Unfortunately I think the size might be the deal breaker though, just remembered how my current one literally only fits in my pocket if I rotate it in at the exact right angle. 8 extra mm in both directions and there's no hope.
I'm not ready for pants shopping again already, taking these ones in took 10 hours T_T
Intriguing! I'm concerned about the "advanced power management algorithms" they're putting up front and center without clarifying. My current phone (OnePlus) is very aggressive about that and just kills my alarm clock in the middle of the night once in a while and breaks other apps, even with optimizations disabled and the phone plugged in. Furiphone isn't listed on DontKillMyApp and I didn't see anything with a quick search, have you heard anything about how it does on that?
Also that size, oof. Mine is already too big and this is noticeably bigger in all 3 dimensions.
It's even worse because that relationship is already called the square cube law. It's not a fixed percentage. Raising it to the power of 0.67 is the same as squaring it and then taking the cube root. So if volume increases by a factor of 8, you'd expect surface area to increase by a factor of 4. If volume increases by a factor of 27, surface area should increase by a factor of 9.
It's always true for any object that maintains its exact shape while increasing or decreasing in size, but it also tends to apply to animals across different shapes because of gravitational and oxygenation constraints. It's why we don't have any animals with proportions like a sheet of paper standing on end.
The funny part to me was where they say "Sharks follow expectations, this changes everything!"
#2: what kind of video games? PvP shooters? Grand strategy? Reflex? Detective games? Story/adventure games? Minesweeper? What about non-grid-based trivia/vocabulary games, or open-ended word games without clues, like Scrabble?
The study says they randomized a subset of the available cognitive games for each game session, could the decreased performance be due to the more sporadic focus on any given skills? Maybe some of the trained skills weren't especially helpful for memory.
Or maybe the specific cognitive games they used were just bad? The only detail about them in the study was that they "included memory tasks, matching tasks, spatial recognition tasks, and processing speed tasks." I don't know if it's similar stuff, or how fast they let the game difficulty scale in the study, but I've tried a couple of those brain trainer apps. They started out trivial and boring and scaled up slowly, and some of them were basically just brute force puzzles. Not particularly mentally strenuous.
I don't see a control group who did neither of them, either. So are both crosswords and cognitive games good but crosswords are a little better? Or do these cognitive games give just as much benefit as watching Family Guy?
I'm tired of these very specific studies being wildly extrapolated out as "video games bad." Video games are an extremely diverse medium, it's like saying reading is bad because you only studied gas station tabloids.
Just from a logistical perspective, holiday cooking in an unfamiliar kitchen sounds like an absolute nightmare, especially with Airbnb where you're at the mercy of the host for how well equipped it'll be.
Linen actually doesn't take to large scale mechanization very well. It causes the fibers to break into shorter pieces more often, which makes the final fabric rougher and less sturdy. Machine-woven linen also tends to be more loosely woven, which is again less sturdy.
Machines certainly helped some amount, but cotton got a way bigger boost from industrialization. That's why cotton is so much cheaper than linen today, especially high quality linen.
Dude, my boss every time. I don't even know how I can go shorter because one time, the whole email was the 2 questions, 21 words total. Still ignored one of them.
You would think so wouldn't you? But Google usually still tries to be "helpful" about everything. "100 linen" does work better, although still not perfect.
That also doesn't fix the issue with being unable to ignore Amazon and Walmart. On the standard search, the dash to ban a specific term makes it not the first result but it still shows up further down the page. On the dedicated product search it doesn't seem to do anything at all.
It's even bad for finding something to purchase honestly. I'll search for a specific part number, and most of the results are other similar but not interchangeable products. No Google I cannot just shove this random other battery pack into my UPS, but thanks anyway.
I tried searching for airtight drawers and all the results were either airtight or drawers. Only one was both and it was a ten thousand dollar museum specimen cabinet.
It's especially terrible if you care about the fiber content of your clothes. Searching for linen or even 100% linen gets me linen blend, linen-look, linen color. 100% wool gets mostly acrylic wool blends. Wool toe socks gets me either wool socks or toe socks but again, not both.
Plus I can't block Amazon and Walmart from the results anymore, so that's a ton of extra junk to filter through manually.
Dope, thanks!