that’s a vibraphone

What kind of tv? For webos it’s potentially a bit complicated but also potentially stupid easy depending on which version of webos your tv has

https://www.webosbrew.org/rooting/

I would strongly suggest avoiding nvm even if it’s supported unless you’re very comfortable with hardware hacks. The others are all software and fairly easy to do if you’re capable with following instructions. The most recent, dejavuln, is fairly simple but can be a bit finicky (you may have to try a bunch of times) but lg is also rolling out patches for it so if your tv is updated you may be out of luck. It’s hard to say because the patches aren’t rolled out unilaterally. Webos is a bit confusing and there are many “branches” that all have similar features but wildly different numbering. If your tv is patched block updates by either disconnecting from the internet or blocking the above sites in your router and watch the webos homebrew discord (linked on that site). There are people actively researching new exploits and if one pops up it’ll be discussed in the discord first (and if it’s a big deal, like they expect it to be patched, they usually ping everyone to let them know to do it asap)

As if android tv isn’t also loaded to hell with ads and reliant on streaming networks that basically all have increasingly obtrusive ads

Either only buy physical or pirate all of your media, set up a jellyfin server, set up a dns server that blocks ads (adguard, pihole) and point any device that can connect to the internet at it. Cancel all of your streaming subscriptions and use a coreelec box to watch your media from your jellyfin server. There are literally no other ways to not get obtrusive advertising.

If you have an lg webos tv like me you can keep it connected to the internet but root it, block updates in homebrew channel, install YouTube with adblocking and sponsor block, and then again make sure it’s getting dns from your ad block server. Add in custom rules for

us.ad.lgsmartad.com us.info.lgsmartad.com ngfts.lge.com lgad.cjpowercast.com edgesuite.net us.rdx2.lgtvsdp.com us.info.lgsmartad.com us.ibs.lgappstv.com us.lgtvsdp.com ad.lgappstv.com smartshare.lgtvsdp.com ibis.lgappstv.com us.ad.lgsmartad.com lgad.cjpowercast.com.edgesuite.net ngfts.lge.com yumenetworks.com smartclip.net smartclip.com

snu.lge.com su.lge.com lgtvonline.lge.com

These block ads and the last three block the update servers. The update blocking isn’t strictly necessary if you have rooted and blocked updates in homebrew channel but it will get rid of the annoying “new version” nag that pops up when you turn on the tv. You may have to clear caches on the tv

That’s good to hear. I have a zigbee stick but haven’t found the time to repair them that way yet. I definitely agree they’re good products, it just left a real bad taste in my mouth when after years of using them I got a notification in the app that soon I’ll be required to put them online, which is nonsense

Just fyi for anyone who would care about this: while hue bulbs are built well they are moving towards a model that requires you to put them on “the cloud”, even though they were sold for years and years without that requirement. The update will be mandatory whether you want it or not as part of Philips security being integrated into the app. It’s unclear what will happen if you don’t create an account and sign in at that point

So if you’re like me and put all your iot shit on an isolated vlan without internet access they may not be the best option for you. Or if you just don’t want to support a company that wildly changes the tos years after purchasing their (expensive) product. I don’t want my home shit on the internet, I don’t trust Philips to put enough cash or effort into securing their servers, etc.

The bulbs do work with zigbee though and that seems to be a viable alternative to using their hub/app although I haven’t tested it fully. This also means if you’re using them via HomeKit you’ll need some kind of bridge like home assistant

Clicker training is just paired stimulus to provide an easier and cheaper mode of reinforcement, training a behavior is separate

like you do the clicker training by associating a noise (or whatever) consistently with a positive stimulus. what stimuli you use to prepare depends on the learner as different stimuli have different potency depending on the learners preferences. eg you can say a blanket “I’ll use food” for your dog and for some dogs this is fine. mine certainly seems to be food indiscriminate with no serious preference and very few refused items. But even with that I still need to take care not to use the non preferred (he spits out lettuce and celery. otherwise literally anything gets him salivating)

but then to change a behavior you’re still relying on operant conditioning which would be something like upon exhibiting the desired behavior provide access to reinforcement consistently and then fade it out as the behavior strengthens. Operant conditioning is much more complex than this of course but this is a pretty standard jumping off point.

That said there are pros and cons to clicker training humans. This is something that is practiced and even has some evidence behind it. The clicker solves a lot of potential reinforcement issues: it’s far easier to deliver immediately (which matters a lot). But I worry about the potency loss translating a strong reinforcer to a clicker. If you pair it with a food you really love or something it will potentially be effective but never as effective as the food itself.

This is still potentially worthwhile as food reinforcers are often problematic (increasing caloric intake, often food reinforcers for people aren’t healthy options, promoting unhealthy eating habits) and reducing it to a click eliminates those issues. But if the behavior you’re trying to create is particularly difficult or aversive the reduction may mean the potency is no longer high enough to motivate.

Often this can be countered by making the behavior less complex and working up to it (eg instead of learning a complex task in its entirety breaking it down into more manageable chunks). In practice this may look like just initiating the task at first and providing reinforcement, then as comfort increases raising the bar for reinforcement. Eg I need to keep my room clean but I hate cleaning so to start out I provide reinforcement for just picking up one item/small area. But then when I do that consistently I raise the bar and now I have to pick up 2 areas. Etc. or you could approach as a tolerance thing, I start by cleaning for only 3 minutes and reinforcing, then 5, 7, 10, etc. numbers are arbitrary and depend on the learner. Approach depends on the learner too, the toleration approach makes more sense for most people but if you do a bad job cleaning and need to develop the skill of cleaning thoroughly the first can make more sense. Then reinforcement is not time based but quality based, Eg did you clean the area sufficiently even if it took you 8 minutes. Drawbacks and positives for every approach

And of course there’s the issue of delivering your own reinforcement. If you control access what’s to stop you from just taking the thing even though the behavior wasn’t exhibited. These strategies typically work better with external control of r+, but some people do have the self discipline to do it alone.

There’s a LOT more to conditioning and reinforcement but I’m getting bored of this lmao. Also you may notice I didn’t describe anything about punishment. That is intentional because it is generally at a much higher risk of creating adverse effects and some studies suggest it is not nearly as effective as reinforcement based strategies wrt general population (and some specialized populations)

deleted by creator

I worked homeless outreach in a rural area. My job was to connect people to housing, assist with obtaining government benefits, and mental health services if necessary. They would spend the day at local hot spots, well trafficked convenience stores in the morning, well trafficked stores like the local grocery store for most of the rest of the day. A lot of them would hang out in the stores as long as possible to escape the heat/cold and many would also hit up strangers for money at these spots

They were often very hesitant or completely unwilling to share where they actually slept. Even though I worked for a nonprofit a lot of them saw me as a government employee and even the ones who didn’t still were very hesitant to trust me or any of my coworkers with that info. I’m pretty sure they were scared that I would call the cops or something. Some slept in wooded areas, some slept behind stores, some couch surfed, etc from the ones who did share and who I found (part of my job was being the point of contact for police and other emergency services who found people staying outside in dangerous weather and getting them emergency housing).

Even though it was probably like 2013 or so that I did this job the absolute cheapest room that would rent to the homeless was $700/mo. There were cheaper rooms around but they tended to require big deposits and would often refuse to rent to someone that didn’t already have a permanent address. I’m pretty sure that’s illegal but they would get around it usually by being vague and ghosting. “Oh so sorry someone else got the room”, stuff like that, and you’d see it was still available for 3 more months. I can’t even imagine what the rent is like now

Super depressing job. It’s very difficult to escape that cycle once you’re in it. It radicalized me a lot to work with people who were literally left on the street in a town with hundreds of vacant apartments. By our estimate there were maybe 20-40 homeless people in said town at any given point

You can also use komf alongside komga/kavita to just scrape metadata automatically upon import. A bit finnicky to get going (a tampermonkey script is required to give it accessible setting on the komga page) but works very well and even has a gui for identifying results and selecting the correct option if the auto scrape fails similar to jellyfin

For the actual reader part I just use komga as a server and read through Mihon (one of the tachiyomi forks) on my ereader mostly. occasionally I’ll use paperback on my iphone (although recently I’ve been trying Tachimanga, which is basically an iOS tachiyomi fork). Loads library, can sort by tag/library/date added, reads most things very well, can sync read status with the komga server (and/or manga updates or whatever), etc.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2167702620921341 - the bigger takeaway from this one is that trigger warnings reinforce trauma as a central part of the traumatized individuals identity but they did find some incidence of drawback/harm

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21677026231186625 meta finding no benefit and actually can cause an anticipatory reaction making the person more engaged with the material

There are others, this is just what grabbed from 30 seconds on google scholar. Its been a bit since I’ve done more serious lit review and it’s not like I keep a directory of papers I’ve read

The issue is the culture surrounding trigger warnings. Let’s be real here, people looking for trigger warnings are generally (perhaps overwhelmingly) not looking for material to help with their exposure therapy. They are looking for a “warning” to help them screen material to avoid. The issue is that this creates an unrealistic expectation that is incompatible with the real world. You can avoid suicide, sexual assault, eating disorders, or whatever in your media (maybe) but real life won’t sanitize itself or warn you. You will encounter these topics, whether through the news, careless speech from friends, or even intrusive thoughts of your own. Research continues to show that avoidance of upsetting topics can worsen anxiety and ptsd symptoms

To your final point the idea of it helping to create a choice isn’t even as clear cut as you describe

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21677026221097618 content warnings actually increase the likelihood someone will view problematic content. This point is further reinforced by similar findings in the meta linked above

So you have a system that ultimately makes creators feel like they’re doing something noble, that is likely at best useless and potentially harmful. Said system increases the likelihood that a person will view the problematic content but also enables the reality that a person will simply avoid the things that provoke their anxiety which again is more strongly established as harmful

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0005796712001064 - ptsd worsens with avoidance

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0962184904000290 - anxiety disorders do the same

There’s evidence that trigger warnings actually worsen anxiety and are counterproductive

The way to treat anxiety is to face the source of anxiety to try and change your relationship and reaction. The best way to do this is via controlled access that exposes one to the trigger gradually in a context that has no risk of harm (eg a media depiction, discussing the concept, building up to discussing the source of trauma that led to the phobic response if applicable)

Trigger warnings enable active avoidance. This sensitizes one to the aversive stimuli and makes the phobic response stronger. As a result when one encounters the stimulus (eg a friend, family, celebrity etc commits suicide, suffers an eating disorder, etc) your resilience to the trigger is now even lower and the response is more likely to be more significant than it was before.

That said education on access to resources like 988 or other warm lines can lower suicide rates, maybe. Research is more mixed here because it’s difficult to prove causation

If you have a rooted webos tv there’s an app for this in the home brew channel

https://repo.webosbrew.org/apps/org.webosbrew.inputhook/

a virus perpetuates and replicates itself infecting other executables with its code, thus the name “virus”.

this is just shitty code that crashes hard. it’s not even particularly malicious, it doesn’t destroy anything

that’s not what a virus is

The important takeaway from this is that “supplements” have 0 oversight. The CBD, probiotics, vitamin d, etc that you buy could just be capsules of vegetable oil that does nothing at all. Or they could be asbestos and cyanide for all you know (that probably would lead to an investigation though). There’s also no safety regarding packing and handling, so it might literally be a guy with unwashed hands who just picked his butt loading your gelcaps in a dirty bathroom that someone just took a massive shit in. No one checks and verifies any of this and that’s why shills and hucksters jump onto this shit, it’s a completely unregulated market where can cut corners everywhere and say whatever you want as long as you include *not intended to treat any diseases and not evaluated by the fda

A $1200 thing you buy on instagram that sends “good waves” to your brain? Supplement. The cbd you buy at the gas station? Supplement. Doterra oils? Supplement. No regulation, no oversight, just robbing people based on their desperation to fix chronic pain and mental illness

Bleed in my ass

those bass drum hertas tho

It hasn’t seen a release yet, code is here:

https://github.com/arjpar/WebShield-staging/tree/ldev

I’m not endorsing it, never heard of it before this post, but this was literally the second line of the readme

“massaging tartrazine solution into hairless mouse skin over the course of a few minutes or using microneedling achieves “complete optical transparency in the red region of the visible spectrum”

I know it didn’t happen this way but I like to believe it was someone having their unwashed dorito fingers after lunch, decided to massage a mouse for several minutes, and figuring this out

Then if you’ve met your deductible the big question is if you have a coinsurance after the deductible is met and an out of pocket maximum.

If your coinsurance is 60% or 80% or whatever, you won’t be responsible for the full bill but only that percentage of it.

If you have no coinsurance (a no charge after deductible plan) the service should be covered 100%

If you have coinsurance you should have an out of pocket max, which once hit should end the coinsurance and make services covered 100%. OOP max is typically quite a bit higher than deductible, sometimes 5-7x as much, but not always. It’s plan specific.

If your employer pays 50% that is an arrangement they have worked out and the specifics will be tied to your companies contract. This could mean they would pay 50% of any bill (unlikely as this is not a fixed cost they can plan for. Maybe if you’re like a ceo or some shit) or it could mean that up to your deductible they’ll pay 50%.

Also keep in mind even if you’re in a “covered 100%” scenario there are some instances in which you would still get billed:

Differential vs contracted rates - if the hospital charges $5000 for your procedure but your insurance only pays $4600 the hospital can sometimes bill you for the difference. This is not always the case; some contracts require the servicer (doctor) to accept the contracted rates and not charge more. Most common reason you’d get a bill in the above 100% scenarios and also the reason the math might not work out in coinsurance scenarios. Eg in the above surgery example your bill would probably be $1320. It should be 920 as that is 20% of the $4600 paid, or even $1000 as that is 20% of the 5k billed, but you pay the 920 as 20% of what your insurance paid plus the $400 difference, so $1320

Out of network providers - these can often have a separate deductible and sometimes in hospitals a provider can be out of network even though the hospital itself is in network

Non covered services - if the procedure involves a service that isn’t covered (uncommon)

Billing errors: if a bill looks wrong contest it and if your insurance isn’t reimbursing providers properly complain to them. Sometimes a medical office gets your info wrong and assumes your deductible or coinsurance is active when it shouldn’t be. Sometimes your insurance makes similar mistakes.

one of the most frustrating aspects of being a therapist in america in the past 10 years is the hand waving of the ethics involved in the financial renumeration of our relationship with those we serve

I would say a significant stressor for the overwhelming majority of the clients I have is financial woes. And because the system is backwards, those with high paying jobs well into their career tend to have the fancy PPO plans with no deductible where seeing me (or anyone) is only $10 despite the fact that they could much more easily afford a 5-10k deductible. Meanwhile the people who are making 20-50k a year on the other end of the spectrum almost always have those high deductible plans with sometimes massive deductibles and rarely have employer funded hsa.

I’m not an idiot, I run my own practice and I do the books for it. I can do the math to figure out how much take home pay someone has with those salaries. I can also conceptualize the cost of housing, food, phone, transportation, etc because I am also paying these things. So when I meet someone here and their appointments are $140 per meeting I am in a tough spot. I am asking them to take on a burden of $560 per month (assuming weekly sessions). That’s immense. And if the deductible is 5k, 7.5k, 10k, it will take ages to meet especially if they’re younger and not really making contact with many other medical providers.

I am contractually obligated to charge what your insurance pays me in these instances. If your insurance pays me $140 for the hour I have to charge you that until you hit the deductible. I could be dropped from the network if I modify this for you and get caught.

I can ask you to skip using your insurance and charge a lower out of pocket rate but this is complex. For one, many therapists can’t adjust their rate much lower. I have flexibility here because my practice is entirely telehealth so my overheads are much lower. But if you see them in an office? They are paying about 40-50% of that just in rent most places.

Additionally even with telehealth I have to be careful with adjusting rates. Insurance only pays me for specific timed and coded sessions. If you and I have a phone call for 25 minutes? Not covered. If you ask me to collaborate with your psychiatrist and I talk to them for 40 minutes? Not covered. The time I spend dealing with billing and this system, which works out to an average of 20-30 minutes per session? Not covered. So the 25% of my week doing billing shit and the overtime hours doing phone check ins, case collabs, etc. has to be covered by that.

This is why many therapists give fee schedules and charge you for all of these things. If you want paperwork from them it’s $1 a page, phone calls are $75/hr, etc. I can make it work without this because I’m not paying for office space but if I was I would need to do this to keep myself afloat.

This is also part of why many, many therapists simply don’t take insurance anymore. Just pay me the $140 directly. I can collect it via square or whatever and your billing is done. I no longer spend 5-10 hours a week on billing nonsense like fighting retracted payments, finding out why claims were denied, etc. You can submit receipts for out of network reimbursement and you deal with them.

I understand why my peers do what they do. But ethically it’s a mess. I signed up to help people and what I have become is a gigantic cash sink that puts a tremendous amount of pressure on the people I serve and is counterproductive to our work.

At the same time I deserve a fair salary for my work and this is the only way to get it. And if I protest the system by leaving it because it’s so broken then the end result is that there’s 1 less mental health provider who takes insurance. If I stop taking insurance altogether I alienate a ton of people with high need who can’t afford to pay out of pocket forever and/or don’t know how to navigate out of network reimbursement.

I cannot tell you how many times I do a screening call with someone and they say “this sounds like what I need”, they tentatively schedule, and then once I run their insurance and give them the actual numbers of what treatment will cost they simply ghost. It is a system that actively deters people from seeking assistance because it is so cost prohibitive

And the insurance lobby has its fingers so deep into the framework of america that this will simply never be fixed. It will only be changed. Look at Kamala Harris’ proposed Medicare for all: it still allows private plans. That will be a movement in the right direction because it will end the idea of someone being “uninsured”, which is great, but it will also create a two lane system in which many practitioners will do whatever they can to avoid taking basic Medicare patients in favor of the commercial plans. Commercial plans, at least in my area, simply pay more. Significantly more. Like $80/hr vs $140/hr. And in the end I will have the same problems because the unnecessarily complex private insurance system will still exist and be very powerful. I will just have one more insurer to add to the web of complexity. But no politician will ever remove the private health insurance industry. To do so would alleviate so much spending waste, so many wasted administrative dollars and man hours, but it would also result in layoffs of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of americans whose jobs rely on processing the complex bullshit of this system