Related
The world Creatonia is populated with various creatures that may be friendly or hostile, that may be alike or different. But all the wars and feuds stop for the period of the Great Gods Uprising Tournament, and warriors from the very far parts of the world come to tourney.
Your sacred dream was to win this competition, and you manage it. But how can one live with a dream that has already come true? What is the next step? You’re getting terribly depressed after all that euphory. And one day, being in a bad temper, you tell your old Master that you’ve excelled him and have nothing to strain after. He gives you a sly smile and claimes you might be possibly right saying you’re a better fighter but you’re nothing as a teacher. In the heat of the moment you declare you’ve learned all the secrets of the fighting art, and are able to make a new champion out of the least experienced warrior by the next tournament. So, unexpectedly you’ve got a new aim of you life.
There are plenty warriors eager to take lessons from a great master. Those naive newcomers somehow are sure that to be an excellent fighter and a good teacher is the same thing. However, according to the bet conditions, you may teach just one fighter. But your choice isn’t restricted with some requirements - you may take a warrior of any race or specialization, of any starting characteristics (but it only can be a novice), so the whole thing starts with picking up a character to teach.
Game features:
- More than 150 world areas.
- 28 apprentices (exclusive characteristics + unique story of life).
- 100 characters.
- More than 400 types of items.
- More than 150 various skills.
- 13 races.
- 13 classes (specialities).
Found this on:
http://www.freewareppc.com/games/creatonia.shtml
Found an article on Sparkfun's website today, thought it would be worth a look for you Nexus One guys. Did a search on the site, didn't see anything about it, so here you go.
I can't post links yet, so bare with me plz...
Sparkfun said:
Here at SparkFun, we have never shied away from launching our products up into the sky. From homemade rockets, to pumpkins, to high-altitude balloons, we genuinely enjoy seeing electronics we have spent hours working on flying through the air.
So naturally, when we saw this project about someone else launching some of our parts in a rocket, we had to share. This is an awesome project called the PhoneSat Rocket.
This suborbital rocket was launched out in the Nevada desert and is based around an Arduino Main Board and a couple of Nexus One cellphones. Check out the above video for a documentary of the whole launch!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Small documentary of the launches:
Flight video from the second Nexus One launch:
Wired Magazine Article on them:
Wired Magazine said:
Cheaper, Better Satellites Made From Cellphones and Toys
* By Jess McNally Email Author
* July 30, 2010 |
* 3:20 pm |
* Categories: Space, Tech
*
MOUNTAIN VIEW, California — Instead of investing in their own computer research and development, engineers at the NASA Ames Research Center are looking to cellphones and off-the-shelf toys to power the future of low-cost satellite technology.
The smartphone in your pocket has about 120 times more computing power than the average satellite, which has the equivalent of a 1984-era computer inside.
“You can go to Walmart and buy toys that work better than satellites did 20 years ago,” said NASA physicist Chris Boshuizen. “And your cellphone is really a $500 robot in your pocket that can’t get around. A lot of the real innovation now happens in entertainment and cellphone technology, and NASA should be going forward with their stuff.”
The biggest challenge of sending cellphones and toys into space is whether the parts can get up there without shaking apart and work in a vacuum at extreme high and low temperatures.
To do some preliminary testing, two Nexus One cellphones caught rides on two rockets on July 24 that launched 30,000 feet into the atmosphere at a maximum speed of mach 2.4 (about 1,800 miles per hour). One of the rockets crashed into the ground after its parachute failed, but the other made it back with the cellphone unscathed.
Both cellphones were able to record the acceleration of the rocket using their built-in accelerometers, and the undamaged phone captured 2.5 hours of video of the event through a hole in the side of the rocket.
“Everything that didn’t break is a piece of data,” said volunteer engineer Ben Howard. “We know that the batteries didn’t break and that the computer worked the whole time.”
If the cellphones ultimately get used to power satellites, they will probably be sent up without a screen and with a different battery to make them lighter. The screen and battery make up 90 percent of the Nexus One’s weight.
Next, the team will build a stabilizing mechanism for the satellite using the cellphone, $100 toy gyroscopes and parts similar to those of the Mindstorms Lego, so the satellite can orient itself in space. By installing three spinning gyroscopes and getting them to spin at different velocities, a satellite can move in any direction. The same technique is currently used on many satellites, but requires multimillion dollar technology.
The project will likely use CubeSat’s as a standardized carrying case for their cellphone-powered satellites, because the boxes have already been tested and are known to hold up in the journey. Often companies who are sending up satellites on rockets have extra space on their rockets, which is how most amateur satellites will likely get into space, and the people paying like to be sure that nothing will break and damage the rocket on the way up.
The whole goal of the project is to make satellites cheap and affordable, so that anyone with bit of time and a couple of thousand dollars can send their own satellite into space.
Upgrading the computing power of satellites using cellphones would mean increased satellite capabilities, possibly including artificial intelligence.
“We’re not sure yet exactly what people will want to do with their satellites, and that’s the point,” said NASA education specialist Matt Reyes. “What can you imagine doing with your phone in space?”
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Last but not least, a mission statement of sorts:
Hopefully some of you guys are into this sort of thing as I am. It's REALLY awesome how far we as a people have come if you sit down and think about it.
Great stuff for the high tech Nexus...reach for the stars
Cool. It really makes sense for CubeSats. The Space Shuttle only has one megabyte of RAM, but that's because it doesn't need any more and the processes are meticulously coded. The basic CubeSat is a four inch box. One of the goals is to make them usable by the general public, like school teachers, to send experiments to space, and they aren't going to have a team of engineers to write software for them. Cell phones are really the only off-the-shelf processor available.
Yeah it's a neat deal for sure. Being able to consolidate a lot of systems that cost millions into a pocket sized cell phone is huge.
Sent from my HTC EVO
Hey guys very very important question , it's about the sar rating when we make calls . Sar represents radiation hazards to the brain and , most phones have predetermined valuethat is approved before they are sold for safety . Please can somebody do a test about this
htc hd2 running on winmo is safe but running on builds like the ones here we are not sure
i hope that the forum members and the developers for tons can find out and let us know.
Very very important !!!
im taking a guess here, but wouldn't it depend on your radio rom not the build?
can someone confirm or dispute this?
primaraly your looking at hardware such as antana and shielding. im doubtfull that diferent radio packages are going to boost things to unacceptable levels, otherwise mfg's wouldnt cook them up.
both winmo and android runs on the same radio regardless of wich one is booted.
does that make you feel more warm and fuzzy on the inside?...... or is it from to much radiation?
Once again, cell phone radiation poses absolutely no dangers to the tissues of your body.
You want to know why?
There is not enough energy in the radio waves.
There is less energy coming off of your cell phone's radio transmitter than there is coming off of your computer screen that you interpret as visible light.
Learn2highschoolphysics
enneract said:
Once again, cell phone radiation poses absolutely no dangers to the tissues of your body.
You want to know why?
There is not enough energy in the radio waves.
There is less energy coming off of your cell phone's radio transmitter than there is coming off of your computer screen that you interpret as visible light.
Learn2highschoolphysics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's right
But if it does still, you won't die because of this radioation. It will only make you sterile if you carry your phone always near of your balls.
But then again if there are safety requirements about this than it is only
Logical to know that if a device exceeds a safe limit then it means
It could pose a health issue.
With that in mind , I hope that a test could be done to resolve the worry.
The radiation also has to with the antenna and battery consumption during
When the phone is searching for signal etc.
Thank you for the reply some of you have given.
ok, first, try educating your self before posting the same drivel in a bunch of diferent threads.
had you spent as much time searching how sar is tested as you did posting , you would have found that its tested @ the hardwares max output.
hmm... the software comes no wheres near pushing the hardware to the limit.
the radio software is the same in both WM mode and in Android mode
therefore this would lead to the conclusion that if it passed federal standards for sar emissions when run @ full hardware output, and we arnt driving it that hard, that we are at a level LOWER than what it was tested...
fariez44 said:
I hope that a test could be done to resolve the worry.
The radiation also has to with the antenna and battery consumption during
When the phone is searching for signal etc.
Thank you for the reply some of you have given.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
please fwd me your bank info, and each specific condition you would like it tested.
its not cheep
http://www.metlabs.com/Services/Wir...ywgP2vhaUCFSBugwodfX3aOw.aspx?_kk=SAR+testing
http://www.ce-mag.com/archive/03/01/miller.html
http://www.rfexposurelab.com/
Well thanks for the information , I was looking for an explanation as such
It seems you resolved my doubts and thanks once again.[/B]
Need to take care of ourselves
I keep seeing people who claim to have headaches in the morning whenever they use specific builds. We also know some builds provide better cell signal and wifi capabilities. I strongly guess there is a difference between radiation levels of different builds.
If someone leads us to measure the SAR levels of builds under this forum to get an "XDA approval", we can surely all donate to her/him. Then we also can prefer the builds acording to their radiation levels.
Someone with knowledge please help us to determine:
- methods of measurement
- rules and standards of approving the builds
- safety classification according to SAR levels
Radiation is no joke. We are the only big enough developer community to provide this standardization to custom builds.
Radio waves are not ionizing, and thus do not carry enough energy to pose any danger whatsoever.
It is physically impossible.
enneract said:
Radio waves are not ionizing, and thus do not carry enough energy to pose any danger whatsoever.
It is physically impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The effect of mobile phone radiation have been studied by a lot of scientists. There are thousands of articles about this topic. I agree that there are contradicting results but no single one claims as you said: "it is physically impossible" Or no scientist refused to do the research assuming that the high school physics is enough to finish the argument.
In fact a lot of researchers came into the conclusion that there is a corelation between cancer and mobile phone radiation.[1,2,3]
It has been basicly studied for the short and long term hazards. Long term hazards have not been completely studied yet due to the short history of word wide mobile phone usage. Short term hazards have been proven such as decrease in cognitive functions and prolonged response times. [4]
1. http://journals.lww.com/epidem/page...=2004&issue=11000&article=00003&type=abstract
2. http://oem.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/64/9/626.pdf
3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19285839
4. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...ionid=69BCBB4C4AC1B054C0B953A974547C77.d03t01
baybenbey said:
I keep seeing people who claim to have headaches in the morning whenever they use specific builds
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Id bet that has wayyyy more to do with screen settings, size, brightness resolution refresh rate comparative brightness of the room( dark room more eye strain) than radiation.
Take two or three flights and you'll already have been exposed more than a small transmitter will give in its lifetime.
I have to admit I keep getting headaches with some phones when having long phonecalls. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the screen (always off during calls) or heating up of the phone (all about the same temperature while in use). In the past I would have laughed, but since I paid attention on when and where those headaches started, I'm pretty sure it has something to do with the phone radiation. Yes, the general radiation levels are pretty low, but still, they are concentrated at our heads and some of us might be more receptive than others.
First I noticed it with my old HTC Trinity. When I moved to an area with generally low reception, I kept getting headaches during phonecalls, while not having them in other areas where the reception was fine. Those headaches always started on the side of the head, where I held the phone. When switching to a bluetooth headset (which has much lower radiation levels) the headaches were gone.
Another example was the Nokia N73 which I had to use for a job I did. I never had a phone before and after which had such an excellent reception. Areas where I couldn't even get a signal with other phones, were no problem for the N73. I could make and receive phone calls without any problems (1-2 bars). For 3 days I had the phone around my neck with a lanyard. So it was resting on my chest all the time. And I can say for a fact that I got a weird feeling at exact that point. When removing the phone from the lanyard or replacing it with a dummy unit or switching it off, it stopped ...
There are various other phone where I can reproduce that. Unfortunatly.
I'm pretty sure too, that different builds have different radiation levels and the radio rom is not the only thing affecting those. When running WP7 on the HD2 I got headaches very fast (after 5 minutes) being on the phone. With Android (at least the ROM I use) and WM 6.5 those headaches only start after 1+ hour on the phone and even then much less. The radio rom might limit the maximum output, but the specific reception control still comes from within the OS.
So since I seem to be pretty sensitive on this, I'm cool with Android on the HD2. I don't get any more headaches than with Windows Mobile 6.5 (or other "low-SAR-phones"). However with WP7 on the HD2 I had serious problems having long conversations over the phone, comparable to my experience with the HTC Trinity in low reception areas. But I don't think that any of those levels are life threatening - it's just an inconvinience (at least for me). But being a gadget fan and geek that's a little bit of a letdown, having to admit that those things might actually be harmful in one way or another.
baybenbey said:
The effect of mobile phone radiation have been studied by a lot of scientists. There are thousands of articles about this topic. I agree that there are contradicting results but no single one claims as you said: "it is physically impossible" Or no scientist refused to do the research assuming that the high school physics is enough to finish the argument.
In fact a lot of researchers came into the conclusion that there is a corelation between cancer and mobile phone radiation.[1,2,3]
It has been basicly studied for the short and long term hazards. Long term hazards have not been completely studied yet due to the short history of word wide mobile phone usage. Short term hazards have been proven such as decrease in cognitive functions and prolonged response times. [4]
1. http://journals.lww.com/epidem/page...=2004&issue=11000&article=00003&type=abstract
2. http://oem.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/64/9/626.pdf
3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19285839
4. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...ionid=69BCBB4C4AC1B054C0B953A974547C77.d03t01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yet, every study focusing on the overall cancer rate in comparison to cell phone adoption has found no correlation. There are numerous experimental problems with actually studying the supposed effect directly (in fact, there was a new york times article earlier this week written by an oncologist enumerating those problems, and why the research, either way, on this subject is fundamentally flawed).
However, the fact remains that if you are scared of this latest nonsensical boogeyman, you should also avoid exposure to all EM radiation of radio and higher energies - you know, radio waves, microwaves, infrared and visible light - goodluck!
I have to admit I keep getting headaches with some phones when having long phonecalls. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the screen (always off during calls) or heating up of the phone (all about the same temperature while in use). In the past I would have laughed, but since I paid attention on when and where those headaches started, I'm pretty sure it has something to do with the phone radiation. Yes, the general radiation levels are pretty low, but still, they are concentrated at our heads and some of us might be more receptive than others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Obviously there is no way that you can get a headache from listening to a speaker placed a few millimeters from your ear for an extended period of time. Obviously, no bloody idiot would think that.
Re-read my post ;-) the speaker has nothing to do with the headaches...
Jeez this whole discussion sounds like one of those stupid news lead-ins like 'find out whats killing your kids... ...right after the break'
Surely there are worthier things to worry about than the radiation from cel phones. Just tune in to Fox News, you'll find plenty of ridiculous crap to worry about. Ask yourself this : if you know for sure that when you're 70 you'll have cancer from using cel phones all your life, will that be enough to make you stop using them now? I'll take the cancer over going back to pagers and pay-phones.
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App
What's the problem discussing possible downsites of customizing our devices? It's not black and white, you know. We can discuss this stuff, and use phones accordingly to our findings and knowledge.
And as said before: It's not (only) about cancer (or any other long term damage this might cause). There are obviously short term effects for some people, why not try minimizing those?
I think it's no difference between WinMo or android builds radiation because the hardware it's the same whit its limitations....even if this wasn't true the livel of sar are not so high to damage our brain(it's possible some biological effect)...so take it easy...only God knows...perhaps
It is really weird that some people here, agrssively oppose individuals who are sharing their concerns by stating some scientific findings about the hazards of SAR. What is the purpose of trying to insult and silence people on the discussion of such a potential risk? Weird!
In the previous references I shared, more than one study of 10+ year of mobile phone usage statistics point out an increased incidence of brain cancer. There are many studies with this result.
And secondly, I found few articles which completely refuses the hazards and defends the safety of mobile phone radiation by agressively opposing(like some people here) the related scientific data. Most of them are suspiciously published from Finland(Country of Nokia). These articles are written in an ideologic and biased manner and falsify all the findings which prove the cancer corelation as nocebo effect or false positive. Or they study the effects of SAR on skin epitheliel cells(relatively resistant against radiation) instead of brain glial cells(sensitive to radiation) and -no surprise- in the end there is no serious harmfull effect... These articles urge to come into the conclusion that SAR is as lovely as blessing of God! Take a look at the discussion section of wikipedia on this topic. All editors complain biased and frequent editing of the page by someone who is adding suggestive sentences to defend the safety of SAR. Hmm...
According to some people here, by looking at the relative wavlength and frequency, microwaves are supposed to be less harmfull than visible light. In fact we can cook a chicken in a microwave oven but not in a sunny beach. SAR can not be found safe by comparing only wavelength/frequency. Who tries to do that obviously misses 3 major points which are:
- distance from source
- intensity of rays
- duration of exposure.
Anyway, even the fanatic SAR defenders in scientific community do not defend it by such a point of view.
Introductory:
Hello all, cell phones produce radiation just in case you did not know. These radiation levels are measured in a value called SAR(Specific Absorbtion Rate) and it literally is the measurement of just the bottom line of what the human body absorbs, rather than just the amount that it radiating(ha, get it?) around the device. Radiation is bad in the human body where it is directly related to certain issues, including directly reducing bone density in the body. I am posting this as an accurate informational thread where you can draw your own conclusions based off of facts.
SAR Levels:
SAR, which stands for Specific Absorbtion Rate, levels fluctuate depending on numerous factors, in which we must go over in order to accurately understand. The key thing to understand is that the further the device is from your body, the levels begin to diminish by the milimeter(mm).
For a phone to receive an FCC certification, the device cannot have a SAR level of more than 1.6 watts per kilogram in the US, and 2.0 in Europe.
Galaxy Note Series Tests by Samsung:
Let's take a look at the Note series in order to keep this sequential and easier to remember from a timeline fashion of perspective. The Galaxy Note 1 was released first(obviously) and is the model number SGH-I717 for reference. Taken from Samsung's website directly, here are the Note 1 results, including the way that they perform their own measurements:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
You can see in this writing the methods that are used for testing, and that the body specific SAR tests have the device at 1.0 centimeters(CM), equivalent to 10 millimeters(mm) away. Keep this in mind and we'll touch up on this later.
And here are the Note 2 specific values:
And here are the Note 3 specific values:
So as you can see the comparisons above, the Note 3 effectively produces 153% more Head SAR than the Note 2, and 196% more Head SAR than the Note 1!
I would calculate the Body SAR differences but we have a big problem with Samsung's specific tests...they test these values with the device 1.0 CM(or 10mm) away from the body. This Body SAR calculation is useless to you if your phone presses against your body at 0 mm away!
Let's think...why would Samsung measure in this fashion at 1.0 CM away? Well the Note 3 produces 1.28 Body SAR at 1.0 cm away, so the big question is what would it produce at 0 mm away/ AKA in your pants pocket? Maybe it would exceed the FCC limitation of 1.6?
CNET Testing:
Now let's take a look at a recent test performed by CNET on 1/16/14 to see what they have found in differences in the Note series in particular:
The above is literally all of the information they posted where it is tough to tell how the test was performed and/or what body part it was performed against. By comparing the numbers, it seems as though they tested the head only since it matches the Head SAR values by Samsung.
But there is only but one main discrepency...the Note 3 reads 0.63 SAR value by Samsung, while CNET tested it at 0.9 SAR. Which one holds true?
Device Model Top Charts:
As you can see in the following results, our devices do not hold the highest SAR values compared to the worst out there *ehem* Motorola!
And here are the lowest SAR values amonst all devices. Keep in mind how the Note 2 is 4th lowest.
Theorycrafting:
I researched more into studies being performed per the distance of an object from humans and have found some interesting results.
Here is a model of the human head for reference, spefical model for SAR testing:
And here is are one test's results from testing the SAR levels after altering different distances:
This is just me tipping the iceberg to not go on and on.
Shifting gears toward current events, check out 2/14/14's event of the Army buying 7,000 Note 2's for its troops HERE
The reason why I feel that this is relevant is that they definitely would not want to have their troops being exposed to radiation levels higher than other devices. What makes more sense though is that they tested it for quite some time before it was rolled out, but who knows?
General Radiation Reduction Techniques:
-Consider a cell phone radiation reduction case, Google Pong research to get started since I'm probably not allowed to post links
-Consider buying a device with low SAR levels
-Keep the device out of your pocket or anywhere where it is directly against your skin. Even a hip holster might help keep it a few cm away, or carry it in a purse/backpack.
-Use speakerphone as often as possible to keep the device far from your head.
-Devices use the most radiation when beggining and ending calls. Pull the phone away from your head, even if just a few centimeters, when beginning and ending calls.
-Devices also use high radiation when "hunting for a signal". This occurs when your device has no signal, and needs to omit more power consistently to find one. So keep it away at these times.
-Bluetooth uses less radiation, but overall can be more damage from keeping it on your head for long periods of time. LOSE THE BLUETOOTH!
-Text instead of calling whenever it is applicable/feasible
-Don't sleep with the device near your head....think about it, 6+ hours of it so close to your head...
-Last things I wanted to mention are beefing up on certain things you eat.
a.) Eat seaweed, it's very powerful against radiation
b.) Look for natural supplements that particularly repair already damaged cells in your body from radiation. They are alpha lipoic acid and vitamins C and E...BUT ONLY IF YOU DON'T GET THESE FROM NATURAL DIET
Conclusion:
Considering all of the above along with knowing that we are the guinea pigs for long term cell phone radiation, I strongly feel that it's best to consider SAR levels when purchasing a device. The SAR levels are obviously increasing with each new model being released and should be monitored closely.
It seems to show as being a factor toward brain tumors and bone density loss in only 1 of 2 legs in people(where they always kept their cell phone in the same pocket). I did not go much into detail here about these particular researches/tests, but I would recommend to now start looking into the tests performed for "decade-long cell phone radiation exposures". Imagine us after 50 years of exposure, and please feel free to comment here.
Your voice and opinions matter in this world, and you should speak up since you have a right to your own opinions, and I will respect it no matter what. While I don't really know the true effects of the radiation, my opinion is that I'm open minded so I'll keep the cell away from my body to be safe. I will post this across multiple forums that it belongs in and moderators, please let me know if I happen to post this in a forbidden section. Don't censor truth, and let the thread live.
Thank you for your time reading all of this and I hope it helps. If so, please rate the thread 5 stars and hit Thanks solely to promote the spreading of the word.
I'm sure that all this info is helpful, but I personally just don't think about, or actually care about it. When choosing a phone, I am concerned about features and price. If I start thinking about it, then I'd have to also think about how much radiation my appliances in the home put out, how much emissions my car puts out, and the amount of everything in my food & water. Have you looked under a microscope at a drop of water? That alone would make you think twice about drinking water ever again. Or how about the acceptable levels of feces, hair and toxins allowable in food products.
I'm not condemning nor criticizing your research. I actually thank you for the effort you put into it to bring awareness to us. It's just, as for me, I don't think about or worry about, such things.
Sent from my Xoom using a Starfleet secured channel
Kamau54 said:
I'm sure that all this info is helpful, but I personally just don't think about, or actually care about it. When choosing a phone, I am concerned about features and price. If I start thinking about it, then I'd have to also think about how much radiation my appliances in the home put out, how much emissions my car puts out, and the amount of everything in my food & water. Have you looked under a microscope at a drop of water? That alone would make you think twice about drinking water ever again. Or how about the acceptable levels of feces, hair and toxins allowable in food products.
I'm not condemning nor criticizing your research. I actually thank you for the effort you put into it to bring awareness to us. It's just, as for me, I don't think about or worry about, such things.
Sent from my Xoom using a Starfleet secured channel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hear you, I'm kinda the opposite where I consider the things I put into my body. For water like you mentioned, I filter my own water with a Berkey rather than tap/bottled water...and don't use a microwave(Pizazz pizza maker instead)
hopefully this sar radiation is like gamma radiation then a few of us can turn into the HULK and HULK smash AT&t for not updating us on time and locking the bootloader.
Of all the things likely to kill or injure me I'd put my wireless devices in the bottom 5%. And while radiation levels may have gone up over time the amount of time we actually hold our wireless devices to our heads has gone down with the percentage of voice calls decreasing in favor of other functions.
BarryH_GEG said:
Of all the things likely to kill or injure me I'd put my wireless devices in the bottom 5%. And while radiation levels may have gone up over time the amount of time we actually hold our wireless devices to our heads has gone down with the percentage of voice calls decreasing in favor of other functions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it prolly wont kill u but it has a good chance of giving u a nice tumor in ur balls for keeping the phone in ur pocket all the time. id prolly rather die than go thru that.....lol
donavo said:
a nice tumor in ur balls for keeping the phone in ur pocket
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My hip. I use a holster.
It's probably measured at 1cm away because when it's against you it still has the thickness of the glass and case away from you.
Let me look in this box to see how much I care...
BarryH_GEG said:
My hip. I use a holster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ppl still use those?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjBjHP_NITI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-EUZ1alXMk
This is something I have never worried about. I don't think I will regret it, but in 40 years if I have grown a second head I might
What is Adderall?
Adderall is an opioid medication. It is a combination of four salts. It belongs to stimulant's family of the drug. This medication used to treat ADHD and narcolepsy, as helping in staying awake during the day. Sometimes it used to enhance athletic performance. This medication itself is a central nervous system stimulant. Adderall, when used works by changing the amount of a few natural substances inside the brain. You may buy Adderall online in different types of dosage. If you order Adderall online, you will get a medication guide that will be helpful for you. Never forget to follow the instructions of the medication guide while using this drug. Taking overdosage or improper dosage may cause side effects or may make you a drug addict. Thus, it is crucial to consider the prescribed dosage to avoid Adderall addiction and side effects.
What is ADHD?
ADHDstands for Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. It is a mental disorder of humans. People suffering from this disease got difficulty in paying attention, shows abnormal behavior, and many other mental deficiencies. ADHD can be seen in less than twelve years older adult, minimum for the six months. Children, suffering from this disease makes a disturbance in the class. They interrupt the other's study by their bad behavior. They don't like group study. We can treat this disease by some initial efforts, by managing their lifestyle, by the help of medications. Adderall is an excellent medication for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. We can buy Adderall online for the treatment of ADHD.
How does Adderall treat ADHD?
Adderall is a central nervous system stimulant. This medication treats attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Adderall increases the availability of the neurotransmitter norepinephrine and dopamine in your CNS connection. This activity of Adderall works sooner and reaches peak performance of the brain.