Nollij

This is terrible advice. Ask any urologist and they will tell you the same. OP, ask YOUR urologist about it.

Vasectomies can, in some circumstances, be reversed. You should not plan on yours being one of them. You should plan on it being permanent and irreversible.

It's tough to predict the future. Most people don't start wanting kids until they're older than that, or at least until they're in a serious relationship. Given that you did not mention one, I'm going to assume that you are unattached. Most single people in their twenties want to get laid without having kids.

You may find that a vasectomy is a complete blocker for certain relationships. However, if you truly do not want kids, those would be doomed regardless.

Will you change your mind? Perhaps. Many people's views on the subject change as they enter their 30s. But that doesn't mean yours will.

It might also be worth considering why you want a vasectomy right now. If you are single, you should not be hooking up with random people unprotected. If you are in a relationship, this is something that you should discuss with your partner.

The time comparison is invalid, because the repairs aren't the same. Think about the maintenance you've done on ICE vehicles. Oil change, spark plugs, ignition coils? None of them have an equivalent EV repair. The ones that do (tires, 12v battery, air filter) are typically the exact same, and not worth contrasting.

Trying to compare the two will be very difficult, and rely on more abstract measurements like cost per year.

The multiple visits detail is very troubling though. It suggests the field is immature, and training/tooling are inadequate.

I don't think we can ignore the context of him being not-Russian. That makes him entirely expendable, moreso than the (fairly expendable) native conscripted Russians.

He's clearly been on the decline for a while. While no one knows when they will die, it was very obvious that he wasn't going to be able to perform much longer. Even his farewell show was hard to watch because of the difficulties he was having. He could've lived for years after, but there was no chance of another event where he performed.

One of the major porn sites has a banner link explaining why it's so bad. But the basic points they make are:

• It's only ever enforced against a handful of the biggest players, driving traffic to smaller sites. Those smaller sites might also not even be "porn", but include things like Tumblr and Reddit.
• A lot of those smaller sites do not enforce standards as well as they need to. This is particularly true regarding consent, extortion, prostitution, etc. They also suggest it applies to CSAM. So instead of getting some (relatively) vanilla porn, they are exposed to all sorts of horrors.

Other people have already mentioned the obvious privacy concerns, and how it could be used for blackmail, trust in 3rd parties, etc. But this covered why it fails even at its core objective.

I specifically mentioned Les Wexner for a reason. While the public information includes an absolute ton of red flags, and it's very likely that he bought child prostitutes, it doesn't reach the level proof beyond a reasonable doubt. IOW, it's unlikely to reach a conviction in court.

These people are also rich enough to drag out a court case for decades, even longer than the government. As such, they aren't likely to take a plea agreement that's more than a slap on the wrist and without admitting anything serious.

Legal Eagle just released a video about "the real Epstein files". The main point they covered in the video is victim impact. The victims could be threatened and harassed because of the info.

Another point not covered is that criminal case info is typically not disclosed. Releasing a list of accused perpetrators (i.e. pedophiles/child rapists) encourages vigilante justice. It also interferes with any ongoing investigations, which should (at least in theory) still be ongoing.

I don't want Trump to release the case info. I want his DOJ to announce charges against people like Les Wexner, based on that info. And I want it to not just be his political enemies and bullshit lies.

From what I've been told, the smell of BO disappears after a while. Instead, they smell like a farm animal. But they have to skip bathing long enough for that change to occur, and it gets undone whenever they bathe.

As for people saying they smell fine, as obnoxious as we are, very few people are willing to tell someone they smell like shit. Most of us will even directly lie to them to avoid the difficult conversation.

This isn't the first time a company has used this approach. Apple users will always pay (be charged) more. I suspect the same is true for mobile users vs desktop.

But with AI being applied, there will be a TON of variables, just like your car insurance. You probably won't even be able to identify most of them. For instance, which ISP are you using? What time of the day are you shopping?

What else does your browser fingerprint say about you? What about when they link it to Facebook, even without your knowledge or consent? Will gay people (or women, or Mexicans, or any other group) pay more?

(Not OP) Welcome them to the correct side of history, assuming they are actually abandoning their old ways. Their past was a mistake, but one they have learned from. It's similar to congratulating, even celebrating, someone's sobriety. Don't attack them for their past of drug abuse.

Of course, this all assumes they have turned a corner. If they still support those same deplorable causes, then none of this applies.

The issue here isn't about charity for the less fortunate. Many of the people begging make a decent living (from begging), and moreso than those working shitty service jobs. I don't want to give money to someone that dresses homeless and puts on an act. I would happily give money to anyone that genuinely doesn't know where they will sleep next week, or where their next meal is coming from.

The problem is that I'm not in a position to evaluate that. As such, I would rather give money to food banks and the like, since they are in a better position for that.