RTW are two very different concepts, and off the top of my head, forty-nine of the fifty states are at-will. The 50th state isn't all that different (MT), just a bit nuanced: "Montana defaults to a probationary period, after which termination is only lawful if for good cause"