Reason #186729 why it's insane to have no right to privacy in public.
Fun fact: Recording the public is illegal in Germany. Any private video camera must only be able to record your own property. If you do record (and store - smart doorbells without storage that are only active when they are rung are exempted) material you must have visible warnings (that others can see BEFORE being recorded) or else any evidence you collect is likely to be thrown out in court.
Only thing I can recommend (as well as for literally any script) is using set -u. Only because it's awful to debug unset variables and there's never a use case for using unset variables.
You seem to be wrong about the packaging criteria:
Packaging
The V-Label does not exclude products whose packaging contains animal-derived products. However, companies are encouraged to voluntarily avoid using packaging containing animal-derived products.
"Venture capitalist" was supposed to be "private equity".
"Consumer electronics" is apparently only referring to the audiovisual (TV, speakers etc) line of Philips. That was sold to the Chinese but not private equity firm TPV Technology.
Philips Domestic Appliances which contains e.g. vacuums, blenders, and coffee machines was sold to the Chinese private equity firm Hillhouse Capital Group.
And the lightbulbs (Philips Hue etc.) were spun off into the still Dutch Signify.
Still part of Philips seem to be products in the categories:
I think the three women in the audience (assuming gender based on haircut and triangular portrusions on the upper torso) must fight to death to ensure all their wants are met.
At most two women are allowed to hate women! If there are three or more, then the women-hating women would be hated back by women (instead of no woman hating back in the case of one woman or one woman [a ≠ e] hating back in the case of two women).
That makes more sense, I somehow skipped the sentence (in the image) mentioning the high rate.
I was a bit mislead by the claim this study couldn't be done in the US/Denmark because of medical ethics. More like it would have been unethical and not approved were the infection rate equally as high. If the point is only seeing whether there are neurodevelopmental disabilities associated with administering the vaccine right after birth then obviously Guinea-Bisset would be the very last choice.
I don't see the point of the study tbh. But neither the outrage. Mostly because not every country vaccinates at the same time after birth so there's no need to test it specifically. Just compare infants from different countries.
Ich habe so das Gefühl, die STIKO erwägt primär die betriebswirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen einer Enpfehlung für die Krankenkassen. Der individuelle Nutzen und volkswirtschaftliche Nutzen stehen irgendwie außen vor. Denn die Impfung nützt sowohl dir (deutlich geringeres Risiko auf Langzeitkomplikationen) als auch der Volkswirtschaft (da man die durchschnittlichen Krankentage reduziert). Nur die Krankenkassen hätten einen dreistelligen Millionen- bis einstelligen Milliarden"schaden" wenn sich viele Millionene Leute impfen lassen.
Ich finde es immer spannend, wie man es schafft auf so einen Schwachsinn zu kommen.