I usually just type with two thumbs and can type pretty quickly. Swiping always felt a bit awkward to me because my phone is too large to use one handed with one thumb swiping, and swiping with a finger felt awkward compared to just holding my phone in both hands and typing with both thumbs.
I imagine if you look at how most young people use their phone, it will mostly be the two thumb method and they will likely be very quick with it.
I can see their point if it genuinely is just a tracker/journal. It’s effectively just words. Should books that describe sex also be age restricted?
As they raised, games with gacha mechanics and violence receive a lower rating.
I feel the complaint is less about the app receiving that rating and more the flawed logic around how they are categorized given it’s effectively a health and wellness tracker.
Books that describe sex are somewhat age restricted. Something like Looking for Alaska is rated 16+ by Common Sense Media and not in elementary or middle school libraries.
Just in case you weren’t aware, you can’t use enzymatic laundry powder with merino because it will dissolve it and cause those holes. For years I thought I was going too hard on them or the holes were coming from moths, but then I read about it online. My merino gear now lasts a lot longer now that I wash it separately and with non-enzymatic powder.
Hirst | Koonz is more of a pyramid scheme of confidence tricksters, limited supply, envy, FOMO and other factors - the ego of those with money to burn and wanting to make a statement has play here.
Money laundering itself in the art market is duller, by design, it trades on lesser regulation and inspection of the funds bought to sales and auctions and often uses decoupling mechanisms, illegal funds -> art -> inflated values -> legitimate money via loans backed by art as collateral, etc.
Searching a bit I found two articles that seem okay on quick skim reading:
The documentary Made You Look: A True Story About Fake Art (2020) explains the concept and process better than I could hope to do myself, so to do your question justice, I would advise you to seek it out and to watch it. Exit Through the Gift Shop (2010) is adjacent to the topics raised and is also worth a watch.
Freeport facilities are part and parcel to enabling these complex businesses arrangements, and they are mentioned in an aside in the documentary Made You Look; the Geneva Freeport being one of, of not the, world’s oldest and most important such facility is called out specifically if I remember correctly, or maybe one in Antwerp.
It is relatively straightforward to money launder through $1 million or so private sales (e.g. random "Qi Baishi" paintings). The pieces are low profile enough to not attract attention, but expensive enough for overhead to be low. The highly publicized auctions the internet declares as "money laundering" are the least likely to be actual money laundering.
Art has a subjective value. If you want to legitimise large amount of money, buy a piece of art for little money, sell it to a friend for lots of money, legalize profit.
That money still needs to be laundered somewhere though for the friend to purchase the piece. Otherwise why not just have the friend gift it to you or lose it to you in a poker game?
Can you explain this? Why would they be in favour of outing someone against their will? I’m genuinely curious because on the surface it seems very cruel.
I believe they feel it is better for the gay community to have more out people, there is strength in numbers and perception of normality; people pretending not to be gay are making gay seem more unusual.
