I only use work hardware for work. I only use work networks for work. I have a cell phone off wifi for everything else

Op why don’t you suggest what an acceptable reply looks like? You’re pretty restricted on what type of advice you’re seeking. Maybe then folks can ad libs in the thing that will help.

And ultimately if you are trying to macgyver together anti drone tech you are beyond fucked and should have spent that energy pursuing other means of privacy.

Athletic golden is great.

But that doesn’t make sense, one beer a week is absolutely not triggering chemical addiction. At that rate you could attack any ritual behavior, or regular consumption of anything beyond nutrient paste and water

To me the important distinction is between chemical and behavioral addiction, habits and compulsions.

That sucks. I like to drink and also drink non alc drinks. I’d just ask your fave 0.0 or non alc derived beverages,maybe I’ll check em out

What about baseball and track?

Loser talk. Do you see the masturbatory way you are reveling in these negative responses? Will you acknowledge you are dwelling in hyper negativity, seemingly for the lulz?

The lack of understanding that indeed, you may struggle to control it, BUT YOU’RE STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR IT

19/f/Cali always

You think a person’s worth is tied to their genes. Pretty yuck. I disagreed and explained how.

For the record I was calling YOU out for linking a person to their genes, just not directly, trying to be courteous to the conversation.

Keep replying now, and you’re just slapfighting. Not worth it. I said in the last comment our positions are well known and the conversation is functionally concluded.

It’s a bad gene. It’s literally the contextually appropriate description of a factor involved in a situation.

Sorry it hurts your feelings

We’ve both made our points and opinions known here.

I mean if it’s a damaged or failed it’s a bad gene. It caused ms!

It’s not shitting on a person, it’s discussing a condition.

I can understand that discussion can lead to eugenics style thoughts.

“Oh that person has tons of bad genes, they therefore are bad”. That’s wrong though, a person can have a super fucked up body but it doesn’t change their value or goodness.

When discussing a condition, the genes that improve or cause that condition can be described as good or bad.

Context matters.

It’s an article about curing baldness, all context is pre determined.

Like sure, if we’re just bringing anything up, why care about baldness when I can’t breathe underwater, or if I can’t raise the dead?

If the topic is undesired head hair loss, “bad” appropriately describes the genes that may contribute to that. The discussion is limited by the context to avoiding hair loss, it isn’t a universal conversation on cosmetics

Depends, do you want it to work?

That’s a very silly thought

Unfortunately, looks like buying Twitter was a very effective choice if you take profit off the priority list

Who cares? Just suck and fuck whatever consents and gets your motor running. If something changes and doesn’t seem so interesting, stop doing that

My God my general but shallow knowledge of many things will grow more powerful