thudrs

The reason nutrition labels dont work is because nobody knows how to put things in relation. How much sugar should be in this item? How much fiber should I eat in a day? The government tried to fix this issue with food pyramids, plates, etc, but were corroded by propaganda, and/or poor understanding of nutrition. A gallon of water a day is ridiculous for most. Your diet is really dependent on how active you are, among several other factors. Nutrition is not a one size fits all type of thing.

We dont really understand proper nutrition yet. Recommendations are constantly changing, what used to be good is now bad, and vice versa. Companies just need to continue telling us what is in our food, and let us do our best.

Adding a percentage based statistic wont help because daily intake stats are wide guesses at best, and most people dont care anyway.

The most effective way to teach nutrition is by cooking. When people can see what is going into their food, they naturally use less. Also, try changing your diet a bit, and feel how it effects your mood. Other than that, if someone wants to make bad decisions, thats their choice. There is no need for these aggressive campaigns against sugar like the sugar line proposed above.

This article was posted below: https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/04/23/52...

The facial recognition prevented Bah from recovering his account. He was accused, and I believe arrested, multiple times. Despite being proven innocent time and time again.

If I understood this article correctly, the thief did not always sign in/show an ID. Sometimes the facial recognition just tied the man to the stolen ID. The CCTV did help prove his innocence, when it wasnt misteriously missing, but the facial recognition, was in fact a problem.

So thief walks in the store with the stolen ID. If facial recognition is working correctly, then this identity theft should have been recognized immediately, unless the actual guy has never been in an Apple store.

Thief steals a bunch of things, and the software ties the thiefs face to the stolen ID. Without facial recognition, they still would have tied the ID to the theft.

Apple sends the police the name and address on the ID, as well as maybe an image of the thief. The police arrest the man matching the ID without reviewing the footage.

This seems like the polices fault for not following through with a proper investigation. If anything, the footage from Apple saved this teenager. He still has an arrest on record, and as others mentioned that could ruin his life. But he needs to take that up with the police, not Apple.

The only way I see this involving facial recognition is if the thief came in to case the place, used the stolen ID, then came back later without showing the ID and stole a bunch of things. Or if they have software that flags thiefs, even when employees dont see it.

Now all that being said, there are questions to be raised about the surveilence brought by Apple. Do they notify their customers that they are being recorded? How long do they store this data? Are they analyzing your behavior (frequency of visits, suspicious activity, where you walk in the store, etc)? Is their facial recognition biased/inaccurate?

Apple prides themselves on being privacy focused, but they are clearly infringing on their customers.

It is in the hardware. You can take one apart and see for yourself. These devices will not activate unless they at least think they hear the hotword. Once activated though, nothing is stopping them from staying on. Although Im sure you can just watch their internet traffic to prove if its listening in the moment.

People were getting annoyed with the high fees and slow transaction times of Bitcoin. LTC is much faster, has cheaper fees, and has a higher cap on currency that can be mined. A few days ago Redditors on r/bitcoin (or maybe r/btc I cant remember) suggested people with these complaints switch to LTC. More and more posts started popping up to rally LTC. Some even mentioned that most coins had a tight correlation with Bitcoin, which LTC did not seem to have. If this were true, and Bitcoin were to crash, LTC would have the greatest chance of overtaking it. The next day LTC started to rise. Im not 100% sure of correlation, but I believe these reasons to be a part of the cause. It could also have to do with big name investors starting to research cryptocurrencies after CBOE went live, or something else entirely.