It works for smoking, but I don't think it does as well for vaping? You just can't rationalize the addiction the same way because you don't stink, you probably won't get cancer from it, you do enjoy it to some extent, etc.
While the book does focus on smoking, and uses some of these physical aspects of cigarettes specifically as arguments, the main thrust of the book is actually a framework that generalizes pretty well to dealing with any addiction. For example, https://easypeasymethod.org/ is a simple rewrite of Carr's book for dealing with porn addiction.
So as long as you have your own reasons for why you want to quit vaping (and if you're picking up the book, you probably already do) it can still be helpful. The books from whyquit.com I mentioned in a sibling comment mention some vaping-specific arguments, and they're framed as quitting nicotine in general, not just smoking specifically.
> the "banana equivalent dose" [is] "very useful in attempting to explain infinitesimal doses (and corresponding infinitesimal risks) to members of the public"
More seriously -- challenging "US standard" dietary norms often leads to fruitful discussions of nutrition and how off-optimal most "common sense" tends to be.
It is more local than talking to chat GPT directly. Open AI stores all your requests on their server. This saves it on your computer. The title also claims it's a UI which always, for now, runs locally.
I didn't say being poor was better, this was in response to who uses more government services. And I'm not event stating it as a problem, I think poor people use more services because they need more services. But I thought it was important enough to correct the claim that they don't use more services.
