Lifehacker ([syndicated profile] twocents_feed) wrote2025-09-19 05:30 pm

There's Something Off About Apple's New Sleep Score

Posted by Beth Skwarecki

We may earn a commission from links on this page.

Did you know you can customize Google to filter out garbage? Take these steps for better search results, including adding my work at Lifehacker as a preferred source.

Apple's new sleep score, now available on the Apple Watch and in the Apple Health app, grades how well you slept on a scale from 0 to 100. Since it grades you retroactively, I can look back at my last month (or even years) of sleep scores to see how the new numbers compare to the scores I’ve gotten from Oura and other wearables. I tried this out, and one thing stood out: Apple is way too easy on me. 

I’m kidding, sort of. Yes, Apple’s scores are consistently higher than those I get from other wearables, but it’s not like I can definitively say Apple is wrong or Oura is right. I think of a sleep score like a grade on an essay: A bad essay will probably get a bad grade, and a good essay will probably get a good grade, but it’s not like every teacher in the world would agree that your take on Moby Dick’s symbolism deserves exactly a 92%. You may feel like you got away with something if your mid essay comes back with an A+, but as long as the prof is consistent with their grading scheme, you can’t say your grade was wrong

That’s why the accuracy of sleep scores doesn't matter a ton, in my opinion. The World Sleep Society more or less agrees, saying not to read too much into individual scores, but instead keep an eye on trends, like whether your sleep seems to be getting better or worse over time. 

How Apple's sleep scores measure up to Oura, Garmin, and Whoop

With all of that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to compare my last month or so of Apple sleep scores to those I get from the Oura ring, plus a few data points from my Garmin and Whoop devices. 

Apple calculates your sleep score based on your sleep duration, bedtime consistency, and interruptions. Competing devices each have their own algorithm. Apple can calculate its score based on the data from any device, not just an Apple Watch, so in some cases the Oura and Apple scores are actually using the same underlying data.

Here are the results: 

Graph of Apple, Oura, Garmin, and Whoop sleep scores
Apple is the red line at the top—usually grading me higher than its competitors. Credit: Beth Skwarecki

Apple says that over the past month, my most frequent sleep score level is “excellent,” earned on 17 nights. I also had a “high” sleep score on 10 nights, with just one night of “OK” sleep, one of “low” sleep, and no nights “very low.”

My major takeaway is that Apple’s scores are almost always higher than those I get from other devices. That said, they tend to go up when the others go up, and down when the others go down, which means that all of these scores are probably useful when looked at from a big-picture point of view. 

Subjectively, I don’t think my sleep has been all that good lately. I’ve been staying up late more often than I’d like, and waking up tired more often than not. I’d judge it as mostly OK, occasionally poor, and sometimes good. But that’s just, like, my opinion, man. 

It is true that there’s probably nothing medically wrong with me, and I don't think my sleep is drastically poor—so maybe Apple’s rosy outlook is just a better way to think about my sleep. It’s OK to be a straight-A student sometimes. 

cyberghostface: (Joker)
cyberghostface ([personal profile] cyberghostface) wrote in [community profile] scans_daily2025-09-19 01:39 pm

First look at Absolute Joker

We have a new look at the Absolute Joker courtesy of an upcoming cover and… uh… I don’t think anyone was expecting this.

Cover under the cut… )
Lifehacker ([syndicated profile] twocents_feed) wrote2025-09-19 05:00 pm

The Best Amazon Prime Benefits You Probably Don't Know About

Posted by Daniel Oropeza

We may earn a commission from links on this page.

Did you know you can customize Google to filter out garbage? Take these steps for better search results, including adding my work at Lifehacker as a preferred source.


If you’re going to commit to an Amazon Prime membership, you might as well squeeze as much as you can out of the deal. And there's a good amount of juice to squeeze there. The price you pay for Amazon depends on many factors, but regardless of how much you're paying, it's worth it for most people (we did the math). If you're on the fence about signing up, October Prime Day, Amazon's fall version of Prime Day, is just around the corner. It's a great time to sell your soul—or take advantage of the 30-day free trial.

How much does Amazon Prime cost?

The standard Prime membership costs $14.99 per month or $139 per year, but there are other tiers that some people might qualify for. For example, the new Amazon Prime Student program allows young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 to get all of the Prime perks for half the cost—$7.49 per month or $69 annually.

The benefits of Amazon Prime

I'll be the first to admit I didn't know all of the benefits that Amazon Prime offers to its members. There are a lot more perks than people think. Here are the most impressive ones (and check out the full list):

Fast and free shipping

  • Fast free shipping on millions of items: Depending on where you live, shipping can take one or two days, and some even come on the same day—and it’s always free (if being shipped by the Amazon store).

  • Pre-ordered items can be delivered on their release date for free.

  • The option to have items delivered inside your garage with a smart garage device (depending on where you live).

  • Earn rewards for future purchases when you select free no-rush shipping.

  • The option to have all your weekly orders delivered on a specific day, to reduce waste from boxes.

  • The ability to try before you buy when you order clothes or shoes, meaning you have seven days before you get charged for the items you decide to keep.

Deals, savings, and sales

  • Subscribe & Save deals that allow you to place recurring orders and save money when you do so.

  • Amazon Prime Rewards Visa card: Cardholders get 5% back on Amazon/Whole Foods purchases. So Prime members who use this card extensively can earn rewards that offset the annual fee.

  • A free year of Grubhub+, normally $9.99 per month, which gets you free delivery on eligible orders, lower service fees, exclusive deals, and other perks. 

  • Sharing with family or friends: Prime benefits can be shared with other members of your household. The more users, the more value per person.

Medical care

  • Amazon Health: Prime users get One Medical access for an additional $9 per month. Through your devices, you’ll have 24/7 access to on-demand virtual care, plus real-life access to primary care offices in a number of U.S. cities. It accepts most major health insurance plans, too.

  • Amazon Pharmacy: Access to free two-day delivery and other savings on medications.

Streaming and digital perks

E-books and audiobooks


Our Best Editor-Vetted Tech Deals Right Now
Deals are selected by our commerce team
Lifehacker ([syndicated profile] twocents_feed) wrote2025-09-19 04:30 pm

Whoop Is Bringing Clinical Blood Testing to Its App

Posted by Meredith Dietz

Did you know you can customize Google to filter out garbage? Take these steps for better search results, including adding my work at Lifehacker as a preferred source.


If you think fitness trackers are just about step counting and heart rate, get with the times. This week, performance wearable Whoop announced it will integrate clinical laboratory testing directly into its ecosystem, partnering with Quest Diagnostics to launch Whoop Advanced Labs this fall. This adds to a growing trend of more and more wearables aiming to be comprehensive, one-stop health platforms.

How Whoop will track bloodwork

Whoop members will be able to purchase Quest's clinical laboratory testing, schedule an appointment for testing, and receive test results within the Whoop app. The feature is designed to analyze biomarkers spanning metabolism, hormones, inflammation, cardiovascular health, and nutrient status—all data that goes far beyond what can be captured through wearable sensors alone.

The vision is that Whoop subscribers will be able access the types of clinical testing that physicians order (like from Quest Diagnostics) to deliver patient care. "At Whoop, we're committed to empowering our members with a highly comprehensive view into their health and performance," said John Sullivan, Chief Marketing Officer at Whoop.

A third-party provider will review test requests, order tests, deliver results through the Whoop app, and provide phone consultations when requested. Whoop Advanced Labs is set to launch later this fall, and members can join the waitlist now at whoop.com/waitlist.

Do you really need to monitor everything?

Again, Whoop isn't the first wearable company to head in this direction. Ultrahuman, the maker of the Ring AIR smart ring, launched its Blood Vision feature earlier this year.

This feature can help people catch health issues early and take proactive steps to address them. At the same time, it raises questions about whether consumers actually need this level of health monitoring from for-profit wellness companies.

In my opinion, this all points to a sort of "medicalization" of everyday wellness. While access to health data can be empowering, it can also create anxiety and lead people to over-monitor aspects of their health that might not require constant attention. After all, blood biomarkers can fluctuate for many reasons, and abnormal results don't always indicate health problems.

Looking ahead

As Whoop prepares to launch Advanced Labs this fall, it will be interesting to see how consumers respond to this deeper level of health monitoring. For now, it looks like the line between fitness tracker and medical device will continue to blur. Anecdotally, the company's existing user base already skews toward serious athletes and health optimization devotees; in other words, the sort of people who would be interested in comprehensive biomarker tracking.

Anyone interested in Whoop's blood testing integration can join the waitlist for Advanced Labs. Whether they'll actually want to know everything their blood is telling them is another question entirely.

Lifehacker ([syndicated profile] twocents_feed) wrote2025-09-19 04:00 pm

How to Use the Pomodoro Method to Study More Efficiently

Posted by Lindsey Ellefson

We may earn a commission from links on this page.

Did you know you can customize Google to filter out garbage? Take these steps for better search results, including adding Lifehacker as a preferred source for tech news.

You may have heard of the Pomodoro technique before—perhaps even here at Lifehacker—and might already be aware it’s a solid productivity hack. But applied in another way, i can actually be more than that: This technique is also an excellent study tool that can help you maximize your focus and retention. It's time-tested, variable, and available to you whether you want to do it the old-fashioned way or call in the help of an app.

What is the Pomodoro technique?

Although it has a fancy name, the technique itself is simple: If you have a large task to complete, you should break it down into pieces and schedule breaks to reward yourself in between finishing bits of it. The scheduling is the key part: When following the classic Pomodoro model, you have to set an alarm for 25 minutes and 25 minutes only. So, work for 25 minutes, and when the alarm goes off, take a five-minute break, maybe to grab a snack, refill your coffee, or scroll social media. When the five minutes are up, get back to work. Do this over and over, but every four cycles, give yourself a bigger break, up to a half an hour.

In the event something distracts you—whether it’s your phone or another person—you have to reset your timer, so try instead to be direct and tell them you’re busy and will be able to reconnect with them in a bit. Then, put them off until you get your five-minute break or even after your whole task is finished.

This works because you are aware you’re getting that little reset once your 25 minutes are up. You can throw yourself into the task knowing there’s a little treat coming down the pipeline. And while you rest up, your brain is processing everything you just learned.

How to use Pomodoro for studying

We usually discuss the Pomodoro technique in terms of working professionally, especially when there’s a big project you need to complete, but its origins actually come from the academic sphere. The method was invented by Fancesco Cirillo, a developer and entrepreneur, but he came up with it when he was a student. It’s actually named for the little tomato-shaped timer he used when he was studying. Those methods are certainly still viable, but the popularity of his technique has also birthed a cottage industry of specialty timers. On Amazon, you can get a Pomodoro-specific timer for under $20. These offer different preset time allotments, so you don't have to stick to the 25 on, five off model—but I'll get to that in a moment.

You can use this method to study for a test by breaking up the content you need to review. You go by chapter, by content, or by “chunk,” if you’re using the chunking method to divvy up your study load (which you should be). It’s a good way to stay on task if you get easily distracted and dividing your topics up will help you remember them better. It’s not ideal for quick cramming sessions, however, since you need at least two hours to get four “Pomodoros” in. Do this on a day you have plenty of time to devote to studying—and, of course, relaxing.

Pomodoro variations that work for studying

As noted, the classic Pomodoro technique involves 25 minutes on and five minutes off, but you needn't be so rigid—there's a reason those Pomodoro timers don't lock you to those intervals. Twenty-five minute increments worked for Cirillo and countless adherents after him, but they may not work for you. I do recommend starting with the classic technique, but if you're not finding yourself falling into a state of deep work during those blocks of time, you have to switch things up.

There's a lot of flexibility to the method, so feel free to experiment. For instance, one student invented "Animedoro" a few years ago. This approach involves working for longer intervals, around 40 to 60 minutes, then getting 20 minutes to relax and do something you enjoy—like watching an episode of anime, which tend to be about 20 minutes long. With longer working time, you have a better chance of getting into deep work and focusing, plus not getting discombobulated when your timer suddenly goes off.

Another approach is called Pomodoro 2.0 and it involves adding 15 minutes to your work period every time you return to your task, so you focus longer and longer as you go. You still need to take breaks, of course, and you can even make those incrementally longer too.

Or maybe you prefer to work in quick bursts. You can try variations where you study for just 10 minutes before a short break, giving yourself a sense of urgency as you try to see how many flashcards you can study in that time. The point is it's up to you: A period of work interspersed with breaks is the only core element of the method, and you can approach it in whatever way you find most useful. Just keep in mind that you'll get better results if you commit to a set structure, even if it takes some time to adjust to it.

Pomodoro apps can help

I'm a fan of those Pomodoro timers because they keep me off my phone, which is a major distraction—it's a slippery slope from setting an alarm to checking a notification and then finding myself in a Reels hole 10 minutes of my allotted study time.

Then again, the phone can be useful if you're using it productively. Many focus timer apps can be used with the Pomodoro method, and will even block other apps during the work-time increments you set, or otherwise penalize you for getting distracted when you should be focusing. (If you need suggestions, I've previously written about a few of my favorites.)

There are also Pomodoro-specific apps—including my top pick, FocusPomo—that exist purely to help you structure your study or productivity time around the famous technique. If using your phone alarm seems risky and buying a tabletop timer off Amazon feels antiquated, look into one of these.

swan_tower: (Default)
swan_tower ([personal profile] swan_tower) wrote2025-09-19 05:03 pm

New Worlds: Camp Followers

As part of its current tour of military topics, the New Worlds Patreon is taking a look at all those other people involved: not the soldiers, but the secondary army of people who support and/or profit off them. Comment over there!

(originally posted at Swan Tower: https://is.gd/FceDbY)
Gizmodo ([syndicated profile] io9_feed) wrote2025-09-19 04:41 pm
Deeplinks ([syndicated profile] eff_feed) wrote2025-09-19 03:48 pm

Companies Must Provide Accurate and Transparent Information to Users When Posts are Removed

Posted by Jillian C. York

This is the third installment in a blog series documenting EFF's findings from the Stop Censoring Abortion campaign. You can read additional posts here. 

Imagine sharing information about reproductive health care on social media and receiving a message that your content has been removed for violating a policy intended to curb online extremism. That’s exactly what happened to one person using Instagram who shared her story with our Stop Censoring Abortion project.

Meta’s rules for “Dangerous Organizations and Individuals” (DOI) were supposed to be narrow: a way to prevent the platform from being used by terrorist groups, organized crime, and those engaged in violent or criminal activity. But over the years, we’ve seen these rules applied in far broader—and more troubling—ways, with little transparency and significant impact on marginalized voices.

EFF has long warned that the DOI policy is opaque, inconsistently enforced, and prone to overreach. The policy has been critiqued by others for its opacity and propensity to disproportionately censor marginalized groups.

a screenshot showing the user's post being flagged under Meta's DOI policy

Samantha Shoemaker's post about Plan C was flagged under Meta's policy on dangerous organizations and individuals

Meta has since added examples and clarifications in its Transparency Center to this and other policies, but their implementation still leaves users in the dark about what’s allowed and what isn’t.

The case we received illustrates just how harmful this lack of clarity can be. Samantha Shoemaker, an individual sharing information about abortion care, shared straightforward, facts about accessing abortion pills. Her posts included:

  • A video linking to Plan C’s website, which lists organizations that provide abortion pills in different states.

  • A reshared image from Plan C’s own Instagram account encouraging people to learn about advance provision of abortion pills.

  • A short clip of women talking about their experiences taking abortion pills.

Information Provided to Users Must Be Accurate

Instead of allowing her to facilitate informed discussion, Instagram flagged some of her posts under its “Prescription Drugs” policy, while others were removed under the DOI policy—the same set of rules meant to stop violent extremism from being shared.

We recognize that moderation systems—both human and automated—will make mistakes. But when Meta equates medically accurate, harm-reducing information about abortion with “dangerous organizations,” it underscores a deeper problem: the blunt tools of content moderation disproportionately silence speech that is lawful, important, and often life-saving.

At a time when access to abortion information is already under political attack in the United States and around the world, platforms must be especially careful not to compound the harm. This incident shows how overly broad rules and opaque enforcement can erase valuable speech and disempower users who most need access to knowledge.

And when content does violate the rules, it’s important that users are provided with accurate information as to why. An individual sharing information about health care will undoubtedly be confused or upset by being told that they have violated a policy meant to curb violent extremism. Moderating content responsibly means offering the greatest transparency and clarity to users as possible. As outlined in the Santa Clara Principles on Transparency and Accountability in Content Moderation, users should be able to readily understand:

  • What types of content are prohibited by the company and will be removed, with detailed guidance and examples of permissible and impermissible content;
  • What types of content the company will take action against other than removal, such as algorithmic downranking, with detailed guidance and examples on each type of content and action; and
  • The circumstances under which the company will suspend a user’s account, whether permanently or temporarily.

What You Can Do if Your Content is Removed

If you find your content removed under Meta’s policies, you do have options:

  • Appeal the decision: Every takedown notice should give you the option to appeal within the app. Appeals are sometimes reviewed by a human moderator rather than an automated system.
  • Request Oversight Board review: In certain cases, you can escalate to Meta’s independent Oversight Board, which has the power to overturn takedowns and set policy precedents.
  • Document your case: Save screenshots of takedown notices, appeals, and your original post. This documentation is essential if you want to report the issue to advocacy groups or in future proceedings.
  • Share your story: Projects like Stop Censoring Abortion collect cases of unjust takedowns to build pressure for change. Speaking out, whether to EFF and other advocacy groups or to the media, helps illustrate how policies harm real people.

Abortion is health care. Sharing information about it is not dangerous—it’s necessary. Meta should allow users to share vital information about reproductive care. The company must also ensure that users are provided with clear information about how their policies are being applied and how to appeal seemingly wrongful decisions.

This is the third post in our blog series documenting the findings from our Stop Censoring Abortion campaign. Read more in the series: https://www.eff.org/pages/stop-censoring-abortion   

amiserablepileofwords: Two overlapping pink hearts (Sapphtember)
A Miserable Pile Of Words ([personal profile] amiserablepileofwords) wrote in [community profile] eggbug_writes2025-09-19 06:31 pm

Eternal Sapphtember #354

Girls who are lost in the woods

iamrman: (Chopper)
iamrman ([personal profile] iamrman) wrote in [community profile] scans_daily2025-09-19 05:18 pm

Fantastic Four #397

Writer: Tom DeFalco

Co-plotter and pencils: Paul Ryan

Inks: Danny Bulanadi


The Watcher pops in to say hello, but something isn’t quite right.


Read more... )