Once upon a time there was a company called Miku who wasn't making quite enough money...
You’ve just spent $400 on a baby monitor. Now you need a subscription | Once upon a time there was a company called Miku who wasn’t making quite enough money…::Once upon a time there was a company called Miku who wasn’t making quite enough money…
I had 3 babies and spent $0 on video monitoring. Your baby will be fine. Don’t fall for the advertising drama. Babies have been fine for thousands of years with no electronics.
I used a wireless webcam to monitor my baby and, honestly, I was so paranoid that I don’t regret it. Seeing her breathe or move before I went to bed and when I woke up was a comfort and relief.
I can just hear some people going, “WHAT? Are you crazy?”. I was a little tike in the early 60s and the only monitor my mom had was me screaming or the “THUNK” of me falling and hitting the floor.
SUID Death rate for infants has decreased even since 1990. Baby monitor likely had a role in that.
FYI not supporting subscription for features a device has in hardware, just saying I’d rather have a monitor that never went off than no monitor and a dead child. There are plenty of alternative devices without subs that cost a lot less to begin with.
I’m not saying baby monitors are the only reason for improved SUID rates. I’m saying they likely played a role.
Despite your sarcasm, you might also be right that lead could have adversely affected unexplained infant mortality.
The point I was trying to make was that baby monitors are not useless devices designed to extract money from you as implied by OP, whose comments by the way, were anecdotal.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
I had 3 babies and spent $0 on video monitoring. Your baby will be fine. Don’t fall for the advertising drama. Babies have been fine for thousands of years with no electronics.
I used a wireless webcam to monitor my baby and, honestly, I was so paranoid that I don’t regret it. Seeing her breathe or move before I went to bed and when I woke up was a comfort and relief.
And only a few children were kidnapped by the Fae.
I can just hear some people going, “WHAT? Are you crazy?”. I was a little tike in the early 60s and the only monitor my mom had was me screaming or the “THUNK” of me falling and hitting the floor.
They’ve also not been fine.
SUID Death rate for infants has decreased even since 1990. Baby monitor likely had a role in that.
FYI not supporting subscription for features a device has in hardware, just saying I’d rather have a monitor that never went off than no monitor and a dead child. There are plenty of alternative devices without subs that cost a lot less to begin with.
You know what else happened in the 90s? Leaded gas was banned. I’ll attribute it to that. Anecdotes don’t mean much.
Leaded gas was banned in the 70s.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/gasoline/history-of-gasoline.php#:~:text=Unleaded gasoline was introduced in,using leaded gasoline in vehicles says otherwise. Unleaded gas introduced in the 70s and lead gas phased out in 96.
I’m not saying baby monitors are the only reason for improved SUID rates. I’m saying they likely played a role. Despite your sarcasm, you might also be right that lead could have adversely affected unexplained infant mortality. The point I was trying to make was that baby monitors are not useless devices designed to extract money from you as implied by OP, whose comments by the way, were anecdotal.
$400 is excessive though. As is a subscription.
And data on SIDS is freely available. https://www.cdc.gov/sids/data.htm