

Their point was that the cars need fossil fuels, not the drivers.


Their point was that the cars need fossil fuels, not the drivers.


I suspect it applies to 5G phone signals too (because they are in a similar frequency) so you need to live where there are no nearby 5G masts and all your visitors must use Faraday bags.


You being wired doesn’t stop WiFi seeing you.


I can definitely see LLM board members existing. They should already be gutting the PowerPoint filter management layer


He renamed Facebook to meta because the leak of Facebook data to Cambridge Analytica and revelations by whistle blower Frances Haugen damaged the Facebook brand.


Nah. Only 51% of the risk.


deleted by creator


I heard there was a team that followed afterwards and corrected the things he meddled with


Yes. And?


New Gmail accounts still get 15GB if they provide a phone number. So it’s specifically about that.


It’s about tying phone numbers to accounts.


If the effect were meaningful it should be possible to establish it
Effects have been established in mice. Do we want to risk lives by establishing it in humans, or just recommend that people not live close to high voltage lines.
EMFs are very dangerous. Particularly at the gamma end of the spectrum.


Obviously not bullshit 


Well I’m glad we’ve gone from no possibility whack jobs to scientific investigation for safety sake.


You have obviously grossly misunderstood my comments.
I suggest you make yourself a nice herbal tea, sit down and reread our interactions.


If you mutate rats then they start training turtles ninja skills.


There is limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of 50 Hz magnetic fields in relation to childhood leukaemia (from epidemiological studies). This is why IARC classified them in group 2B, as possibly carcinogenic to humans. This is from the website that funded the study against the “whack jobs”.


Wow. So much anger. Why?
Yes a gopro has a screen but you only have to poke the lens through a hole in a bag or piece of clothing to have something superior and better camouflaged than chunky glasses.
Again I’m not arguing against your dislike of smart glasses, but you are missing the forest for the trees.
Wash trade