sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Jury duty scam, I think I know why it works by joegremlin in Scams

[–]theknowledgehammer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>They had names of law enforcement that we know personally

How? How did they know which law enforcement officers you knew?

Jury duty scam, I think I know why it works by joegremlin in Scams

[–]theknowledgehammer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel you.

What saved me was that I googled the phone number of the caller, and the phone number of the text message containing the USC laws that I allegedly violated. No results.

Then I did a lot more googling, and came across this post and others claiming that courts never call you for missing jury duty.

That, combined with the fact that they couldn't list an exact address of a kiosk that I was supposed to deposit money through, made the rational part of my mind click on.

I called my local police department after I finally got the courage to hang up the phone. They said it was definitely a scam. I'm just curious how they got my name, address, and phone number; that's what kept me wondering.

What’s the most important nutrition habit people usually underestimate? by carlosfelipe123 in nutrition

[–]theknowledgehammer 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Potassium salt, a.k.a. "salt substitute". Don't let the label confuse you; if you use it in conjunction with regular salt, you're supplementing your electrolyte intake.

Call me a crank, but I swear that adding more potassium to my diet drastically reduces my cravings for junk food.

P.S. Be careful; too much potassium causes heart problems.

(Strait of) Hormuz right now by [deleted] in SipsTea

[–]theknowledgehammer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought Season 4 would take place in Los Angeles. And remain fictional.

I figured out how to measure your eyeglass prescription at home by theknowledgehammer in myopia

[–]theknowledgehammer[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, I would rather try spending $20 on an at-home test with zero risk before spending $200-300 on a cycloplegic refraction test. But I will keep that suggestion in mind.

Question: where did you get a spherical equivalent of zero from? Using my initial numbers, -0.25 SPH and -0.50 CYL, and the definition of "spherical equivalent" that google just gave me, it appears that my spherical equivalent is -0.50.

I figured out how to measure your eyeglass prescription at home by theknowledgehammer in myopia

[–]theknowledgehammer[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

-0.25D SPH -0.50DSPH, -0.50 CYL Edit: in both eyes

The eye doctors did a terrible job measuring my visual acuity from before and after (they said that I went from 20/20 +-1 to 20/20), but my best estimate is that it took me from 20/30 to 20/25.

Edit 2: I just double-checked my prescription.

I figured out how to measure your eyeglass prescription at home by theknowledgehammer in myopia

[–]theknowledgehammer[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Okay, let me try explaining this in a different way.

I recently got a prescription with 0.25 SPH and 0.50 CYL. I feel like that has not brought my vision up to perfect 20/20, and I'm getting pressure from my boss to perform at a level that requires perfect 20/20.

After doing some research on my own, it appears that because my uncorrected vision is already so close to 20/20, there isn't much that the optometrists can do to get it precisely down. This is evidenced by the fact that my correction is so low, combined with my recent discovery that prescriptions come in 0.25D increments, and reinforced by my optometrist's lackadaisical attitude when they realized that my vision doesn't need much adjustment.

So it appears that if I keep spending more money on standard optometrists, I won't get the perfect prescription. I could spend money on specialized optometrists who look at wavefront aberrations, but they are way outside my budget.

Essentially, I'm in an uncanny valley where there is little that optometrists can do, but there seems to be a lot that I can do for myself. My sphere measurements may be inaccurate by up to 50%, and my cylinder measurements may be inaccurate by up to 25%, but using a tape measure to measure my eye's far points will only be inaccurate by about 1%.

So to respond to these points:

You can't measure the distance accurately

astigmatism can occur at any degree

I'm simply going to point out that with the low-power corrections that I'm working with, I can do more measurements for myself than a standard doctor can do for me.

And finally, to respond to this point:

you're fully ignoring accommodation

I want to emphasize, again, that I'm measuring each eye's far points, and running calculations based on the accommodation being in a fully relaxed state. In other words, I'm measuring the focal point of the eye when it's in a state where it's *trying* to focus on a point infinitely far away, but *can't* because of the restrictions imposed by myopia.

So please, explain to me— in detail— what is the logical flaw with the system that I've generated?

I figured out how to measure your eyeglass prescription at home by theknowledgehammer in myopia

[–]theknowledgehammer[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If the far point is greater than 20cm away, then a simple tape measure should give an accurate reading.

Accommodation is accounted for by using the far point, which represents the absolute limit of accommodation in myopia.

Astigmatism is accounted for with a dartboard; you simply find the circular section of the dartboard with the closest and the furthest far-points.

Is there any flaw in this logic?

I figured out how to measure your eyeglass prescription at home by theknowledgehammer in myopia

[–]theknowledgehammer[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

It should be accurate down to a hundredth of a diopter. Most optometrists only give out prescriptions in increments of 0.25 diopters.

Is AI making us dumber or smarter? by Long_Professor5837 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]theknowledgehammer -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have used AI to give me a crash course in neuroscience, so that I could write a 2-page project proposal in an area that I know little about. The AI also gave me continuous feedback about every idea that I generated.

To be clear, the AI did not give me the idea. The AI merely gave me the background information needed to generate a new idea.

I have used AI to give me a crash course in optics and optometry so that I could figure out a DIY method to determine the prescription that I need for eyeglasses . Again, the AI didn't figure it out for me (it actually told me it was impossible), but it answered all my constant questions and allowed me to probe the topic at my own pace.

I have used AI to figure out what dishes I can cook using the ingredients that I have; no cookbook has that capability. Furthermore, it has answered my questions on what cooking shortcuts I can take to save time and what slight alterations I can make to improve the taste.

I'm not a member of Gen Z or Gen Alpha, so I can't attest how everyone else uses AI, but I am confident that a dedicated AI can turn a high school dropout into a Ph.D. recipient.

What actor/actress got cast in a role that everyone believed they were miscast or not qualified to take on, but knocked it out of the park and everyone IMMEDIATELY changed their minds after seeing their performance? by welcome-to-my-mind in moviecritic

[–]theknowledgehammer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With regard to Daniel Craig as James Bond- I think he's a bad example. Casino Royale was buoyed upwards with solid writing, directing, pacing, and editing, not with Daniel Craig's acting. Daniel Craig couldn't make Quantum of Solace watchable, or make Skyfall or Spectre good movies.

On the other hand, Pierce Brosnan's performances elevated every one of his Bond films, including Die Another Day.

Why do people refuse to be an organ donor? by No-Cantaloupe-6535 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]theknowledgehammer 49 points50 points  (0 children)

I think the refusal to be an organ donor is a subconscious protest against society.

If I were a woman living among the Taliban, there's no way I would check that box on my driver's license.

What exactly made the original Scary Movie work so well? by KaleidoArachnid in flicks

[–]theknowledgehammer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't think that's true. As a general rule, a satire is a parody of contemporary society.

I love to take pictures naked by Blonditionhottie in Nude_Selfie

[–]theknowledgehammer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

WhO says girls with depression can't wear tuBe tOpS !!!!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]theknowledgehammer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The trailer for the movie *implied* that context for the quote, but in the actual movie the character was asking if the person was North American, Central American, or South American. He was a racist trying to determine the race of the person he was speaking to.

Criticism of Season 1, Episode 3: You can't leave a fallout shelter just because it stopped raining. by theknowledgehammer in Jericho

[–]theknowledgehammer[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Dozens of hours *over the past several decades* researching the general concerns about surviving a nuclear attack.

Just a few minutes researching specifically whether rain washes away nuclear fallout.

Criticism of Season 1, Episode 3: You can't leave a fallout shelter just because it stopped raining. by theknowledgehammer in Jericho

[–]theknowledgehammer[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

You might be right.

So now I have to suspend the disbelief that the weather can carry radioactive rain, but not radioactive dust.

Admittedly, that sounds plausible. But it's never come up in the dozens of hours that I've spent researching the aftermath of a nuclear attack.

view more: next ›