I would imagine it has more to do with its principal function in recycling ADP back to ATP (fuel for cells). People who are sleep deprived also have impaired glucose metabolism, meaning that the cellular "fuel pipeline" is impeded. Perhaps creatine is especially helpful under these conditions.
Disordered sleep can cause executive dysfunction similar to ADHD, but it does not cause ADHD. It certainly can exacerbate it or be diagnosed incorrectly.
There are dubious results for "uBlock" as well on browser extension stores. If it's not breaking rules (copyright violation, malware) it's precarious for companies to take action. It's obvious to me that uBlock Origin is the "correct" result, but how would a company determine that at scale?
The app was removed a day after your article was posted. The app name, developer, icon, and images are all different. It's absolutely a problem, but it was addressed.
If Apple aggressively took action against this with a high error rate, the headlines would probably be about anti-competition, censorship, and upset developers.
> but how would a company determine that at scale?
Two-way signature validation. Apple distributes unique developer IDs; make the dev sign the app locally before uploading it, like Google does for the Play Store. If those trojan horses still make it through Apple's manual inspection process, then they need to fire everyone working for the App Store and replace them with AI.
> If Apple aggressively took action against this with a high error rate
They need to take action. Apple's entire argument for an App Store monopoly is that they curate apps individually before they're uploaded to ensure a baseline of quality. When they stop vetting apps and allow the App Store to become like every other store, their argument in favor of monopoly control evaporates.
So yes, it would be anti-competitive censorship, but that's nothing Apple hasn't done before. The real issue is that their "premium" store interface is getting shown-up by the Google Play services. At the going rate there won't be anti-competitive behavior to complain about since Apple will be forced to accept competing storefronts - and they have no one to blame but themselves.
I don't think this behavior is expected. When I've tested it, I was able to get DNS to behave in the expected manner. Apple does make design decisions that can be frustrating, but in most cases I find 1) there's a way to work around it or 2) the decision was the lesser of two evils.
Absolutely love GOS as well. What are you using for your DNS server?
They are not mutually exclusive. You can cooperate with police at a lawyer's recommendation. If someone tries to pressure you from talking to a lawyer, they're doing it to manipulate you to their advantage. In your scenario, first time youth offenders almost always will have diversion as an option. If the situation can be remediated so easily, then the cost would not be too great. It seems far more likely to result in a better (or at least neutral) outcome with a lawyer.
> someone tries to pressure you from talking to a lawyer
add that to the list of when one should pull the ripcord on DIY and find/demand an attorney
> It seems far more likely to result in a better (or at least neutral) outcome with a lawyer.
So in my case the outcome was a restitution payment of a few hundred dollars. I don't know what the bottom of the market for attorneys looks like, but I would be highly surprised if you could find one to get involved for less than a two hour commitment (let's say $500). So right off the bat, that would have tripled the cost of the outcome. Never mind when the detective now sees mom, despite being ostensibly "poor", has enough money to afford that attorney (and make the detective's job harder!). So he stops telling me that I should be content with a few hundred dollars, and I instead claim a much higher amount of actual damages including the time I had to spend.
(Note that my comments on this matter are all modulo assuming the kid is guilty. There was pretty strong evidence left behind the scene, and yes, I am mostly just taking the detective's word for it. Obviously if the kid was innocent and being framed by some other kid, then the downside to not hiring an attorney becomes a bit harder to stomach, despite the same financial incentives remaining)
Having spoken with criminal defense attorneys about this exact subject, speaking with the police if you are guilty is explicitly a bad idea. Guilt does not imply conviction. The two events are more decoupled than anyone in the justice system wants to admit
Criminal defense attorneys speak from a perspective of ignoring that they cost a lot of money. That cost is itself damage, sometimes outweighing the rest of the matter. That was the point I made, and you completely skipped.
The typical client of a criminal defense attorney is not a minor suspected of petty crime, and their case is unlikely to be informed by the experiences of such a minor.
reply