This article is a dumpster fire, and based on fundamentally obsolete and harmful beliefs. Yes people that ever have a seizure are more likely to have epilepsy. This says nothing about why, and what follows is all poorly or non researched editorializing. None of what is said here has even weak evidence. Seizures are an objective physiologic phenomenon we can measure. While there are a wide variety of non-specific predispositions to an episode including stress, no one has the authority to claim the above. Furthermore a large class of epileptic seizures are provoked by imageable, physical brain damage and another large portion have no provocation, this isn’t some middle school angst. It also seems to riff off the obsolete notion that epilepsy was mostly due to mental illness/craziness back when those were equivocated.

Do you have a link/cite for this? I couldn’t find easily somewhere summarizing pixel density stats.

“Desktop resolution stats” is not the same thing. All the retina displays have at least a 2x pixel ratio so these tables on a cursory Google search are clearly lumping 13 inch MacBook pros into the 1280x800 bucket for instance.

You got a reference to something that clearly is accounting for pixel ratio?

Bullshit. Except for the brief period of time when the Altair was the only thing going on in the Micro space… the Apple II, Atari 800, IBM PC and TRS-80 amongst others were marketed in the late 70s/early 80s with off the shelf, ready to run software. While copying code out of a magazine was something you could do, it wasn’t even the common case then.

> Every release makes it harder to run arbitrary code.

I have not experienced this. Yes Mac OS makes it harder to run random stuff downloaded from the internet, but Llvm, clang, cmake, python from the command line works the same as they always have (you are fetishizing code that is entered yourself after all).

Seems like willful snake oil.

The Erie Canal was replaced by the New York Barge canal system which avoided the cities other than NYC and was ironically much larger than the Erie Canal though eclipsed by the railroads in fame by that point. Numerous sections in Western NY such as through Pittsford reused the Erie.

And are you kidding?? The Erie Canal ran right through the city (likewise Syracuse, Utica, etc) and crossed the Genesee river on an old aqueduct that is still there today and interestingly carried the short lived Rochester subway. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad_Street_Bridge_(Rochest.... The Canal put those places on the map and the New York Central maintained them there heading into the 20th century.

Tappan Zee [sic] bridge maybe (that’s at least one arguable line).

Rochester and Syracuse got their economic genesis in large part from the Erie Canal (leading to the NYC RR which terminated in Chicago), Buffalo to a relatively lesser degree but at no point was the economic magnitude of these ever in the same ballpark as Chicago which was an mercantile center long before the Rust Belt population and GDP peaking. There’s a nice recent article in the Atlantic about Kodak. Much like Pittsburgh (which is probably a more apt comparison) with US Steel and Alcoa.. Rochester relied on a oligopoly of Kodak and Xerox (that willingly gave up doing anything notable with all the great things from PARC). When they dwindled so did the city basically. Chicago has already lost even larger employers than Kodak (Sears, Motorola alone), the economy of the greater Chicago area is incomparably larger - I think even Schaumburg or Bolingbrook alone are bigger than the Rochester metro, certainly if you exclude URMC.

For the Rust Belt, Chicago was always literally the second city in terms of the railroads. So I’d argue all those cities listed prevailed in part because of Chicago.

This is a very obtuse way of saying “refrigerator”, which is a type of heat pump.. a technology over a hundred years old. The simplest refrigerators/heat pumps are pretty simple — https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorption_refrigerator

If you were so certain the biopsy was unnecessary and harmful, why didn’t you just refuse it, seek a second opinion (especially as you evidently are portraying the doctor as a villian).

Also your last paragraph doesn’t even read well as preteen fall fiction.

Ah, so that’s why Microsoft’s financials have been tanking.

This is not a legitimate question to be answered and therefore has no scientific or research merit, so stop dragging biologists into it. How do you define “normal”? Once you have picked a suitable definition, what do you intend do to with that information?

Your linked article asks the questions about the genetic origins of homosexuality, which has fuckall to do with your own invented concept of “normal” or “disorder”.

Your whole premise is bollocks. You’re convinced that you have some enlightened thought exercise here but you really need to get your head out of your own ass. We get what you’re trying to say - but it’s too stupid to argue against.