Chipthemonk

That’s not what the science says. It seems logical, but the mask is supposed to protect the wearer from external shit. It seems logical that it would slow down the spread if an infected individual wears a mask, but the science is far from clear on this after a multi year long pandemic. If a mask makes you feel better, then wear it, but it’s not evident that it plays a big role when it comes to respiratory viruses.

https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses

There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated.

You are not up to date. The science on whether mass masking is effective is far from settled and the biggest reviews of the literature strongly suggest that masks are not effective in preventing or slowing the spread of respiratory viruses. See below.

https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-such-hand-washing-or-wearing-masks-stop-or-slow-down-spread-respiratory-viruses

The Cochrane Review is highly respected in the medical community. The authors, after a massive study, write the following:

We are uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses based on the studies we assessed.

There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated.

I’m happy to ban religious veils like nun hats (whatever they are called) and burkas/burqas as problematic religious symbols of misogyny. These religious relics are embedded deep into a culture and that part of the culture is misogynistic and discriminatory.

I don’t know, but I would bet many of the women that “prefer” wearing them prefer it because they believe they would be shunned otherwise from their support system. They “prefer” it in part because they don’t know anything different, and their own community has enforced it as soon as they went through puberty. What does it even mean to prefer something when you haven’t ever experienced not wearing it for an extended time without all your local support group shunning you? Is that really a preference?

But you can’t tell me these things are always comfortable. They look miserably uncomfortable in many situations and must cause a lot of undue heat and such. But the culture that forced these women to wear them runs deep. That part of culture needs to be eradicated.

I really don’t like the idea of governments regulating tech and innovations. Although this seems like a good idea, it could severely limit companies in the way they design their phones.

People think that Apple and Samsung maliciously make irreplaceable batteries, but these people barely know how to use their phone in the first place, much less how the phone was engineered. Battery implementation in super thin devices is not a simple affair. Requiring tech to have certain things is really dumb. Let the capitalistic market and buyers figure out what they need. Don’t force it through government.

Governments move really, really slow. How long has USB-C been out? Many years it seems and now it’s being mandated? In my view USB-C is old tech. I like it, don’t get me wrong, but it’s old old.

If you go to any government organization except maybe parts of the military, you’ll find that their tech is outdated and running legacy shit because they have to go through piles of paperwork to change anything.