Pup Biru

I feel (and I’m no doctor) was that it was already too late by visit 3.

perhaps, but even the other visits it seems the doctors were cagey around pregnancy - that’s what this kind of law does - it dissuades doctors from considering things because they’re worried about repercussions

if the first 2 doctors had come to the conclusion that it was pregnancy related sepsis and that abortion is the only option, well now they’re in a real hard position - to let the patient get worse and worse in front of them and then likely take all the blame when things go downhill FAST? or “misdiagnose” and send her on her way for someone else to deal with?

the first is a lot of personal risk; the 2nd is minimal risk… is it selfish? absolutely! but humans act selfishly - thats just how we’re wired, and laws can’t just decide to make people act differently

terming 5G “fancy city tech” is more than a little harsh. 5G was never meant to exist on its own - it solves a lot of density issues exactly because of its limited range

Though he had already performed an ultrasound, he was asking for a second.

The first hadn’t preserved an image of Crain’s womb in the medical record. …

The state’s laws banning abortion require that doctors record the absence of a fetal heartbeat before intervening with a procedure that could end a pregnancy. Exceptions for medical emergencies demand physicians document their reasoning. “Pretty consistently, people say, ‘Until we can be absolutely certain this isn’t a normal pregnancy, we can’t do anything, because it could be alleged that we were doing an abortion,’” said Dr. Tony Ogburn, an OB-GYN in San Antonio.

the delays at the 3rd hospital were almost entirely attributable to Texas abortion law.

the problem with blaming doctors for fobbing off “hard cases that they simply don’t want to deal with” as you put it, is that they shouldn’t be hard cases - they have to think about more than what’s good for the patient, and that’s kinda ridiculous

If democeats cares to protect women

okay so let’s say for a sec they don’t… the choices are don’t care and actively works against

the choice is still easy

2 pass will encode a file once, and store a log of information about what it did… then on the 2nd pass it’ll use that information to better know when it should use more or less bitrate/keyframes - honestly i’m not too sure of the specifics here

now, it’s most often used to keep a file to a particular file size rather than increasing quality per se, but id say keeping a file to a particular size means you’re using the space that you have effectively

looks like with ffmpeg you do need to run it twice - there’s a log option

i mostly export from davinci resolve so i’m not too well versed in ffmpeg flags etc

doing a little more reading it seems the consensus is that spending more time on encoding (ie a higher preset) will likely give a better outcome than 2 pass unless you REALLY care about file size (like the file MUST be less than, but as close to 100mb)

if you’re planning on editing it, you can record in a very high bitrate and re-encode after the fact… yes, re-encoding looses some quality, however you’re likely to end up with a far better video if you record and 2x the h264 bitrate and then re-encode to your final h265 (or av1) bitrate than if you just record straight to h264 at your final bitrate

another note on this: lots of streaming stuff will say to use CBR (constant bitrate), which is true for streaming, however i think probably for re-encode VBR (variable bitrate) with multi-pass encode will give a good trade-off - CBR for live because the encoding software can’t predict what’s coming up, but when you have a known video it can change bitrate up and down because it knows when it’ll need higher bitrate

Adding my +1 for I ate the onion

Right now, you have 2 real choices. Every other choice is an effort to change your future choices. You want to push the democrats more left, and so do most of their voters… However your choices right now to effect the genocide are to either vote for someone that’s supporting the genocide or someone who cheers on and suggests more genocide faster. By abstaining, you’re putting yourself in the middle of the choice, which is potentially a worse outcome for Palestinians than making an upsetting choice.

That is the reality of the situation. By refusing to make an unpalatable choice, you’re helping to make a far worse outcome reality.

You live in a fantasy and sabotage real effort to limit damage in the real world. You are responsible because you can’t swallow your pride. How incredibly selfish of you.

they’re all on planes that fly around the world, constantly experiencing 8pm

just say you didn’t get the joke. it’s fine

and when typing :q with unsaved edits it literally also says “add ! to override”

that’s what automation is for - nobody is going to manually check them, but anyone is able to automatically set something up to check their hashes in change… the fact that it’s possible that anyone is doing that now that it’s a known issue perhaps makes it less problematic as an attack vector

that’s only partly true:

economically liberal indeed means free markets and capitalism (this is why the australian conservative party is called the Liberal party)

however liberalism as a whole includes individual rights like human and civil rights, secularism, etc (this is what the US tends to define as liberal)

it’s an overloaded and imperfect term for our current global political cultures

similar applies to left and right wing:

the left are supporters of change and generally change that supports less fortunate and leads to less social hierarchy

what both these things have in common is that liberal and left wing are about change and new ideas, whilst conservative and right wing are about maintaining the status quo (or as is more currently the case, regressing to a previous status quo)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics

your statement is true however that doesn’t mean that correlation does not imply cause… the cause is fucking obvious to anyone that has more than 2 brain cells to rub together

don’t give him fame. don’t mention his name, don’t post his pic, try not to talk about numbers to turn it into a “high score”. he is anonymous

breakable for the NSA doesn’t mean the police have access

also the current issue is with moderation: telegram is refusing to take down CSAM channels etc

and this is called the slippery slope fallacy and is either a flaw in your logic or a way of arguing in bad faith. either way, it’s just fearmongering. if that’s all you’ve got then i have nothing more to say

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

you think they’re going to link to still available (that’s the point - they’re still available) sources of CSAM?

if that’s your burden of proof then buddy i’m sorry to say there’s no way anyone’s going to convince you, and that’s not a good thing

we don’t disagree about that: governments don’t like that telegram doesn’t cooperate; that’s not in dispute

where the disagreement comes is the part after. telegram (and indeed meta, google, etc) have that data at their disposal. when served with a legal notice to provide information to authorities or shut down illegal behaviour on their platforms, they comply - sometimes that’s a bad thing if the government is overreaching, but sometimes it’s also a good thing (in the case of CSAM and other serious crimes)

there are plenty of clear cut examples of where telegram should shut down channels - CSAM etc… that’s what this arrest was about; the rest is academic