Oh man you missed the pinacle of Nokias phones. The possibilities of the N900 where endless back then. Emulators, IR Blaster, High Quality Camera (for back then), all the Linux software, free Wifi everywhere (Because everybody still used WEP and the N900 would crack the password in like 20 seconds) and so much more. The transreflective screen 800x480 worked incredibly well. Low power and still very good visibility, only in bright sunlight the colors were washed out. I always wondered why they never used this technology in modern devices.

Then the N9 which lacked some features, but was so handsome and user friendly. It had an OLED but also the Clear Black technology which prevented the screen from reflecting to much sunlight, making it readable in the sun even though it had much lower brightness than todays OLEDs.

Sadly all this was killed by Elop who came from Microsoft and tried to push Windows phone, slowly downgrading the amazing hardware till Nokias phone branch was dead.

Or the N900 which even had fluid animations and scrolling which this company still seems to struggle with

Well there is the Stop Killing Games initiative started by Ross Scott and supported by the Pirate Parties. If they succeed, companies selling games in recent years will be required to either keep supporting their game or to make it available in a way so that others can ensure its continued support.

When this is achieved the step to free older games is small.

If you live in Europe you have the chance to support the movement by vote in the upcoming elections.

Einstein didn’t say that religion was needed for science. Cosmic religion is not a good term because any reader will associate it with our umbrella term religion while he defined something else. Writing it without context is manipulating any reader who does not have/take the time to read up on the term.

He firmly stated that he does not belief in any religion associated with any god or gods like all the religions OP probably means. Even going so far as calling such beliefs expression and product of human weaknesses.

He also wrote “the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.” And “I, like yourself, I am predominantly critical concerning the activities, and especially the political activities, through history of the official clergy.” So he does se a conflict between religion like OP means and science. He only once made a statement in support of the traditional religions when he said he was positively surprised that the christian church opposed the Nazi regime. He later backtracked on this because the church supported the Nazis partially during the further years of the war.

He still stated he is no Atheist because he believes in the existence and governance of the fundamental laws of nature and what he sometimes called religion he defined as the aspiration to pursue the research on these fundamental laws.

It seems you have not read my post or the study in detail.

Indeed it seems that cloth masks are not very or even not effective. But, and that’s a big but: FFP2/KN95 Masks seem to be quite effective.

The Cochrane study authors themselves note the low confidence they have in their results. The sample size is quite small (e.g. only 8407 people in summary over all studies they evaluated for FFP2 masks) They even got the result that handwashing has no benefits.

In Contrast the studies in the metastudy I linked work with far larger sample sizes.

I won’t respond anymore after this comment as you seem agitated and resort to personal attacks which won’t lead to a productive discussion. I hope you find a calmer moment to consider the evidence studies have gathered and overthink your position.

I don’t understand people downvoting without correcting. This way this wrong information stands here, seemingly scientifically sound as a study is linked, contradicted only by votes and words.

Thank you @[email protected] for looking at the study and noting its limits here.

If somebody wants to check for himself I suggest to take a look at https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/full/10.2217/fvl-2021-0032 A study which looks at many different studies and metastudies.

To summarize:

• Some studies exist that measured no benefits of masks under certain circumstances. E.g. only evaluating complete protection. But few also seem to be sound at first glance. E.g. one looking at effects of a mask requirement in Bexar County, TX.
• Many of the negative result studies focus on cloth face masks, one even suggesting they increase risk.
• Many studies and metastudies with generally more sound methods suggest mask are effective at preventing spread and limiting mortality.

Conclusion: Masks, excluding simple cloth masks, are likely quite effective. More research is needed.