Slashdot Mirror


Tinfoil Hat House

An anonymous reader writes "A family in Sacromento has covered the side of their house with aluminum to keep the radiowaves from their neighbors at bay. The city has given them one week to remove the life saving shielding or face charges."

896 comments

  1. Sacromento? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is that near Sacramento? Or is it in Colifornia?

    1. Re:Sacromento? by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 1

      No, right next to SacroTomato

      --
      "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
    2. Re:Sacromento? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe it's near Sacramende... http://www.the-op.com/ref/ee2.php?ep=212&pg=5

    3. Re:Sacromento? by wahsapa · · Score: 1, Funny

      no... but its right next to Suckramento

    4. Re:Sacromento? by mrmez · · Score: 1
      Sacré Bléu! Do you not recognize a mis-spelling of Sacramento when you see it? Use the little grey cells!

      I hope they did not get any wrinkles in their aluminum. It must be orderly if the ondes radio it is to keep out.

    5. Re:Sacromento? by Damvan · · Score: 1

      We always called it "Excremento"

  2. Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by jeremy_dot · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's just what they want you to think.

    1. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by plover · · Score: 4, Funny
      Anybody else read that URL as "theCRACKchannel.com"?

      Moderators? :-)

      --
      John
    2. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a pretty common joke around these parts to call the domain name the "crack" channel, so no... it's not just you.

    3. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by Caspian · · Score: 1

      I did.

      --
      With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
    4. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Well, as everyone knows, "Use Aluminum Foil, Go To Jail".

    5. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by jjr1 · · Score: 1

      This is Marion Barry, reporting for the crack channel.

      --
      Best Trivia answer ever... Name the largest aquatic man eater... Contestant: Tsunami
  3. I'm not a Californian by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How can they be brought up on Misdemeanor charges for this?

    It's stupid. It's ugly. But why in the fuck is it illegal?

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:I'm not a Californian by Darthmalt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They mention health code but how is sheet metal a health code violation

    2. Re:I'm not a Californian by harmanjd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      From the article it looks like the building codes prohibit it. Maybe they should look at getting sheet metal siding - as long as its installed correctly and doesn't violate any of the neighborhood covenants they'd probably be ok.

    3. Re:I'm not a Californian by Kethryvis · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because it's a housing code violation. It looks from the picture like it's touching the fence/house next door and in CA (at least in Sac, I live there) it's illegal to build or have any structure connected to your house touching or within x amount of feet of the fence. Our neighbours behind us built some rickity lean-to on their house which used our back fence as one of the walls and we called the housing code people who came and told them to tear it down.

    4. Re:I'm not a Californian by mobiux · · Score: 1

      The only thing I could think of is that maybe it's reflecting the sun into a street or something.

      I know there was a business where I used to live that had a sunporch area parallel to a highway and as certain times of the day it felt like you were driving into the damn sun. Dangerous.

    5. Re:I'm not a Californian by Kethryvis · · Score: 2, Informative

      For being "California's News Leader", KCRA doesn't always get their stuff correct :) (they're my local news station. they used to be good but they've slid over the last couple of years)

    6. Re:I'm not a Californian by SilverCheese · · Score: 1

      It seems that the sheets are not properly installed. Therefore the neighbours are worried the sharp edges from those will injure their kids or something while they are playing.

    7. Re:I'm not a Californian by bstadil · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Liberals that want to force everyone to conform to their way of life

      And this kind of thinking is anathema to the Religious right. ;-)

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
    8. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree. If it's their property let them be protected from the aliens. Who cares. And don't give me crap about it looking nice for the neighbors. I believe in freedom. If my neighbors want to paint their house with pink polka-dots then so be it, none of my buisness. People spend far too much energy worrying about what other people are doing. The officials should worry about stuff that is actually harming others.

    9. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Sorry, dude, just use the word "politicians", the difference between the Right and the Left evaporated sometime in 2001.

    10. Re:I'm not a Californian by flawedgeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But why in the fuck is it illegal?

      Because it's in California. Any other state and they'd merely be shunned by their neighbors and harrassed by annoying teenagers.


      btw, anyone else think this image verification thing is annoying?

      --
      My other Sig is .40 caliber.
    11. Re:I'm not a Californian by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      I think it's a joke. See the monty python foot?

      Not that I see what's so funny... and it's not April 1 or anything, either..

      --
      Fuck it
    12. Re:I'm not a Californian by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree that there's far too many silly rules about houses (damn HOA's), but there are construction standards for a reason. Some of this crap blows off and hits a neighors house, or a neighbor, and I think there will be a few problems.

    13. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow... That was pretty assholeish.

    14. Re:I'm not a Californian by dtdns · · Score: 1

      So quick to blame the liberals, but the conservatives do the same thing on different issues (moral values, for one). I for one am a Libertarian so you could say I'm quick to blame both sides.

    15. Re:I'm not a Californian by WankersRevenge · · Score: 4, Funny

      This site is a great true example of what happens when your neighbors go crazy. In this case, it's a family of rednecks. It's a great laugh from the burnt down back yard to the child sized children pools.

    16. Re:I'm not a Californian by Deadstick · · Score: 1
      Ummm, no, conservatives created most of the housing codes and restrictive covenants to force everyone to conform to their way of life. Tacky-looking houses reduce the property values, dontcha know...and covenants were originally invented to keep blacks and Jews out.

      rj

    17. Re:I'm not a Californian by nolife · · Score: 1

      Not only stupid and ugly, but how is it blocking radio waves? Although more expensive then vinyl siding, aluminum siding is still an option. In the 70's it was very popular because it was cost effective when compared to other options. My parents had aluminum siding my whole life and we never had reception problems..
      These people are whacked.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    18. Re:I'm not a Californian by Penguinoflight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Absolutely. Any time you're having a problem with your neigbor make sure you talk to him/her first. Not only is it the polite thing to do, you have the ethical responsibilty to go to your friend/opponent before seeking legal protection.

      If the fence is really important to him you might be able to work out a deal to your own financial gain. Keeping communication open will require that you respect your neighbors directly.

      --
      "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
      1 John 4:14
    19. Re:I'm not a Californian by plover · · Score: 1
      btw, anyone else think this image verification thing is annoying?

      What "image verification thing" are you talking about? A specific site, or just the idea of image verification in general?

      --
      John
    20. Re:I'm not a Californian by EnderWigginsXenocide · · Score: 1

      Because sheets of aluminum foil will cause so much harm when applied incorectly to the side of a home.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups. -- 0 1 My two bits
    21. Re:I'm not a Californian by khallow · · Score: 2, Insightful
      btw, anyone else think this image verification thing is annoying?

      Not half as annoying as the incredible crapflooding it just stopped. :(

    22. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful


      Some people are still laboring under the impression that this is a free country.

      Silly rabbits.

      Or should I say, sheep.

    23. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      whether or not it's touching the house/fence next door, it would probably still be a code violation. in portland you have rules like this:
      http://www.portlandonline.com/index.cfm?&a=18198&c =38058
      (see B & C, probably more).

      Basically you have to be able to see from your windows and have proper natual light come through. I'm sure there are quite a few other violations. However, I'm also positive that if you wanted to pick nits you could find something wrong with every house in portland (according to the strict rules, especially if you want to talk about interior building codes and whatnot).

    24. Re:I'm not a Californian by ResidntGeek · · Score: 1

      Right. I cant even count how many stories I've seen of absofuckinglutely HUGE damage being done to homes by pieces of aluminum foil blown by small wind gusts.

      --
      ResidntGeek
    25. Re:I'm not a Californian by SilverCheese · · Score: 1

      yeh watch the video, there is some foil, but also there are sheets of metal that seem to be hanging between the fence and the roof. Dunno how thick or hard those are but they sure look edgy.

    26. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jajajaja!

      I hope this is well placed sarcasm, as the facts have this being quite the opposite of reality. In fact, exactly the opposite... I wonder...

      You see, many liberals stance in conforming is to shun it, plain and simple. "Following the herd" is what should be avoided, critical thought is what should be instilled, etc.. Be creative, express yourself, appreciate our differences as a positive thing, abolish pre-judgement, etc... No, you have some things backwards my friend, but that's OK, this liberal forgives you and hopes you understand someday that worrying about property value, and curtailing personal "freedom" with what they do to their house (construction not-withstanding, I'm talking about painting my house neon orange... most places will NOT let you do that) is a conservative thought process, not a liberal one. Do some homework...

    27. Re:I'm not a Californian by kberg108 · · Score: 0

      Two words morons. I'll say it loud and clear. Why do we have HOA's? Because home owners asked for them. Why did people ask for them? Hear it comes the magic words... PROPERTY VALUE!!!. Nobody is going to buy your house if you live next to the wacko who is afraid of YOUR radiation. Which just so happened to start after 911... funny thing about that... 911 happens now I'm overly paranoid... hmmm... I think the city should call some mental health profesionals not the build code people.

      --
      I like things that are sweet and not things that are lame. --
    28. Re:I'm not a Californian by pintpusher · · Score: 1

      IIRC there was a CHiPs episode about that -- glass delivery truck that reflected light into the eyes of freeway drivers. Amazing 20+ car pile-up and a cop in the ditch. man those were the days.

      --
      man, I feel like mold.
    29. Re:I'm not a Californian by RumpledElf · · Score: 1

      I had a house made entirely from corrugated galvanised iron, with metal flyscreens on the windows and security doors, and I had no reception whatsoever inside - tv, phone, radio, you name it. Had to use outdoor aerials for everything.

      --
      An Australian MMORPG under development - http://restlessworld.hidden-waters.com
    30. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some neighbours are just not interested in talking. Some people are also bastards, my neighbour built his house using the divider wall, and didn't pay us one bit (we had built it, so he must pay us; we could sue, but we're just hoping he chokes on a pretzel. Also, he made a small dyke with cement in the gutter, so leaves don't bother him, of course that means a lot of extra water on hours side... Some people don't even deserve to be shot, a bullet is too much.

    31. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't worry, their 1-legged grandma that was living in the lean-to was getting annoying anyway. they just needed an excuse to kick her to the curb!

      sorry grandma. yeah. code violations. welp, seeyalater...

    32. Re:I'm not a Californian by kberg108 · · Score: 0

      it's not a joke. watch the video file attached to the article. it's pretty funny.

      --
      I like things that are sweet and not things that are lame. --
    33. Re:I'm not a Californian by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Any other state and they'd merely be shunned by their neighbors and harrassed by annoying teenagers.

      Where the hell do you live? I want to move there so I can quit being harassed by my homeowners' association for having my antenna in the "wrong place". It was "hurting the value of their investment", not that the mandated ugly gray and brown houses are all that great anyway.

      Anywhere where there are no associations has to be a better place to live than here, even if the house isn't a "great investment" without a bunch of old biddies who take hundreds of dollars of my money then can't even afford to pay a bored neighborhood kid $20 to mow the yard for the old woman down the street that they've been harassing as well.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    34. Re:I'm not a Californian by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      You encounter many homes covered in sheet aluminum, installed by the local whackjob?

    35. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      on the other hand, strangulation is cheap. and fun, too!

    36. Re:I'm not a Californian by jonwil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      With more and more people putting in things like Home Theater Rooms (where having natural light comming in is actually undesirable), how come polititians and regulators wont change the building codes to allow you to have rooms without natural light?

    37. Re:I'm not a Californian by kylemonger · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not health code, fascist community code, as in "no trucks up on blocks in your front yard", "no neon Looney Tunes paint job for your house", "no satellite dish antennas", "no running a bordello in a residential neighborhood", that sort of thing.

    38. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the fence is really important to him you might be able to work out a deal to your own financial gain.

      Yeah great sig there too... I don't recall Jesus teaching "Bribe your neighbor".

    39. Re:I'm not a Californian by name773 · · Score: 1

      does anyone honestly believe that?

    40. Re:I'm not a Californian by Velox_SwiftFox · · Score: 2, Funny

      Besides, the local neighborhood association specifies cedar shingles and can't stand the idea that the tin-covered house is the only one likely to be left standing if there is a nearby brushfire.

    41. Re:I'm not a Californian by Cobralisk · · Score: 1

      True, kinda sucks for text-browsers though.

      --
      Waiting for ad.doubleclick.net...
    42. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      "no trucks up on blocks in your front yard"
      I'm cool with that. They're ugly anyway
      "no neon Looney Tunes paint job for your house"
      Not a problem. Couldn't handle it anyway
      "no satellite dish antennas"
      Meh. Those little DirectTV dishes are fine attached to the back of your house. No big loss.
      "no running a bordello in a residential neighborhood"
      Who the hell do they think they are! To arms, to arms!
    43. Re:I'm not a Californian by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      I love when people get all pissy without RTFA or in this case watching the video (WTFV).

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    44. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ummm, did you just suggest that people extort money out of their neighbors in exchange for not ratting them out to the cops for their illicit home improvement projects?

    45. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The health code they are refering is most likely one for mental health, this looks very schizophrenic.

    46. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every Scientist or Dicoverer is first called mad or at least not believed. Maybe this family will open our eyes to undetetcted radition waves in colonies.
      Timi
      http://www.thisismyindia.com/>This is My India

    47. Re:I'm not a Californian by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Actually I'd think the people that vote for liberals are the ones who put up tin foil. :)

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    48. Re:I'm not a Californian by Ponzicar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Aluminum siding. 'Nuff said.

    49. Re:I'm not a Californian by lightningrod220 · · Score: 1

      This is an example of what beer can do to a guy's brain. I especially like the part about the back yard up in flames, and the grill on the back deck. Stuuuuupid.

    50. Re:I'm not a Californian by Chasuk · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I also believe in freedom, but not unlimited freedom. There are no absolutes (except for this one). By making your property look like an eyesore, you are negatively impacting my pocketbook.

    51. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great, except this isn't alumnium foil. It's corregated metal, like what you use on deck/shed roofs. Try having a little of that flying at you during one of Sacramento's more recent F0 tornados.

    52. Re:I'm not a Californian by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

      Maybe they read this article.

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    53. Re:I'm not a Californian by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

      Dang. This one works.

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    54. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because Sacramento is prone to high winds during storms (even has its share of small tornados). The metal sheets did not appear to be properly secured to the house, just propped up outside of it. It's a violation of building codes. No one wants pieces of metal falling on them just because their neighbors couldn't be bothered to put on proper metal siding.

    55. Re:I'm not a Californian by ThePromenader · · Score: 1
      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    56. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aajmskd alks wjhg poqipo mk jhwwr

    57. Re:I'm not a Californian by friedo · · Score: 1

      Heheheh. You have a very short memory.

    58. Re:I'm not a Californian by imsabbel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Im sure when hit by lighning it will make a really nice lightshow, btw.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    59. Re:I'm not a Californian by rjshields · · Score: 1

      The should have used radio shield paint instead.

      --
      In this world nothing is certain but death, taxes and flawed car analogies.
    60. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The image verification here on Slashdot when you post a comment.

    61. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Only on /. would someone give a sensible and informative post on how to build a tinfoil hat house.

    62. Re:I'm not a Californian by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1
      Why can't they be fascist about the butt-ugly McMansions on postag stamp-sized lots?

      Why can't they be fascist about the fire code? Fire's part of the ecology there in California, yet you'd think you were in rainy Switzerland from all the wood shingles on the roof and incendiary foliage up against the wall of the house.

      --
      Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    63. Re:I'm not a Californian by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 3, Insightful
      how come polititians and regulators wont change the building codes to allow you to have rooms without natural light?
      Because then landlords will rent out rooms without natural light. There is also health and safety issues. With a window, you can theoretically get fresh air or escaping a fire or after an earthquake.
      --
      Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    64. Re:I'm not a Californian by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1
      Your confusing liberals with facists .
      lib·er·al P Pronunciation Key (lbr-l, lbrl)
      adj.
      Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
      Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
      Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
      Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
      Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
      Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
      Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
      Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
      Archaic. Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
      Obsolete. Morally unrestrained; licentious.
      Ofcourse i see a great number of the supposed liberals also seem to have no clue what being a liberal is about either .
      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    65. Re:I'm not a Californian by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1
      Only if you are planning on selling ASAP. Otherwise the eyesore is lowering your taxes by lowering the 'value' of the property.

      Down the street from my elementary school was an old house that hadn't been painted in decades nor had the yard been maintained. Apparently the old crank who lived there got nailed by a major tax increase weeks after he painted it. When he complained and tried to appeal, the administration claimed that the taxes reflected the improvements.

      --
      Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    66. Re:I'm not a Californian by black_rock · · Score: 1

      We're your antennae inside the house or outside? If they were outside then there were nothing to stop radio waves from reaching them, were there.

    67. Re:I'm not a Californian by halleluja · · Score: 1
      It's stupid. It's ugly. But why in the fuck is it illegal?

      Blocking Wall-Mart subliminal messaging undermines our freedom to shop anywhere which is acknowledged to be a threat to modern society.

    68. Re:I'm not a Californian by dinkster · · Score: 1

      Its sad how if you don't agree with one way of thinking your automatically tagged as the complete opposite. If not liberal then crazy religeous nut case, if not religeous, then ignorant liberal.

    69. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi Timi,

      Please put a bullet in your head.

      Thanks,

      -Mgmt

    70. Re:I'm not a Californian by gnu-sucks · · Score: 1

      That, or its an example of one of those 'busybody' neighborhood patrol persons. You know, the type that take pictures of your house, call the police whenever you have a party, can't stand the sight of nails, wood, or bricks...

      I understand some of his fustration, but most of it is uncalled for, and an obvious sign of obsession.

    71. Re:I'm not a Californian by Robmonster · · Score: 0, Redundant

      It'll be your business when no-one wants to buy your house due to the wacky paintjob of your neighbours.

      --
      I have no sig yet I must scream.
    72. Re:I'm not a Californian by rikkards · · Score: 1

      True it is the polite thing to do only if your neighbours respect you back. However if you have neighbours who even if you politely ask them to turn down the volume at 1:00AM will continue partying like it is New Years every weekend, it isn't worth it. Call the cops and have them shut it down. Enough weekend parties ruined and they party elsewhere.

      I usually let the housewarming or typical special day (i.e New Years, Canada Day, etc) parties go as they are reasons to celebrate. But if it becomes a regular thing, my tolerance drops.

    73. Re:I'm not a Californian by Teddy+Beartuzzi · · Score: 1
      Mait Team.

      I only saw around four episodes of CHiPS in 1979, but for some reason that episode and the title is burned into my mind.

      Yes, I'm a strange little man. :)

    74. Re:I'm not a Californian by rikkards · · Score: 1

      Heh. Kanata which is a suburb of Ottawa Canada had some really stupid bylaws. i.e
      1. No painting your house unusual colours.
      2. No wash lines in your front or back yard
      3. No Tree houses
      4. No working on your car in your driveway (not the car on blocks issue just working on it)

      There were a whole bunch but I believe a lot of them have been thrown out since Kanata was made part of Ottawa.

    75. Re:I'm not a Californian by Gary+Destruction · · Score: 1

      For one thing, it can be severely blinding when the sun hit is it.

    76. Re:I'm not a Californian by technothrasher · · Score: 1
      "no satellite dish antennas"


      That one won't fly, no matter how badly they want it. It's illegal.

    77. Re:I'm not a Californian by spj524 · · Score: 1

      Thats funny... You can clearly see a satellite dish antenna in the picture.

    78. Re:I'm not a Californian by RandomJoe · · Score: 1

      That's why I made damn sure there was no HOA, and no CCRs, when I bought my house.

      My sister's family bought a house in a "historical" neighborhood. They had to ask permission to put a swing set in the back yard for their kids! They were given permission, provided it was hidden by the fence and couldn't be seen from the street...

      A friend at work found out the hard way about HOAs. He didn't even think to ask if there was one in the new subdivision he bought into. He was thrilled when the first several-hundred dollar bill showed up. And he was told he couldn't keep his trash cans on the side of the house. And he had to keep the lawn mowed "just right". And...

      I'm a ham radio operator, so of course like putting up "big, ugly" (to who? I think they're beautiful! ;) antennas.

      So the first words I said to the realtor helping me look at houses was "NO HOA!"

    79. Re:I'm not a Californian by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

      we called the housing code people who came and told them to tear it down.

      Aha.. so _you're_ the bastards that called five-O. I'm opening the microwave door right now and aiming it at your house.

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    80. Re:I'm not a Californian by pla · · Score: 1

      btw, anyone else think this image verification thing is annoying?

      Ummm... You posted that under your own account. If you actually log in, you can ignore the image verification box, you only need that if you want to post anonymously.

    81. Re:I'm not a Californian by benzapp · · Score: 1

      Political liberalism necessarily involves laws and more laws in the United States and Canada. In Europe, liberalism is a different story.

      That said, fascism really has little to do with the quantity or type of laws. It is nothing more than anti-democracy. Not everyone believes that the future of a given country should be decided by a popularity contest.

      Given how most people in my office are more concerned with who is going to win American Idol than the next election, there might be some truth to the fascit political argument.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    82. Re:I'm not a Californian by signifying+nothing · · Score: 1
      If the fence is really important to him you might be able to work out a deal to your own financial gain.

      This is a really bad idea. If you are even considering it, make sure you get a contract drawn up by a property lawyer. Otherwise you may find your house impossible to sell or mortgage.

      Also, if you do talk to your neighbour before calling in the law, make sure you do not say anything that could be interpreted as giving consent, even temporarily.

      Granting permission and then lying about it to mortgage companies and potential purchasers will normally work out OK, but if it goes wrong the potential liability could be enormous - why take the risk?

    83. Re:I'm not a Californian by m50d · · Score: 1

      Crapflooding is a part of slashdot culture, and the editors and mod system handle it fine. Plus the images are being automatically generated, so surely they can be automatically recognised?

      --
      I am trolling
    84. Re:I'm not a Californian by eht · · Score: 1

      That's all right, soon in California you won't be able to plug in a toaster or a blender, or run speaker wires without a permit.

    85. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      > you have the ethical responsibilty to go to your friend/opponent before seeking
      > legal protection.

      What, you can just decide what it's ethical for other people to do now? It's no longer a case for the individual to decide? Perhaps you'd like to clear up a few other issues, some of which have been undecided for some time now:

      The right to abortion (in both rape and contraception failure cases)
      Recreational use of drugs (such as cannabis, tobacco and alcohol)
      The use of landmines in war
      Eating animals
      The use of animals to test drugs (for developing cures for cancer, as well as testing new cosmetic)

    86. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Liberals that want to force everyone to conform to their way of life and remove any trace of individualism from society?

      Do you know what a liberal is? The name gives a clue. It comes from the same root as "liberty". A liberal is someone who believes people should have freedom to choose what they want.

      That's why liberals support things like gay marriage and abortion rights, while conservatives oppose them.

      Your confusion probably arises from the perception that liberal means left-wing. This is not true. Libertarianism is an example of a right-wing liberal philosophy. Communism is an example of a left-wing philosophy that is not liberal.

      Please try to use words with their proper meanings. It makes it much easier for people to work out what you're saying.

    87. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh really? I was unaware that you want to move there so you can quit being harassed by your homeowners' association for having my antenna in the "wrong place".

      Sorry mate, just testing out the image verification feature, but I have nothing to contribute.

    88. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does harm you if it drops your property value by tens of thousands of dollars.

    89. Re:I'm not a Californian by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Yes fascism may have been a slight hyperbole on my part , But the things i see often ascribed to liberalism in the States to me seem far more authoritarian than liberal .Though looking at some of the supposed liberal laws that get passed there is a case for the fact they are rather opresive and dictatorial

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    90. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well there is a trade-off with moving outside of an area with an HOA. Unless you can afford to buy enough land to seclude yourself, the nice house you buy or build will be surrounded by trailers and shacks and all sorts of junk. Some people may not care, but most don't want to build their 'dream home' in the middle of what looks like a garbage dump.

    91. Re:I'm not a Californian by Sindri · · Score: 1

      It being illegal just proves they are after them!

    92. Re:I'm not a Californian by General+Wesc · · Score: 1

      > It's no longer a case for the individual to decide?
      It was never the case for the individual to decide. Moral relativism is false.

      You seem to conflate the ability to know what's right/wrong with what is right/wrong. Why? Do you do this with everythingm, or just morality?

    93. Re:I'm not a Californian by CarrionBird · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your property value is your problem.

      --
      Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
    94. Re:I'm not a Californian by borkus · · Score: 1

      "no running a bordello in a residential neighborhood"
      I think you need zoning for light commercial for a boredello - as well as a piano player with a garter on one arm.

    95. Re:I'm not a Californian by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      What image verification?

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    96. Re:I'm not a Californian by Brian+Esser · · Score: 1

      Thats absolsolutely idiotic. Only in California could something like that fly.

    97. Re:I'm not a Californian by zero_offset · · Score: 1

      I know you're joking, but in actuality mixed metal and wood structures are a Very Bad Thing. The metal tends to heat and deform so if it's structural, the whole building is shot. It also retains heat really well, so anything non-flammable has a better chance of either catching fire, or is harder to put out. Or at least, so my friend (who used to be a homebuilder himself) told me when I inquired about metal framing for my new house.

      --

      Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005

    98. Re:I'm not a Californian by justins · · Score: 1
      How can they be brought up on Misdemeanor charges for this?

      Would you rather they were "brought up" on a felony charge? Dumb cunt.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    99. Re:I'm not a Californian by xtracto · · Score: 1

      What image verification are you talking about?? is it on slashdot?? I ask you because I read before someone complaning about some kind of verification on slashdot when posting but, I do not find it, I just reply to and post as usual.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    100. Re:I'm not a Californian by stanleypane · · Score: 1

      Far too much energy worrying about what others are doing? Hrmmm... Perhaps people get involved because it has a direct effect on them? Some people, believe it or not, live in neighborhoods that hold good property value and don't wish their neighbors to spoil that.

      I live in a neighborhood of rowhomes/townhomes (whatever you want to call them). The parking is rather, well... there isn't any on some days. You have to walk a couple blocks (5 minutes) to your house after parking. Some wise ass decided to spray paint the following in the middle of the street:

      "Please park extra cars at the end of the street."

      When the entire neighborhood was up in arms bitching at this guy and trying to get him fined, he just couldn't understand why. It's really quite simple. People put alot of money into their homes and they don't want people fscking with their property value.

      Albeit this isn't really comparable, since the person in the article didn't mess with the public roadway, he nonetheless is ruining the neighborhood.

    101. Re:I'm not a Californian by nolife · · Score: 1

      I can't remember what my supervisor told me to do this morning when I got in but I remember that episode of CHiPs that aired over 25 years ago.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    102. Re:I'm not a Californian by QMO · · Score: 1

      I own a house.
      I don't live in that house, because I moved for omployment.
      I would like to sell the house.
      If my neighbors (really my neightbos' landlords) kept their houses nice my house would already be sold.
      So, the lack of enforceable appearance standards in my neighborhood has cost me at least $6000 over the past few months.

      "No man is an island." - John Donne

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    103. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are plenty of places without restrictive covenants where you can live in a trailer painted to look like festering boils. The thing is that those places aren't very expensive because there isn't a lot of demand for them.

    104. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Therein lies the fundamental problem with libertarianism - meddlesome preferences. People calling themselves "libertarian" don't pay enough attention to the fact that:

      1. Things you do might affect others both negatively and positively.
      2. People might have different opinions on those externalities.

      There is no such thing as true freedom. If my neighbour painted his house polkadots, I would sue him for devaluing my house.

    105. Re:I'm not a Californian by BHearsum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So anytime anydoes something to impact your property value you're going to tell them to stop it? That's fucking stupid. It is THEIR property, unless they are doing something negative directly to yours, you have no grounds whatsoever to sue them.

      I have a friend who lives in a very high class neighborhood, inherited the house. She has a tough time paying the bills because property taxes are so high. I think she should sue all the neighbors for keeping their houses and property in such great condition -- it's causing a negative impact on her pocket book.

    106. Re:I'm not a Californian by Milican · · Score: 1, Informative

      Since the site is having trouble I have coralized it.

      For those who don't know, coralizing is a lighting fast method of mirroring a site. Click here to find out more details.

      JOhn

    107. Re:I'm not a Californian by QMO · · Score: 1

      "many liberals stance in conforming is to shun it"

      In theory.
      In practice that hasn't proven to be so.
      One good example is Political Correctness.
      PC is all about conformity and is a very hefty source of liberal political power.
      (PC is cleverly marketed to disguise the conformity and inhibition of freedom of speech that it requires.)

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    108. Re:I'm not a Californian by ryanvm · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I believe in freedom. If my neighbors want to paint their house with pink polka-dots then so be it, none of my buisness.

      The problem is that a neighbor that does that will lower property values around him, thereby *directly* affecting the livelihood of those nearby.

      I have a more practical definition of freedom. You can do whatever you want as long as it does not affect me.

    109. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Or New Jersey...

      It's worse than California, I tell ya!

      Why so many tolls? They waste fuel and cause massive delays. Why not eliminate all the toll booths and raise the gasoline tax a little?

      Why can't I pump my own gas? Every idiot who pumps my gas lets my gas cap hang after they open it so it bangs into my car.

    110. Re:I'm not a Californian by QMO · · Score: 1

      "What, you can just decide what it's ethical for other people to do now?"

      So, are you deciding for him that it's not ethical for him to decide what is ethical for others?

      Moral relativism is such an illogical merry-go-round.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    111. Re:I'm not a Californian by Evro · · Score: 1

      Because it's unsafe? A room with no windows is unsafe. Think about fires and such.

      Whether the government should force people not to risk their lives is another debate... if you want to lock yourself in a completely isolated room with thousands of watts of electricity passing through it... I say do it!

      --
      rooooar
    112. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      > You seem to conflate the ability to know what's right/wrong with what is
      > right/wrong.

      Answer the question! Is abortion morally acceptable, or is it murder?

      > Why? Do you do this with everythingm, or just morality?

      Do you evade answering all questions, or just the ones where you don't have a satisfactory answer?

    113. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree with you, the counter argument is that you are ruining your neighbor's property value. It's simply opinion whether that's a case of their freedom infringing on other people's. If I owned a house, I'm sure I'd say that it is.

      But am I then forbidden to breath oxygen that you otherwise had a claim on? The truth lies abstractly in between.

    114. Re:I'm not a Californian by bigbigbison · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What a busy body. Except for the parties, I don't know what this guy is complaining about. He complains about the neighbor's mailbox (it's a frickin' mail box, get over it) and then when the neighbor redoes it, all he can do is complain "he can't put the flag down!" Oh no! "There's a statue on it!" whoopie. And what's the deal with "stolen 2x4's" and "stolen bricks?" How the hell does he know if the neighbor stole the stuff or not? Where the hell would you steal that many bricks anyway?

      Most of the stuff the guy is complaining about is in the back yard. Maybe if he wasn't so busy looking in teh neighbor's back yard, this stuff wouldn't bother him. I wonder why that guy decided to move? It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that his neigbor is an asshole, would it???

      --
      http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
    115. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      > So, are you deciding for him that it's not ethical for him to decide what is
      > ethical for others?
      > Moral relativism is such an illogical merry-go-round.

      So abortion is objectively right...or wrong? Please try and avoid using the phrase `moral relativism` this time - it never seems to help solve any problem I've seen it used it - rather, it's used as some sort of stick with which to beat the party which is suggesting that something isn't wrong even though it's unpopular.

    116. Re:I'm not a Californian by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      No, the OP was just confusing ethics and courtesy.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    117. Re:I'm not a Californian by pogle · · Score: 1

      Hmm...

      I don't see any image verification.

      --
      http://thechubbyferret.net - Ferret pictures and informative links.
    118. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > So, are you deciding for him that it's not ethical for him to decide what is
      > ethical for others?

      Does a scientific theory decide for others what is possible, or does it just so what is likely to be possible?

    119. Re:I'm not a Californian by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      You also have to consider what happens when the other neighbour calls the police and you're the only face they've seen.

      If you don't already know them, call the police. It's not worth it.

    120. Re:I'm not a Californian by Kombat · · Score: 1

      Your property value is your problem.

      Part of the services the municipality provides in exchange for paying taxes is enforcing rules that the neighborhood, as a democracy, has agreed they want everyone to abide by, in order to preserve each others' property values. If you don't like it, simply leave. But if I'm paying taxes, I expect the city to make sure my neighbors aren't adversely affecting my own home's resale value. People who resent these restrictions are "free" to buy somewhere else, where such rules don't exist. But they are not "free" to come into my neighborhood and flaunt the rules which my neighbors and I have decided (through a free and open process) that we want enforced, to keep our neighborhood clean, safe, and stable.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    121. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wrong
      so is murder, adultery, theft, and unkindness.
      Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

    122. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scientific theory doesn't decide, it describes.

    123. Re:I'm not a Californian by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      "Because then landlords will rent out rooms without natural light."

      Not if you have a law that prohibits apartment complexes from doing so. An apartment is still a business. Homeowners can still do what they want then.

      "There is also health and safety issues."

      If it's not going to affect the health and safety of my neighbors, then the govt has no business dictating petty nonsense like this.

    124. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      >wrong
      >so is murder, adultery, theft, and unkindness.

      Murder is wrong, but is abortion murder?

      > Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

      My feelings are irrelevant.

    125. Re:I'm not a Californian by mikael · · Score: 1

      Maybe not aluminum foil, but falling masonry and building materials.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    126. Re:I'm not a Californian by tgd · · Score: 1

      Spoken like someone who doesn't own a house with a mortgage in which its actually useful if your property value stays above what you owe.

      If some nutjobs drive down house prices in a neighborhood causing 3-4 other people to be upside down on their mortgage and the banks foreclose on them, how is that not harming others?

      Community rules and building codes exist for a reason, and its not to take away your rights. Its to protect the rights and safety of everyone else.

    127. Re:I'm not a Californian by FuturePastNow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I live in a neighborhood without a HOA. I'm pretty sure none of my neighbors live in shacks or trailers. Looks out the window...nope. No junk, either. Just fresh-cut grass and parked minivans. What fuckwad modded you insightful?

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    128. Re:I'm not a Californian by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Yes, and thus you have every right to be PISSED OFF when some dumb fuck negatively impacts _your_ property value.

      See how that strings together into the original point?

      --
      No Comment.
    129. Re:I'm not a Californian by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2, Insightful
      A room with no windows is unsafe.

      Closet. Basement. Commercial theatre. Attic. Having multiple exits is good, but having windows is unnecessary.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    130. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And any day some nut could move in to your neighborhood and park his trailer in his yard and paint his house blue and pink and you couldn't do shit but watch your mortgage turn upside down.

    131. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This crapflooding was a tad bit excessive, though-- some script was taking comments from one article, and posting it in another. Got darn annoying...

    132. Re:I'm not a Californian by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      For at least 40 years, liberal has meant "moderately leftist" in the context of politics in the U.S..

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    133. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abortion is a wonderful thing. It is a womans right, as decided by the highest court in America. Since it is a right, then it is right.

      Or are you one of those nut jobs that want to reverse roe vs. wade?

    134. Re:I'm not a Californian by jdaomteys · · Score: 1

      So most houses are illegal then you're saying, with their closets and bathrooms and basements (which don't need a window unless there's a bedroom)?

    135. Re:I'm not a Californian by Morlark · · Score: 1
      So first you criticise one person for something, then you criticise someone else for not answering a question that was not directed at them in the first place?

      > Answer the question!

      No! Your question is meaningless in the context of this discussion.

      > Do you evade answering all questions, or just the ones where you don't have a satisfactory answer?

      Only the ones where you don't have a satisfactory question.

      --
      Santa's suicide mission go!
    136. Re:I'm not a Californian by Rufus88 · · Score: 1

      Bribing your neighbor would result in his financial gain. What we seem to be talking about here is blackmailing your neighbor.

    137. Re:I'm not a Californian by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Well.. I may have a window up here on the 6th floor but I do not think it is a safe exit.

      I go to specific steps to shut all light out of my bedroom. I sleep much better in a completely dark room.

      Next thing you know, the zoning boards will prohibit using jpxtpvr in slashdot posts!

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    138. Re:I'm not a Californian by CustomDesigned · · Score: 1
      Answer the question! Is abortion morally acceptable, or is it murder?

      It is murder.

      > You seem to conflate the ability to know what's right/wrong with what is
      > right/wrong.
      Do you evade answering all questions, or just the ones where you don't have a satisfactory answer?

      Sometimes the answer can be "I don't know." It is possible that something can be wrong, but the people involved don't know that it is. That is why the Apostle Paul says "the law brings death". When you didn't know it was wrong, you had an excuse. When the law informs you of just how wrong what you are doing is, and you continue doing it, you are without excuse. If you didn't know anything about electricity, and stuck your primitive knife into an electrical outlet while exploring a house, your "shock" would be understandable. When you know about electricity, playing around with metal objects in sockets is just plain stupid. It is not the childs fault if a one year old gets into the paint cupboard. It is the teenaged childs fault if they decide to try sniffing glue despite repeated warnings about the destructive consequences.

      The law is good. Things are wrong because in the long term, sometimes a very long term, they are destructive and bring death. Sin is not sustainable (yes, environmental destruction is sin, and is specifically mentioned as such in Revelation). But the law brings spiritual death, because with knowledge comes responsibility, and some deep spiritual flaw in human nature makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to do all that we know is right. "There is pleasure in sin for a season." "There is a way that seems right to a man, but the end result is death."

      Sometimes, hostility to moral truth arises from conscience. You didn't know it was wrong, but you had a nagging feeling deep inside that something is not right. When you hear the law, you instinctively know that if you accepted what you hear as true, you would be responsible to stop what you are doing - and that would be very painful. So you fight like hell to reject what you hear as false, despite acknowledging it as true at some not quite conscious level.

    139. Re:I'm not a Californian by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      Why not just remove all of the siding, put stainless steel or tin sheeting, ground it all, and then nail the siding back on over the metal? The city would have no right to complain then I don't think.

    140. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Or are you one of those nut jobs that want to reverse roe vs. wade?

      Perhaps he's one of those nut jobs that expects other Slashdot readers to possess the basic reading comprehension skills needed to distinguish between:

      1) a question asking how we determine what is morally right or wrong
      and
      2) an assertion that abortion is wrong.

    141. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unkindness it wrong, feelings are relevant to kindness.
      murder is wrong.
      not accepting full responsibility for all consequenses of your actions (including unintended ones) is wrong.

    142. Re:I'm not a Californian by QMO · · Score: 1

      Legal right is not the same as moral right.
      I have a legal right to waste my life, but not a moral right.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    143. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      > When the law informs you of just how wrong what you are doing is, and you
      > continue doing it, you are without excuse.

      So the law determines what is morally right or wrong? So hiding Jews in Nazi germany is morally wrong?

      And to think that I'm the one being accused of moral relativism!

    144. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      > not accepting full responsibility for all consequenses of your actions
      > (including unintended ones) is wrong.

      So a rape victim must bring up the rapists child, rather than terminate the pregnancy, because...what? Where's the moral obligation there?

    145. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      > So first you criticise one person for something, then you criticise someone
      > else for not answering a question that was not directed at them in the first
      > place?

      I'm basically asking one question to anyone who wants to answer it.

      >> Do you evade answering all questions, or just the ones where you don't have a
      >> satisfactory answer?

      > Only the ones where you don't have a satisfactory question.

      It's a perfectly satisfactory question - what determines what is right and wrong.

    146. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long have you been a humorless redneck?

    147. Re:I'm not a Californian by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is absolutley nothing requiring natural light in every room. The only rooms required to have a window are bedrooms. Any other room in the house can be as closed off as you want it, you just can't call a 4 room house a 4 bedroom house unless all four rooms have a window. (Well, two exits actually, whether they are doors or windows or whatever.)

      bkr

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    148. Re:I'm not a Californian by egomaniac · · Score: 1

      The bricks and 2x4s were stolen from a nearby house that was under construction. He knows this because he watched the guy do it. Just because a partially-completed house has a pile of bricks and lumber in front of it doesn't mean "Hey guys, free building materials!"

      The brick mailbox is a poorly-constructed eyesore. Did you take a look at the pictures? Things like that really do affect property values in otherwise decent neighborhoods. And the fact that much of the stuff is in the back yard doesn't necessarily mean much -- my house's back yard is visible from the street.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    149. Re:I'm not a Californian by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      The only way that would ever affect you is if you can't pay your current mortgage or you try to sell your house and you can't. You can't be "upside down" on a mortgage for a house you plan to stay in that you can actually pay for. If you can't pay for it, your property value is the least of your worries.

      Of course, your point is still the same, some asshat can completely fuck up your property value, and that's not good. There should be serious limitations on the rules that can be made by HOAs though.

      bkr

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    150. Re:I'm not a Californian by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
      Spoken like an asshole.

      (Me == Homeowner for 6 years, no homeowners association, living inside the D.C. beltway doing WHATEVER THE FUCK I WANT.)

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    151. Re:I'm not a Californian by SpectreBlofeld · · Score: 1

      Windows can be unsafe. They are easier for criminals to break into than doors.

    152. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I hope these busybodies enjoy paying their property tax. Over the long stretch their property value is going up anyhow... I have no idea why they care so much about it short term.

    153. Re:I'm not a Californian by geekoid · · Score: 1

      well, if your friend wasn't infomed anout an HOA, they should go to court and fight it. If the realator new about it and didn't inform them, take action against the realator as well.
      OTOH, if the signed a document that tells them there is an HOA, well then your friend needs to learn to read what he signs.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    154. Re:I'm not a Californian by Penguinoflight · · Score: 1
      The right to abortion (in both rape and contraception failure cases) Recreational use of drugs (such as cannabis, tobacco and alcohol) The use of landmines in war Eating animals The use of animals to test drugs (for developing cures for cancer, as well as testing new cosmetic)


      With the exception of rape, every one of the activities you mentioned do not involve others. When your behavior can cause others trouble it should be handled under ethics, which doesn't really dictate what you can do, only the ways in which you can do it. So I lied, landmines could also be considered an ethical problem.. it doesn't matter, there are no rules in war.
      --
      "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
      1 John 4:14
    155. Re:I'm not a Californian by Evro · · Score: 1

      You just listed several places in which it is illegal to live. Most basement "apartments" are illegal because the windows are too small. You proved my point.

      --
      rooooar
    156. Re:I'm not a Californian by dolphinlover · · Score: 1

      I get a visual confirmation image and box. In trying to submit a post while logged in and not as an AC, I get "Wrong image text, try again You failed to confirm you are a human. Please double-check the 7-letter image and make sure you typed in what it says."

    157. Re:I'm not a Californian by dolphinlover · · Score: 1

      I recently started getting that when I go to reply to a post. I also recently started running a Tor server, so maybe Slashdot is simply trying to prevent abuse by people using anonymous proxies to access the site.

    158. Re:I'm not a Californian by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Where the hell do you live? I want to move there so I can quit being harassed by my homeowners' association for having my antenna in the "wrong place".

      You're probably already aware that your HOA can not enforce a ruling on the location of your antenna. That's covered by federal law. I've lived in two HOAs that attempted to do so, but it's completely unenforcable. Here's a neat little summary on the topic:
      http://www.ccfj.net/FCClaw.htm

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    159. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You just listed several places in which it is illegal to live.
      Just because you have a closet, basement, or attic in your home doesn't mean you live in it.
    160. Re:I'm not a Californian by deblau · · Score: 1
      I believe in freedom too. I'm going to buy the land next to your house and put up a sewage treatment plant. It's my land, why should I care if your land value drops, making you poor? Heck, I'll buy your land for pennies on the dollar, and that will give me a place to bury the leftover waste.

      In case you hadn't guessed, that's why we have zoning regulations. External housing codes work on the same principle. They're not structural, they're economic. Maybe you don't care if your neighbor paints his house polka-dots, but I bet his neighbor on the other side does.

      --
      This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
    161. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a ham radio operator, so of course like putting up "big, ugly" (to who? I think they're beautiful! ;) antennas.

      What really pisses me off is that the FCC has established time and time again that they are the ONLY organization in the country who can tell you what you can or cannot do with an antenna. And yet, HOAs continue to threaten to sue people over them across the country.

      I'm tempted to write a letter to the HOA and deliver copies door-to-door outlining the (several) court and FCC decisions on the issue, and stating that if I ever receive another complaint about ANYTHING from the HOA, if its not backed up with a letter from a lawyer explaining exactly on what grounds they have to demand me to do whatever they want, I WILL report them to the FCC and then file extortion charges over the antenna issue.

    162. Re:I'm not a Californian by plover · · Score: 1
      Ahh. That's only if you're not logged in when you post. Nope, doesn't bother me at all. Keeps the stupid troll posters from scripting their fecal-ware.

      If you don't like it, feel free to log in. You'll dodge it completely.

      --
      John
    163. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      most don't want to build their 'dream home'

      If by "dream home" you mean "investment that they hope they can make money on". My dream home would probably never be accepted by an HOA anywhere, since it would far outclass the cut and paste homes shat out into poorly designed subdivisions by underpaid illegal immigrants these days. Have you ever watched these things be built? Insulation exposed to the rain for weeks while they eventually get around to putting walls up... and people wonder why we get mold problems here. Roofs that look fine on the inside, but climb into your attic and none of the joints are correct, and they all leak. My current house has studs in interior walls every 24 inches.

      But they're dirt cheap to build, and whoever buys them first can overlook the flaws until they sell the house off to a sucker like me for a profit.

    164. Re:I'm not a Californian by Changa_MC · · Score: 1
      He didn't make mention of morality, only ethics.

      It's to your benefit, and the benefit of all society really, to talk to your neighbours before you call the cops over something non-threatening.

      Therefore, it's the ethical thing to do.

      --
      Changa hates change.
    165. Re:I'm not a Californian by General+Wesc · · Score: 1

      > Answer the question! Is abortion morally acceptable, or is it murder?

      No, see, we have a problem here:

      > > You seem to conflate the ability to know what's right/wrong with what is
      > > right/wrong.

      What I was trying to say was that you're conflating them and you should not, because they are quite different. The answer to the question is 'I don't know'. Your conclusion seems to be 'Therefore, there is no fact of the matter'. That's what I object to.

      However, I think we're getting all screwed up here. I'm not saying abortion (or whatever) is moral (or not) in every situation. I'm simply saying that once the situation is pinned down, it's not up to any person as to whether it's right or wrong. But that's merely a materr of categorisation. What is morally relevant is not relative. I'm not sure if this is contrary to what you meant to say, but you comment about the individual deciding suggested otherwise to me. The answer may vary from individual to individual for many moral questions (the little girl should not run into the house to save the 200KG man; the fireman perhaps should), but what they don't get to decide what the moral course of action is and we just all say 'well, if that's what you think, then that's what it is'.

      Sorry for my lack of clarity in my original reply. (And in advance for my lack of clarity in this post. :-)

    166. Re:I'm not a Californian by m50d · · Score: 1

      I don't know, it was kinda funny. I can imagine an AI starting out that way.

      --
      I am trolling
    167. Re:I'm not a Californian by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      It's not just about taxes. I buy a house in a particular neighborhood not only because I like the house, but because I like living in that neighborhood. Without controls, that neighborhood could seriously deteriorate in a short amount of time. An obnoxious neighbor, or one turning his home into an eyesore, makes me want to move.

      Except I can't move now, because I owe $50k more on the house than it's worth. I can sell it, but I'll still have to make payments on it for another 10 years if I do. Sure, my taxes are a little lower, but I don't want to live there anymore, and now I can't afford to leave.

    168. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I said "not accepting full responsibility for all consequenses of your actions (including unintended ones) is wrong."

      Your response suggests that the rape victim has responsibility for the rape, which I don't believe. Perhaps you didn't understand that I meant unintended consequenses.

      Your response also implies that adoption is not an option.

    169. Re:I'm not a Californian by pla · · Score: 1

      In trying to submit a post while logged in and not as an AC

      Okay, strange indeed! I have yet to bother filling in the verification box, and have posted at least four or five times (and again with this post) without a problem.

      Perhaps they only care about it from certain IP ranges? That would (at least partially) explain why Slashdot has taken to portscanning people recently... Though exactly what they hope to find, or how they tie it in with image verification, I have no idea.

      Wierd.

    170. Re:I'm not a Californian by bigbigbison · · Score: 1

      Not to get into a big flame war or anything, but yes, I looked at the pictures. Big deal. If you are worried about property values, then maybe you should live somewhere where there aren't neighbors.
      For my money, nothing would lower property value more than an nosey neighbor.
      If I were living next to the guy who made that webpage I would do everything I could to make his life miserable.

      --
      http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
    171. Re:I'm not a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My house has aluminum siding painted a tasteful color like all the other houses in my neighborhood. All I need is a tin or copper roof to protect me from the satellites.

    172. Re:I'm not a Californian by CustomDesigned · · Score: 1
      So the law determines what is morally right or wrong? So hiding Jews in Nazi germany is morally wrong?

      Good catch! But I suspect you knew that I was referring to law in the "Ten Commandments" (laws given by Divine revelation to instruct us on right and wrong) and "Natural Law" (referred to in the Bible as God "writing his law on our hearts", and by Justice Thomas as things universally known as right or wrong at a deep level) sense rather than the legal sense. The context of the quotations from Paul are the Mosaic Law in the Old Testament.

    173. Re:I'm not a Californian by Suicyco · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Man, what an asshole this guy is. He is obsessed with his neighbor, spies on him and all in all is a total jerk. Reminds me of the movie "the Burbs."

    174. Re:I'm not a Californian by rikkards · · Score: 1

      I agree. If you even think that they are going to ignore you. Call the cops. Then you have an easier case of plausible deniability

    175. Re:I'm not a Californian by Damvan · · Score: 1

      Because it is California? - Californian

    176. Re:I'm not a Californian by ResidntGeek · · Score: 1

      Why would I RTFA when I've already read the article's title? It clearly says "tinfoil".

      --
      ResidntGeek
    177. Re:I'm not a Californian by Damvan · · Score: 1

      Umm, what shit hole part of this country do you live in? So, unless prevented by an HOA, everyone turns their neighborhoods into garbage dumps? Move!

    178. Re:I'm not a Californian by Symbiot · · Score: 1

      OMG, you live in Reston Virginia don't you.

    179. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 1

      HOAs are viruses. Some homeowners 30-40 years ago created them and now you can't buy a house without agreeing to them. Hell I didn't even get a full copy of mine but HAD to sign it to buy my house. There is nobody in charge of them and no record of which houses are under the same HOA so you can't get together with your neighbors to change them. My in-laws have a provision in theirs that indicate that they have to have the interrior lights of their house off by 10:00pm.

      If a subject is SOO important that it is of public interest then make a LAW about it. At least laws must be overseen by a government body with a known procedure to dispute/change them. If you like HOAs then go life in North Korea. They are right up the communists alley.

    180. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 1

      Exactly!

    181. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 1

      Fine. So be it. His paitjob is noneof my buisness.

      Really if you want to think that way. I hold you responsible for planting flower because it raises my property value and therefore my taxes. Taxes are of MUCH more concern to citizens who LIVE in the neighborhood rather than someone trying to turn a buck. Why should I care how much you can sell your house for? You are leaving. If you are staying and think blue is nicer to look at than pink, come chat with me and I'm sure we can work something out.

      I'm well aware that the above opinion is a bit over the top. My point is if you are going to make a fuss over decreasing property value you can make the same fuss about raising the taxes or complaining that because I skydive and some skydivers get hurt it raises your insurance rates.

    182. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 1

      And your nice new addition with flower beds hurt me because it raises my property value and therefore my taxes. Taxes are of MUCH more interest to folks who LIVE in a neighborhood and arn't just trying to turn a buck. You are leaving, why should anyone care how much you get for your house. If you are staying and think blue looks better than pink, come talk to me, we can work something out.

      I can come up with a million ways you effect me. You might raise my health insurance rates by smoking. You might have 10 kids that I have to help pay to educate. Point is, it's none of my buisness if you smoke or have 10 kids even though it might impact me.

    183. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 1

      Fine then DO not smoke, it raises my health insurance.
      Do not own a sports car, it raises my auto insurance
      Do not have more than 1 child because i'll have to pay for it.
      Don't skydive, you die and effect my life insurance rates


      Devaluing a homes value doesn't directly implact those who LIVE nearby only those who sell and leave. Those who stay would actually benefit by a decrease in taxes. Oh... and you can't own a dog because he just might bark and wake me up hence directly *effecting me*. Really, Just mind your own buisness and increase the value of your home by making it nice and participating in your community/local school.

    184. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 1

      I own a house. If you are so close to being forclosed on that some aluminum paneling will collapse the value then you have other problems.

      If you plan to LIVE in your house you will be more negativly effected by an increase in value as it increases your taxes. If you plan to just buy the house, tell everyone else what to do to increase value and then sell to turn a profit, you really arn't part of the neighborhood then are you? If you dislike my pink house, come chat with me and I'm sure we can come up with a color that works.

    185. Re:I'm not a Californian by bgog · · Score: 1

      Oh, I almost forgot. (ways you can impact me are so easy to think of)

      What if I lived in Mississippi and those likely to by my house are white-supremeists (lot's o' them in mississippi) You'll need to leave if your black because that effects my property value. And if your not you better not bring any of your mexican friends over.

      Oh... and stop driving your car. People had to move to the city because of the smog.

    186. Re:I'm not a Californian by Threni · · Score: 1

      > laws given by Divine revelation to instruct us on right and wrong
      > "Natural Law" (referred to in the Bible as God "writing his law on our hearts"

      I see no moral reason to abide by the rules of someone elses religion. For one thing, there are so many - mutually exclusive - religions, unless the same universe was created by different deities at the same time. Many things we agree upon, such as the wrongness of theft, arbitrary murder, but others (rape, the death penalty, freedom to use/abuse ones own body in ways which don't hurt other people) are more contentious.

    187. Re:I'm not a Californian by khallow · · Score: 1
      I don't know, it was kinda funny. I can imagine an AI starting out that way.

      My imagination just isn't that good. It's not actually reacting to input, just working in a rigid environment and transfering data from one place to another.

  4. 1984 by babyhuey23 · · Score: 0

    wow, do this reminds me of 1984. It doesnt even really work that well does it?

  5. Wow... by Supernoma · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Bet that works great to keep the heat out of the house too...

    Maybe they could use that as a reason to keep it?

    --
    I'll Find You Peer, If It's The Last Thing I Do!!!!
    1. Re:Wow... by unitron · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually you can get insulation boards, such as Tuf-R, which are basically styrofoam or something similar with an aluminum foil skin, designed to be nailed directly to the outside of the wall studs before the siding goes on. As of several years ago they were looking into connecting the aluminum skin together, electrically speaking, and tieing it all to a grounding system to create a "Faraday cage" type shield.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    2. Re:Wow... by PsychicX · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those fools. Everybody knows that you can't just coat your house with it -- microwaves can still tunnel through. It's necessary to wear an actual hat at all times.

    3. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The walls on some types of single family homes are not very strong at all by themselves. Codes are different for every area but a normal wall on a split foyer home from the inside out consists of paint, 3/8 or 1/2 inch drywall, fiberglass insulation to fill the area between the 2x4's, a moisture barrier/foam insulation (like you described above) and then vinyl siding. Notice the absense of wood sheets? Some homes have a 2 4'x8' sheets of wood added on the corners for stabilty but some designs apparently do not even require that. A razor knife would allow you entry into the house in about 30 seconds provided you could fit between the 16 in spaced studs. Again codes are different for every area but I've seen many house like this.

    4. Re:Wow... by utexaspunk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      our house has aluminum siding and an aluminum roof. does a great job keeping the radio waves out, as evidenced by the really lousy cell phone reception inside.

    5. Re:Wow... by unitron · · Score: 2, Informative
      The walls on some types of single family homes are not very strong at all by themselves. Codes are different for every area but a normal wall on a split foyer home from the inside out consists of paint, 3/8 or 1/2 inch drywall, fiberglass insulation to fill the area between the 2x4's, a moisture barrier/foam insulation (like you described above) and then vinyl siding. Notice the absense of wood sheets? Some homes have a 2 4'x8' sheets of wood added on the corners for stabilty but some designs apparently do not even require that. A razor knife would allow you entry into the house in about 30 seconds provided you could fit between the 16 in spaced studs. Again codes are different for every area but I've seen many house like this.

      Actually, nailing on the drywall and outside sheathing contributes significantly to the strength and rigidity of a stud wall, provided that the recommend nailing schedule is adhered to, and code requirements reflect this.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    6. Re:Wow... by Sinner · · Score: 1

      I always thought American houses were crappily built, now I know why! Seems like Britain is the opposite... new houses here always seem to have an outer layer of brick *just for decoration*. It's the breeze blocks inside that actually hold the roof up. Maybe it's just because Britain is colder?

      --
      fish and pipes
    7. Re:Wow... by Mithrandir · · Score: 1

      I think it's the other way around - american houses are typically way over built. I come from Australia, and when I first saw these multilayer houses being built I wondered why on earth they were putting so much useless material on them. In oz, houses are basically just the pine 2x4 frame with steel diagonal strips put in for the diagonals. No extra sheeting inside or out - just straight gyprock (sheetrock to americans), maybe insulation, then brick on the outside. That's it. Houses stand up just as long.

      --
      Life is complete only for brief intervals in between toys or projects -- John Dalton
    8. Re:Wow... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

      In oz, houses are basically just the pine 2x4 frame with steel diagonal strips put in for the diagonals.

      I'm not sure which part of oz you're from, but here in Perth, most new houses are brick and tile. Likewise, I've seen some pretty lightweight constructions in parts of the US I've visited (Soundproofing? What's that for?).

      I think you'll find the prevalent housing type has more to do with local climate, property developers and material availability than the nation they're built in.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    9. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still not as bad as this guy:

      http://www.blacktable.com/elder040114.htm

      -jw

    10. Re:Wow... by lendude · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of when I was younger and travelled to Melbourne I was amazed to see all these houses being built with stud walls - my grandad was a builder here in Perth and I'd seen plenty of houses being built in Perth, but they were all double brick and tile/tin roof. I never imagined newer houses being anything but!

      --
      "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
    11. Re:Wow... by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Exactly,

      Don't forget that the USA consists of just about every type of climate from almost-rainforest swamps down in florida to desert to "your skin freezes in how many minutes?" and "It was a light snow, only a foot" up north.

      Where I live having more than one heating system is considered prudent.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    12. Re:Wow... by peterhoeg · · Score: 1

      Is that really the way that you make houses in America? Plaster and wood?

      Where I live (Denmark), houses from before the 80's are ALL brick walls (except some cheap apartment blocks made out of concrete), while newer house walls mostly are made of gas concrete slabs with bricks on the outside and plaster slabs on the inside.

      I am aware that brick houses in earth quake areas is obviously a really bad idea, but there's got to be something more sturdy than wood!

    13. Re:Wow... by hab136 · · Score: 1
      Is that really the way that you make houses in America? Plaster and wood?

      In the vast majority of homes, yes - especially in subdivisions built by a single builder.

      I am aware that brick houses in earth quake areas is obviously a really bad idea, but there's got to be something more sturdy than wood!

      There are better, stronger, more fire resistant, more wear resistant, better insulating materials. But there aren't any cheaper materials, which is why plaster and wood are used.

    14. Re:Wow... by bluGill · · Score: 1

      Wood is an excellent building material. It last for years, and is safer in a fire than most of the alternatives.

      Real wood becomes soft before it fails. So you have warning to get out (fire), or fix it (rot). Most alternatives tend to fail suddenly.

      Although cement seems long lasting, in practice it doesn't last longer than dry wood.

    15. Re:Wow... by peterhoeg · · Score: 1

      My current house is from 1903, which is not particularly old for houses here - it is a brick house. I don't even dare to think of what 102 years old house made of wood would look like - even less to live in!!

    16. Re:Wow... by unitron · · Score: 1
      Even brick homes tend to have a wooden stud wall behind the bricks, with an insulating sheathing in between. The roof trusses rest on and are attached to these stud walls. Metal strips are nailed to the studs on the outside and bent over to be embedded in the mortar between courses of bricks every few rows to tie the brick wall and the stud wall together. In the spaces between the studs fiberglass batts provide more insulation. If some form of plaster, usually in sheet form called drywall or sheetrock, is used for the interior wall it has approximately a gallon of water in every 4 square feet so it makes a good firestop.

      Just calling it plaster and wood doesn't really do it justice.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    17. Re:Wow... by bluGill · · Score: 1

      I have lived in a house built sometime in the 1880's. Other than the architecture being obviously the old there is no way to tell. We tore down one wall, and discovered that the studs still look and feel new.

      Wood rots, and is damaged by termites (and others) but not if you take care to prevent it.

      Brick tends to absorb water and then explode when it (the water) freezes. Most brick also decays over time. (There are millions of different brick recipes, each with good and bad points)

      Steel rusts and corrodes, particularly when wet.

      There is no perfect building material. Wood is no worse than the others.

    18. Re:Wow... by unitron · · Score: 1
      "...american houses are typically way over built."

      I'm guessing the first thing you think on hearing the word "hurricane" is "sports team name" and not "I wish the building codes had been more strict back when this house was built".

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  6. what's the date? by heller · · Score: 1

    For a minute there I thought I was looking at /. April 1st edition. . .

    1. Re:what's the date? by jericho4.0 · · Score: 1

      I thought I was reading fark, samzenpus seems to be a new editor.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    2. Re:what's the date? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      No, that would be these: 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998,/a>.

      Doesn't look like there are any hoaxes in the 1998 issue. But go ahead and take a trip down memory lane. :)

  7. well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I suppose they won't have any trouble with government mind readers...

  8. At least they're taking extra precautions... by viva_fourier · · Score: 5, Funny

    "The inside of the house is also covered with foil and the beds are covered with a foil-like material as well,"

    So, these are the guys that buy those "space blankets"...

    --
    and now back to the fallout shelter...
    1. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by benjamindees · · Score: 2, Informative

      Seriously, space blankets work great to keep out the day star. I put one on a couple of windows last year, and went most of the summer without air conditioning. I'd bet it was 10 degrees cooler than without.

      Those window films you buy at Home Depot are mostly the same stuff, but with a huge markup. And, though you can still kind of see through a space blanket, they block much more light than any of the commercial films.

      It's probably not economical to re-apply film every summer and remove it for the winter. And space blankets aren't reusable. But there used to be a site on the 'net that sold reusable films. I'd tell you what I think they are probably made of, but I haven't ordered my supply yet :)

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    2. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by adamfranco · · Score: 2, Informative

      So, these are the guys that buy those "space blankets"...

      Jests aside, those Mylar "space blankets" really do work. A few years ago a friend and I were climbing Ben Nevis in December in a [failed] attempt at some winter mountaineering. To make a long story short, our shitty mountaineering-club tent leaked through the top and bottom and we spent a very long (13-hour) night laying awake in 2 inches of water on the side of the mountain.

      Putting one of those Mylar blankets inside of my sleeping bag was the difference between shifting about uncomfortably all night and hypothermia.

      - Adam

      --
      "When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind." -- Bill Moyers
    3. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by SacredNaCl · · Score: 3, Informative

      The only problem with buying lots of mylar and mylar space blankets it the visit your get from the DEA after the hardware store reports you.

      They started offering cash rewards to store owners here to report that kind of activity, it doesn't matter that most people buying it aren't running a grow op.

      --
      Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
    4. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by CurlyG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Erm, you *are* kidding aren't you?

      'Space blankets' are AFAIK absolutely standard hiking/camping gear - you'd be an idiot to go away without one.

      They're compact, light, and they could save you from hypothermia.

      I mean yeah, you could concievably rig your grow-room up with mylar over the walls, but is it really going to help that much more than the white plastic sheeting used by most of the grow-rooms I've seen?

      Are you seriously suggesting that every hiker or camper who buys a space blanket in the US is going to get reported to the DEA? I don't live in the US, but if so, that is so ridiculous, so utterly pointless, so far out of control, that I'm just kind of staggered.

      --
      You know they call 'em fingers but I've never seen 'em fing. Oh, there they go.
    5. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by uvsc_wolverine · · Score: 1

      The parent post that you are replying didn't say that you get reported for buying one space blanket. He was talking about buying a LOT of space blankets - like enough to use instead of top sheets on all the beds in your house.

      --
      This space for rent...
    6. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by sessamoid · · Score: 1
      I mean yeah, you could concievably rig your grow-room up with mylar over the walls, but is it really going to help that much more than the white plastic sheeting used by most of the grow-rooms I've seen?

      The part you don't seem to understand is that it isn't necessarily to preserve heat that marijuana growers use mylar. It's to prevent excess heat from leaking out and showing up on overhead infrared cameras the DEA uses to find them. Buying once space blanket isn't going to attract attention. Buying 200 of them may be a a different matter entirely.

      --
      "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
    7. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by SacredNaCl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, unfotunately I am not joking. Many of the stores that sell garden lights openly tell you they share their customer list with law enforcement, a few of them have signs on the door. The police used to tail people who would go to the garden center and pull them over...etc That behavior got it institutionalized here, so they got the hardware stores involved and started offering cash to employees who would phone in on larger orders of certain supplies. Buying a mess of mylar at the hardware store is enough. Buying a single space age blanket probably isn't going to raise an eyebrow though.

      I'm not sure how much better the mylar is for that purpose, I've been told that it reflects different spectrums of light more effectively than just flat white paint, and slightly more effectively (total lumens) than the plastic sheeting. The plastic sheeting is lot cheaper.

      Of course just because they come to your door doesn't mean you have to let them in, but the mere fact that they are at the door because you made a purchase from the hardware store is very disturbing.

      --
      Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
    8. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by EdibleEchidna · · Score: 1

      Definitive proof that tinfoil *really* works!

      http://eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php

    9. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by ElfKnight · · Score: 2, Informative
      'Space blankets' are AFAIK absolutely standard hiking/camping gear - you'd be an idiot to go away without one.

      They're compact, light, and they could save you from hypothermia.

      And they are no more use than any other sheet of light plastic (except to keep the sun off you). Most heat is lost from the body by convection and conduction and evaporation of water or sweat - NOT by radiation.

      Hillwalkers in the UK are recommended by instructors to carry orange plastic survival bags instead - a little more bulky, but more effective since you can get inside, it'll keep water and wind out better, and it's less likely to blow away. And you can fold the damn thing up again properly.

      --
      -- I would have got out of bed earlier...but I was asleep.
    10. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by hairykrishna · · Score: 1

      Mylar works amazingly well as growroom wall covering. It would make sense just to buy it by the metre rather than a bunch of survival blankets though...

      --
      "Physics is to math as sex is to masturbation." -R. Feynman
    11. Re:At least they're taking extra precautions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No, unfotunately I am not joking. Many of the stores that sell garden lights openly tell you they share their customer list with law enforcement, a few of them have signs on the door. The police used to tail people who would go to the garden center and pull them over...etc That behavior got it institutionalized here, so they got the hardware stores involved and started offering cash to employees who would phone in on larger orders of certain supplies. Buying a mess of mylar at the hardware store is enough. Buying a single space age blanket probably isn't going to raise an eyebrow though. In one of the cities near where I live local law enforcement has got the local Wal-mart to create a "meth aisle" where everything the enterprising meth maker would buy from Wal-mart in way of supplies to make meth are located. They have extra cameras trained on the aisle beyond just Wal-mart's normal ones, some are owned by the police. If you happen to pick up more than one thing on that aisle, you're likely to be tailed and then your house staked out at least for a while.

      From what I know some of the stuff is kept in its regular locations as well (Sudafed and it's generics are now kept under pharmacy control thanks to state law, you can't buy them if the pharmacy is closed as they're locked up) but some of the stuff is _ONLY_ kept on that aisle. I imagine they spend a lot of wasted time and money staking out houses of innocents. After all if I know this I'm quite sure the crooks wanting to make meth do as well and will just find somewhere else to buy what they need.

      These sorts of draconian laws/policies only serve to punish the innocents in the name of letting law enforcement claim to be doing something to stop the drug problem (be it meth, marijuana, whatever). I've actually yet to hear of a single arrest anywhere around here thanks to stores notifying police of suspicious purchases. I have heard a LOT of people realizing they'd been noticed and leaving their shopping cart behind and high-tailing it out of the store, generally before police arrives. Maybe that's helping, but somehow I suspect they'll just try again somewhere else or at some other time and succeed eventually.

      Of course just because they come to your door doesn't mean you have to let them in, but the mere fact that they are at the door because you made a purchase from the hardware store is very disturbing. Worse some law enforcement (*cough*FBI*cough*) has a nasty tendency to follow up on unsubstansiated tips in the middle of the night and not announce who they are. (Or at least not loudly enough for anyone to hear it.) After a bit of knocking with no response they feel perfectly justified in breaking down your door. So now you don't have to let them in, but they'll probably let themselves in and get the search warrant later. Fight it? Good luck, you need congressional approval to sue the FBI I'm told, and even if you don't are you willing to risk it? I was told by multiple lawyers to forget the whole thing as if I tried to fight it and everything came out and publically embarassed the FBI that they would (in the words of one lawyer) "hound you for the rest of your life looking for something, anything to stick you with in order to save face."

      Face it, we live in a police state already, it's just that those fortunate enough to not have had a run-in with the law because of an anonymous tipster lying to them don't know it yet. Once it happens you'll never be the same again. Now I _KNOW_ I can't trust my own government, and I look back on past FBI activities (Ruby Ridge; Wako, TX; etc.) with a new sense of suspicion. Of course the FBI is not respected even by most local law enforcement, a friend of mine who used to be a police officer at the local level said his entire department referred to the FBI as "lawyers and accountants with guns."

  9. Hmmm... by buckymatters · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why don't they just cover their bodies instead?

    1. Re:Hmmm... by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      One word: sex.

    2. Re:Hmmm... by viva_fourier · · Score: 1

      I concur -- why don't they just use their space capes!

      --
      and now back to the fallout shelter...
    3. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      GOOD LORD ..

      NO11!!that's exactly what they want you to do

      TO COVER YOUR body in IT!

      It will only make it like an ANTENAA focusing the EVIL GIOVERNMENT MIND CONTROL RAYS

      DO
      NOT DO IT

      Listen to me I KNOW BECAUSE I HAVE NO MIND CONTROL!!!

    4. Re:Hmmm... by ErikTheRed · · Score: 5, Funny
      Why don't they just cover their bodies instead?
      Better yet, why don't they just seek proper psychiatric help?
      --

      Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
    5. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow! The homeowner himself has joined our discussion! Of course, I knew he must be a /.er all along...

    6. Re:Hmmm... by mapmaker · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Or put aluminum siding on the house?

    7. Re:Hmmm... by macemoneta · · Score: 1
      Maybe before we recommend psychiatic help, we should verify that their beliefs are not founded in reality.

      That's not saying that they're not crazy, but whatevery the situation is, if an entire family has been impacted, it's not normal.

      --

      Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    8. Re:Hmmm... by Adrick42 · · Score: 3, Funny

      ok, the thought of these people even possibly reporoducing troubles me deeply.

    9. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Tinfoil Rubbers, er prophylactic penis sheaths.

      Protection from Radio Active Poontang

    10. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I HAVE NO MIND CONTROL ...and it shows.

      (And what's this
      To confirm you're not a script,
      please type the text shown in this image

      crap about?? )
    11. Re:Hmmm... by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 1

      They'd have to take the tinfoil rubbers off sometime, and we'll be waiting.

      Regards,

      Ray Gamma,
      Brain-farking Microwaves Inc.

    12. Re:Hmmm... by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 1

      I heard lunacy skips a generation. It's their kids reproducing that we have to worry about.

    13. Re:Hmmm... by kfg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      . . .why don't they just seek proper psychiatric help?

      Because if they knew they needed it they wouldn't need it.

      KFG

    14. Re:Hmmm... by earthbound+kid · · Score: 5, Funny
      Better yet, why don't they just seek proper psychiatric help?


      One roll of tinfoil: $3.57
      One month of psychiatric help: $357
      Keeping the neighbor's dog from reading your mind: Priceless.
    15. Re:Hmmm... by ErikTheRed · · Score: 1
      Maybe before we recommend psychiatic help, we should verify that their beliefs are not founded in reality.

      That's not saying that they're not crazy, but whatevery the situation is, if an entire family has been impacted, it's not normal.
      Yes it is normal. People that become frightened of illness - regardless of how ridiculous the fear - often do start to exhibit symptomps of that illness; this is called psychosomatic illeness, and it's extremely common. To make a long story short, I've dealt with this myself. I got my thinking fixed. My problems / symptoms went away.

      Responses like yours do a significant disservice to people suffering from this problem - it reinforces their irrational fears and makes them more difficult to treat in the long run. And, incidentally, the link you provided (good one) shows the current status of EMF-related health disorders - there is no conclusive evidence to suggest EMF at the levels typically encountered cause any health disorders. There are a lot of hypothesis floating around, which is all well and good, but going around scaring people to death - or at least illness - in the quest for publicity and grant money is the current fashion for asshole scientists (as opposed to the scientists that are responsible with reporting their theories and results, making sure the appropriate caveats are included, &c).

      If I had a nickel for every report I'd read talking about how some study shows a strong link between this and that with a sample size of 5 people picked off of a subway at random with the all-too-common "Control group? We don't need no stinkin' control group!", I'd be too busy spending the money to bother replying to Slashdot posts. You know the rest of the story - the "scientists" report their "results" to some mentally challenged sycophant "reporter" who reprints their press release more or less word-for-word (bonus points if political correctness or the enviroment are involved).

      If we're not careful, we'll wind up in a world full of people who expect us to go around proving negatives and saying that if we can't then we need to change everything we do because there's a very good theory that we're all going to die if we don't ... fuck ... too late.
      --

      Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
    16. Re:Hmmm... by kfg · · Score: 1

      . . .if an entire family has been impacted, it's not normal.

      Are you honestly trying to tell me you've never run into people with religious beliefs before?

      In any case, three issues give the key to the problem being entirely psychological. The first is that it began with a psychological trauma, and one that didn't effect them directly at that.

      The second is that they blame all maladies and ills that have happened since that time on being bombared with radiation, even though these ills have nothing to do with each other and/or no known connection to exposure to EMR.

      The third is that the supposed bombarding by their neighbors has no justification in reality. They believe it, but they have no actuall grounds for that belief, nor even any grounds for believing they have grounds. They just "know."

      They were frightened by the attack on the WTC. They are responding by sublimating their fears into patholgogical actions.

      Basically they're scared shitless over the boogey man hiding under their bed and blame him for everything bad that ever happens to them. Good, old fashioned demonism.

      KFG

    17. Re:Hmmm... by macemoneta · · Score: 1
      Responses like yours do a significant disservice to people suffering from this problem - it reinforces their irrational fears

      So... if their neighbor's kids took apart that old microwave oven and are firing the magnetron at them, it's a psycological problem. Good to know!

      --

      Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    18. Re:Hmmm... by macemoneta · · Score: 1
      Are you honestly trying to tell me you've never run into people with religious beliefs before?

      Just because someone reports ghosts doesn't mean that there isn't a physical cause. As I pointed out in another post, a neighborhood kid with a magnetron from an old microwave can cause many physical problems. Until it's investigated, assuming that there's no physical cause does a disservice to the scientific method.

      --

      Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    19. Re:Hmmm... by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Thing is the "costing things in aluminium foil" thing is generally a sign of mental problems, frequently schizophrenia. It's quite a serious disease, one that if allowed to progress can lead to a total loss of touch with reality.

      If they really are worried about health problems, they should seek out a physican to verify the existince of the problems, get treatement and verify that there is evidence these could be cause by radiation. They should then get the house tested for radation, and not just low frequency EM, which is all aluminium foil would really help, but also for things liek alpha radiation due to radon gas. That one actually happens and IS known to cause serious health problems.

      Sounds more like one or more of them are having mental problems and require treatment.

    20. Re:Hmmm... by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      lol....

      sigged, with slight mods to fit in 120 chars.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    21. Re:Hmmm... by kfg · · Score: 1

      Your answer is cogent only to that portion of my post you did not quote.

      KFG

    22. Re:Hmmm... by keziahw · · Score: 1

      ... you mean.... better than SEX?? -- If you see this, it means either I forget to hit "Post Humously", or I just died.

    23. Re:Hmmm... by Senjutsu · · Score: 1

      If their neighbour's kid was firing a magnetron at them, the results wouldn't be headaches and lupus.

    24. Re:Hmmm... by flyingsquid · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      They were frightened by the attack on the WTC. They are responding by sublimating their fears into patholgogical actions. Basically they're scared shitless over the boogey man hiding under their bed and blame him for everything bad that ever happens to them. Good, old fashioned demonism.

      So basically, 9/11 happens, they get scared and wrap their house in foil. Meanwhile, George W. Bush's response to 9/11 is to invade a country with no clear link to 9/11 or al Qaeda, get 1600 troops killed along with tens of thousands of civilians, make the Islamic world hate the US even more than it used to, waste hundreds of billions of dollars, and to get us stuck battling a raging insurgency without the slightest freaking clue how to get out of the situation.

      If you ask me, these people practically seem sane in comparison.

    25. Re:Hmmm... by stor · · Score: 1

      So... if their neighbor's kids took apart that old microwave oven and are firing the magnetron at them, it's a psycological problem. Good to know!

      Oh come on: how unlikely is that?

      If the kids did that they'd probably do more damage to themselves than their neighbours.

      Even so, wouldn't you try to *measure* the radiation and *notify* someone if you suspected a problem?

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    26. Re:Hmmm... by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1


      Responses like yours do a significant disservice to people suffering from this problem - it reinforces their irrational fears and makes them more difficult to treat in the long run. And, incidentally, the link you provided (good one) shows the current status of EMF-related health disorders - there is no conclusive evidence to suggest EMF at the levels typically encountered cause any health disorders. There are a lot of hypothesis floating around, which is all well and good, but going around scaring people to death - or at least illness - in the quest for publicity and grant money is the current fashion for asshole scientists (as opposed to the scientists that are responsible with reporting their theories and results, making sure the appropriate caveats are included, &c).


      I beg to differ. It all lies with where the cash is.

      There was "no conclusive evidence" that smoking caused cancer... for 5 decades!

      Today it is an undenable fact. There is too much cash involved to report whatever health hazards long term exposure to EMF might produce. Cell phones.. Wifi.. RFID... OMG.. the tabacco industry looks tiny in comparison.

    27. Re:Hmmm... by kfg · · Score: 1

      I'm inclined to believe you have a point. At least they don't report they're doing this because of the voices in their heads.

      KFG

    28. Re:Hmmm... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well, I do not know about the specifics of this family's circumstances, but I know what exists for me.

      At the far corner of the property next door to me is a HUGE cell phone tower. When I worked on any electronics in my home lab - analog or digital - I used to have problems with high levels of RF that clearly reduced noise margins in the circuitry. Crude experiments with a high frequency probe and antenna showed that the tower seemed to have a nice fat lobe pumping stuff in my direction. Then I began to wonder about living for long periods with my body continuously absorbing RF energy every night. As a precaution, I DID redo my insulation with aluminum-faced foam board, and lined the bedroom curtains with space blanket mylar. Crazy? Well, I'd rather err on this than wake up in five years with cancer.

      By the way, years ago I read an article somewhere that explained that metal springs in a bed could pick up RF energy and worse, resonate. In one rare case a local radio station antenna had provided enough energy that a resonant set of bedsprings apparently sparked and caused a fire. Admittedly a very rare situation. Sometimes when grounding in a building is incorrect or the connection corroded, wiring can pick up RF and strange things happen inside. So it's not so nutcase as you might think to be prudent about RF pollution.

    29. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because, my friend, to them, we're the ones that need psychiatric help. Now, please take your hands off my Gucci tinfoil jacket. Damm tourists.

    30. Re:Hmmm... by Petersson · · Score: 1

      Better yet, why don't they just seek proper psychiatric help?

      Because they don't realize they have a mental problem. They feel normal and it's the surroundings that causes them to feel bad. It's a sort of irrational behaviour.

      Similar mental disorders aren't exceptional, but this is one heavy stuff... But such delusion is nothing compared to delusion of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

      I remember some case of another 'enemy radiation' I once red about: few years after WWII, man was hospitalized claiming that secret Nazi sciencist are broadcasting signals in to his head and he asked for an underground bunker to hide away from it. But he has received only stronger sedatives.

      --
      I'm not insane. My mother had me tested.
    31. Re:Hmmm... by ErikTheRed · · Score: 1
      I beg to differ. It all lies with where the cash is.

      There was "no conclusive evidence" that smoking caused cancer... for 5 decades!
      There was no conclusive evidence for a hell of a lot longer than 5 decades, and then there was, and Big Tobacco got sued, and now society is slowly dropping that disgusting habit.

      There is too much cash involved to report whatever health hazards long term exposure to EMF might produce. Cell phones.. Wifi.. RFID... OMG.. the tabacco industry looks tiny in comparison.
      "OMG? There's so much cash involved?" What kind of mouth-breathing horseshit is that? You think trial lawyers don't have money (well, at least in the US)? You think they can't afford to spend several hundred million on research? You think every single academic researcher on planet Earth is bought off? You think that George Bush, Jacques Chirac, and Vladimir Putin are engaged in a giant conspiracy to cover up for Sony and Samsung? You think that every single newspaper and magazine is covering up for them? You think the hundreds of thousands of people that would be required for this kind of cover-up could keep a straight face? If so, you're the dumbest motherfucker wasting air. The US government can't even cover up a third rate burglary or prisoner abuse in Iraq or selling arms to Contras or a west wing blow-job. The newsies circle each other's mistakes like vultures and would turn each other in out of simple spite. Newsflash: the world's professional worrying class has been on EMF for decades now, with nothing substantial to show for it. If they do come up with something, it will be huge news, trillions of dollars, euros, yen, etc. in lawsuits, we'll adapt, and life will go on (maybe with three eyes and an extra arm or two).

      WiFi? RFID? Shit, what if iPods cause cancer? It's possible! Nobody has proven they don't! Wouldn't that be the moral dilemma of all time? Die a slow, painful death, or miss that boost of self-esteem you get from having those white earbeads in? Shit, I have an iPod and I don't even know what I'd do if faced with a hideous choice like that! And besides, you didn't even bring up the big EMF conspiracy theories, like power lines, and microwave ovens that leak harmful radiation! What the hell, even that's small potatoes! Why not go all the way? Let's sue the Sun! It's been bathing us in EMF since, ummmmmmm... the birth of the solar system! Full spectrum! Even X-Rays and Gamma Rays! No hypothesis needed, it's proven that the fucker causes skin cancer, and, even worse (I can barely say it) - uneven tans! I say we sue it, then sentince it to death for crimes against humanity and giving sunburns to enemy combatants even though they're not covered by the Geneva convention and it's soooo not fair, then blow it up, then we don't have to worry about global warming either. Woo hoo! Everybody wins!
      --

      Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
    32. Re:Hmmm... by TrappedByMyself · · Score: 1

      Better yet, why don't they just seek proper psychiatric help?

      Or just focus their energy on posting to Slashdot. I think they'd fit right in.

      --

      Help me take back Slashdot. When did 'News for Nerds' become 'FUD and Conspiracy Theories for Extremist Nutjobs'?
    33. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One roll of tinfoil: $3.57
      One month of psychiatric help: $357
      Keeping the neighbors
      ...off your tinfoil domain: .357
    34. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, why don't they just seek proper psychiatric help?

      That will not help you against the gamma rays.

    35. Re:Hmmm... by Maestro4k · · Score: 1

      By the way, years ago I read an article somewhere that explained that metal springs in a bed could pick up RF energy and worse, resonate. In one rare case a local radio station antenna had provided enough energy that a resonant set of bedsprings apparently sparked and caused a fire. Admittedly a very rare situation. Sometimes when grounding in a building is incorrect or the connection corroded, wiring can pick up RF and strange things happen inside. So it's not so nutcase as you might think to be prudent about RF pollution. In one apartment I lived in years ago I would get hit with sporadic high energy RF energy of some sort. It appeared to be related to Ham radio or perhaps the local emergency services radio channels as I could tell there were people speaking when this happened but it wouldn't last more than 5-10 seconds at a time so I never could make out more than a few words. When it happened though the signal was powerful enough to cause speakers in my apartment to play the sound back! This would happen with non-powered speakers connected to the stereo (which was turned off), and on the powered ones on my PC (both turned on and off). Once it actually caused my PC to interpret the signal as mouse movements including a right click on the desktop. Frankly I was (and still am) worried about it, anything with enough power to cause those types of activities couldn't be healthy. I'm just glad it wasn't continous.

    36. Re:Hmmm... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      did you measure the signal strength inside your house?

      I wonder if it violates any laws?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    37. Re:Hmmm... by ErikTheRed · · Score: 1

      No, no, no, your reply is priceless.

      --

      Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
  10. grumble by snilloc · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    2005-05-23 16:18:50 Family installs aluminum shield against radiation (Index,It's funny. Laugh.) (rejected)

    Oh well, the story made it up at some point.

    1. Re:grumble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, you gotta admit, "Tinfoil Hat House" has a little more zing than your title. Yours is a little too factual, too journalistic. And all the words are spelled correctly.

    2. Re:grumble by aicrules · · Score: 0

      Are you seriously grumbling that they picked one submission of the same story over yours? They actually warn you in the FAQ that this will get you modded down. Just because you submitted before it was posted to the front page doesn't mean you were the first to submit it. It doesn't mean you weren't, but most importantly it doesn't mean you were.

    3. Re:grumble by neilyos · · Score: 1

      actually it's spelled "Sacramento".

  11. Uhm by Cliff.Braun · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I think that the people are just crazy, although they will probably come up with some evidence and prove me wrong, that or they'll be forgotten in a week.

    1. Re:Uhm by Darthmalt · · Score: 1

      more likely they'll be forgotten by the end of the week

    2. Re:Uhm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, just ignorant, paranoid, and influential to their kids.

    3. Re:Uhm by crazyphilman · · Score: 1

      When I was living in Phoenix, Az, there was an old man who was like, 70 years old, who became famous among the cops in my neighborhood. He was completely nuts, and had somehow gotten the idea that "chaff" would foil police radar. He wound tinfoil all through his car's grill, through the hubcaps, taped pieces of it to his car, and threw it out the window as he sped past speed traps doing 70 or 80 miles an hour.

      The cops would dutifully pull him over, then endure a long conversation about whether they could prove anything or not. Then of course the judge would have to go through the whole thing all over again. He racked up ticket after ticket, and the cops ended up getting really fond of him. He became sort of their semi-mascot.

      After a while, he lost his license, and that was that. This one cop I heard the story from said they missed him, though.

      Of course, this was the same cop who admitted to the following:

      1. Taking radar readings from pidgeons, then pulling over corvettes and camaros to tell them that driving three miles an hour is "obstructing traffic".

      2. Taking readings from landing 747's, then pulling over the worst junkers they could find to ask why the person was going 325 miles an hour.

      I guess they get bored out there... :)

      --
      Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
  12. Turn it down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why not just ask the neighbors to turn their radio down?

  13. The best part... by isny · · Score: 4, Funny

    The best part of this article is that was posted by an anonymous reader. That's irony. (and, if it's not, I'm sure the grammar police will enforce).

    1. Re:The best part... by mcc · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's irony

      No no... Aluminum

    2. Re:The best part... by mtrisk · · Score: 0

      No... aluminium

      --

      Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
    3. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually its Aluminiumy

    4. Re:The best part... by badmicrophone · · Score: 5, Funny

      No no... Aluminum

      steel, he's got a point.

    5. Re:The best part... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Those fucking grammar police; you'd think they were a copper something like one!

    6. Re:The best part... by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean aluminumy?

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    7. Re:The best part... by stuffman64 · · Score: 1

      You know, it used to irritate me that the British would say the "-ium" ending, but I recently realized that it makes perfect sense. Most elements on the table end with the -ium ending (except Lanthanum, but let's just forget about it for right now), and Aluminum just sounds like us Americans got lazy and decided to drop a sylable.

      When put into perspective, dropping the -ium for -um just seems to not make much sense. We don't say "Chromum" or "Magnesum," and it would sound stupid to say it as such. And I'm sure that's what the other English speakers think about our "Aluminum".

      --
      --- At my sig, unleash hell.
    8. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that'll be Aluminum in this country, thank you very much. We won't waste our time on a useless syllable like that.

    9. Re:The best part... by Velox_SwiftFox · · Score: 1

      Well, hell, let's just call it "alumium" then.

    10. Re:The best part... by Betelgeuse · · Score: 1

      The spelling actually has an interesting history. Both were used at one time or another in the US, but I actually think that the Brits have it right here. See Wikipedia.

      Not that I'm going to start using "aluminium".

      --
      I couldn't tell if you were experimenting with poor-man's cryogenics or looking for the orange sherbet.
    11. Re:The best part... by log0 · · Score: 1

      IIRC, it was called aluminum by its discoverer and some Brit added the i for the very reason you state.

      So the American way isn't lazy, but actually more correct*.

      *As a non-American myself, it kills me to say that.

    12. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wasn't funny.

    13. Re:The best part... by Spellbinder · · Score: 1

      just call it alu

      --


      stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
    14. Re:The best part... by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Not that I'm going to start using "aluminium".

      Not saying you are one, but geeks crying for standards should at least do. :-)
      Aluminium is indeed the preferred spelling by IUPAC.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    15. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Tin again, maybe he doesn't. It could lead us down all sorts of bad alloys.

    16. Re:The best part... by RollingThunder · · Score: 1

      You can call me Al.

      Doo-doo-doot-doo...

    17. Re:The best part... by MobileC · · Score: 1

      no... Aluminum

      Sigh... Aluminium...

      --

      Fran
      :):):)
      1st 1st Poster of the new Millennium!

    18. Re:The best part... by The+Grassy+Knoll · · Score: 0

      No no... Aluminium

      --
      They will never know the simple pleasure of a monkey knife fight
    19. Re:The best part... by ectoraige · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ah... it's rare to see jokes of that mettle around here.

      --
      Vs lbh pna ernq guvf, ybt bss abj. Tb bhgfvqr. Syl n xvgr.
    20. Re:The best part... by tiluki · · Score: 1

      Until he was foiled...

    21. Re:The best part... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      Most elements on the table end with the -ium ending
      What, like Oxygenium? Carbonium? Or maybe Hydrygium?
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    22. Re:The best part... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Pack i tin, or I'll really get brassed off.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    23. Re:The best part... by Bob+McCown · · Score: 1

      Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?

      Baldric: Yeah, it's like goldy and bronzy, only it's made of iron.!

    24. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sulfur" is the interesting one. The British write "Sulphur". And, you know, that one seems kind of logical too. I mean, the element right next to it isn't called "Fosforus"...

    25. Re:The best part... by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is an American website. Therefore, the correct spelling is Aluminum. Take that i and stick it with your redundant 'u's. Traditional english is helping contribute to the heat loss of the universe by requiring many unneeded characters to be sent out. So, for the children, please switch to a (slightly) more logical spelling.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    26. Re:The best part... by eeyoredragon · · Score: 1

      *ahem* Grammar Coppers

    27. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a worry that people will get rusty.

    28. Re:The best part... by PMuse · · Score: 1

      Ah... it's rare to see jokes of that mettle around here.

      True, but this is slashdot. Perhaps you should try kuro5hin.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
    29. Re:The best part... by ectoraige · · Score: 1

      Yes, you'd zinc so, wouldn't you?

      --
      Vs lbh pna ernq guvf, ybt bss abj. Tb bhgfvqr. Syl n xvgr.
    30. Re:The best part... by kjones692 · · Score: 4, Funny

      You've got a lot of brass to be saying that around here, mister.

      --

      Love the Third Amendment?
    31. Re:The best part... by ectoraige · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I thought the crowd around here would take a shine to my carefully wrought puns.

      Mind you, my wife is reminding me that the kids, Lacey and Nicholas, are constantly telling my I'm not funny.

      If only I had a nickel for every time I heard that, still... that's Our Son Nick and Ol' Lace for you.

      --
      Vs lbh pna ernq guvf, ybt bss abj. Tb bhgfvqr. Syl n xvgr.
    32. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Your all just a bunch of humorist zincophants!

    33. Re:The best part... by lahvak · · Score: 1

      Actually, it was discovered by some Brit, who first called it alumium. Later rhe same Brit changed the name to aluminum, and finally, for the stated reasons, to aluminium.

      --
      AccountKiller
    34. Re:The best part... by lahvak · · Score: 1

      it used to irritate me that the British would say the "-ium" ending

      Ehmm, not just British, but pretty much the whole world with the exceptions of USA and Canada.

      --
      AccountKiller
    35. Re:The best part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, aluminium!

    36. Re:The best part... by syukton · · Score: 1

      alright, the "our son nick" = arsenic was a good one.

      --
      Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
    37. Re:The best part... by kjones692 · · Score: 1

      My tinfoil hat is off to you, sirrah! You've earned yourself a fan today.

      --

      Love the Third Amendment?
  14. why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's wrong with protecting yourself from harm?

  15. Well, if the lived in Livermore... by helixcode123 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... they might have a point.

    --

    In a band? Use WheresTheGig for free.

    1. Re:Well, if the lived in Livermore... by anagama · · Score: 1


      Lasers and silver foil houses don't mix well either. Case in point: Heart of Gold.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  16. Hahahahahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's bloooooooody brilliant.

  17. wow... by StupidStan · · Score: 0
    "and the beds are covered with a foil-like material as well"
    people are amazing!
  18. Legalistics by UlfGabe · · Score: 0

    I would believe that this family has the right to put whatever they want on the side of their house if they demonstrate that the radiowaves are life threatening.

    For that matter if the city does not declare them an "eye sore" then they cannot force them to pull it down.

    A solution for the family is to paint it for a big mural and declare it an artistic expression.

    btw, IANAL dont use my advice, check with your lawyer, or go take the bar and 4 years of law school coupled with some practical experience.

    --
    Check journal for info on Anti-TextBook, an idea by me.
    1. Re:Legalistics by gameboyhippo · · Score: 3, Informative

      But they don't have the right to put up whatever they want. Especially if they have neighbors. You see, if the town becomes ugly, then the value of their property diminishes. It's kinda like me going over to some kids house and spilling kool-aid on his super rare comic book.

    2. Re:Legalistics by dtdns · · Score: 3, Insightful

      +2 Informative? Spilling cool-aide on some kids rare comic book has nothing to do with this situation. This would be more like taking your crappy comics and putting them next to his nice ones. Sure, it may not look nice, but the ACTUAL value and quality of his comics are not affected in any way. As soon as you take your nasty comics away his look nicer again. In order for your analogy to be correct, these foil people would have had to put the sheet metal on their neighbors house instead of their own. Frankly, I find the whole "they're making my house worth less" argument to be ineffective unless you are actively trying to sell your house. Thanks for playing.

    3. Re:Legalistics by Darby · · Score: 1

      A solution for the family is to paint it for a big mural and declare it an artistic expression.

      btw, IANAL dont use my advice, check with your lawyer, or go take the bar and 4 years of law school coupled with some practical experience.


      But most importantly, check with your local chemist to make sure that the paint doesn't interfere with the effectiveness of the aluminiumyness of the protective wall.

    4. Re:Legalistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I suggest you look into the "broken windows syndrome." Basically states (and has been proven pretty much correct numerous times) that small amounts of graffiti, broken windows, etc just invite more of the same. In the '20s real estate agents used this to their advantage by giving some unsavory sorts (in this case black people) a really good deal in a desirable (in this case all white) neighborhood. What happened? White flight, and the real estate agents really boosted their market by "forcing" a lot of people to move. Oh, and the neighborhoods were destroyed in the process as demand for the housing plummeted. (I'm not saying that black people will destroy a neighborhood, but that unsavory elements, however defined by the majority of residents, has a definate negative effect on the financial, psychological and physical well being of the residents.) And seriously... watch the video and tell me that this is nothing. This is really shitty work, probably becoming dangerous in storms. Not to mention that it wouldn't actually do much to solve the problem of microwave radiation. And look at the eyes of the lady of the house... she is schizophrenic. She doesn't need metal sheeting on the house. She needs mental help.

      But, yes, having this crap on their house does A)significantly reduce the value of the neighbor's houses, B)create a public nuisance and C)invite further degredation to the neighborhood. But hey... thanks for playing.

    5. Re:Legalistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking of paint. We all know that lead doesn't have negative health consequences. The reason that it's been banned from paint is because lead is so effective at shielding radiation that the mind control beams often cannot make it through walls painted in thick layers of lead paint.

      -The more you know...

    6. Re:Legalistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except you're causing physical damage to property. Tell me how a loss of revenue when selling a house equates to this and I'll agree I don't have the right to choose how I choose to make MY OWN HOME LOOK.

      This is forced conformity, nothing more.

    7. Re:Legalistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again, the flawed idea that your house exists in a vacuum. The value of a house is not derived solely from what is inside its property lines. There are several indirect factors that affect the value of land and the structures sitting upon it, one of which is the appearance of nearby property. If you put crap in your yard and I have to lower the price of my house by $10k to find a buyer because of it, you cost me 10 grand! If you were correct, we would buy houses like we do cars: based on the appraised value. It doesn't matter if you are actively trying to sell your house; some people use houses as long-term investments and others would just prefer that wackos didn't diminish the value of their largest asset.

      If you were offered a job that paid twice your salary tomorrow but required selling your existing house, wouldn't you be at least slightly annoyed that your neighbor had recently put a bigass hunk of aluminum on top of their house and you couldn't do anything about it other than cut the price of your house by 20 percent or more? I think you'd want somebody to force them to get rid of that scrap metal too.

    8. Re:Legalistics by dtdns · · Score: 1

      If you were offered a job that paid twice your salary tomorrow but required selling your existing house, wouldn't you be at least slightly annoyed that your neighbor had recently put a bigass hunk of aluminum on top of their house and you couldn't do anything about it other than cut the price of your house by 20 percent or more?

      Annoyed, yes, but nobody ever said you have the right NOT to be annoyed. If you're going to make twice as much at a new job, one could argue that taking a 20% hit on the price of your existing home isn't so bad, annoying as it may be.

      I think you'd want somebody to force them to get rid of that scrap metal too.

      That is where you would be wrong (about me anyway). Using the force of government to make someone else to comply with my wishes goes against my principles.

  19. The fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTFA:

    "(It's) a shield to protect against radiation, because microwave radiation is reflected off of aluminium, so it's a protective measure," resident Sarah D'Souza said.

    Everyone knows you need TIN for this to work!

    All these people are doing are stopping the space rays from reading their minds, but as soon as they open the window or go outside to get the mail, it's too late.

    1. Re:THE FOOLS! by kubrick · · Score: 1

      concentrating the radio beams from outer space

      Maybe they're trying to listen to the aliens, and all the local radio chatter is muffling the message the aliens have for them? :)

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
    2. Re:THE FOOLS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No kidding. They don't even have any protection up top and that's how the Major League Baseball satellites read your thoughts. I just know Mark McGwire is involved in this somewhere.

  20. weird but illegal by indy_Muad'Dib · · Score: 4, Insightful

    easy fix, just line the inside of the house with foil.

    love the antibot text field btw. same i cant read the fucker.

    1. Re:weird but illegal by JadeNB · · Score: 2, Informative
      easy fix, just line the inside of the house with foil.
      According to this link posted by mgmatrix, that is exactly what they are doing.
    2. Re:weird but illegal by xie · · Score: 1

      According to the story linked they already have ..

      "The inside of the house is also covered with foil and the beds are covered with a foil-like material as well..."

    3. Re:weird but illegal by anagama · · Score: 1

      easy fix, just line the inside of the house with foil.

      They would probably prefer a "belt and suspenders" technique. Lucky for them, there is a ready made legal solution: aluminum siding. They could even place foil under the siding -- lead foil available anywhere? That would do the trick for sure!

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    4. Re:weird but illegal by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
      easy fix, just line the inside of the house with foil.

      Not good enough. That allows the 'evil radiaation' to infest the structure of the house.

      Remember...you're looking for a rational solution to a whackjob problem.

    5. Re:weird but illegal by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      Exterior use of lead foil may not be legal due to the chances of the lead seeping into the environment.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    6. Re:weird but illegal by meeotch · · Score: 5, Funny
      Are you nuts? That would keep the radiation *in*!

      mitch

    7. Re:weird but illegal by anagama · · Score: 1

      True -- but once it's hidden behind the protective aluminum siding, who will know??

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    8. Re:weird but illegal by thegrassyknowl · · Score: 1

      easy fix, just line the inside of the house with foil.

      I tried this once. Takes a lot of foil and you really have to cover the windows to make it worth the effort... To top it all off you have to seal the aluminium really well because otherwise the govt will just use smaller wavelengths that pass through the gaps...

      (end sarcasm)

      --
      I drink to make other people interesting!
    9. Re:weird but illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      > easy fix, just line the inside of the house with foil.

      I believe somethingawful did this before.

      http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2716

    10. Re:weird but illegal by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1

      Why go with lead foil? There is really only one truly effective anti-radiation foils available: Uranium Foil.

      Yes, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, we here at Rick's Radiation Resistance Resort have just gotten a shipment of our special Spent Uranium Foil. It's perfect for keeping other people's radiation out -- why bother with theirs when you can have YOUR OWN?

      So don't DeLay, Call ToDay -- wrap your house (or just your cranium) in Uranium.

    11. Re:weird but illegal by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Remember...you're looking for a rational solution to a whackjob problem.

      Yep, this is the a classic case of trying to fight irrationality with logic. The classic example is the apocryphal story of the med student working in a psych ward trying to cure a delusional man with reason. The man was under the delusion that he was dead.
      "So you're dead," says the med student.
      "Yes indeed," says the man, "I've been dead for nearly ten years."
      "OK then, do dead people bleed?" the med student asks.
      "Don't be absurd," replies the man, "of course dead people don't bleed."
      So the med student grabs the man's hand, and jabs the mans thumb with a pin, which then begins to bleed.
      "Well what do you know!" exclaims the man, staring in wide-eyed amazement at the drop of blood welling up on his thumb, "Dead people do bleed!"

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    12. Re:weird but illegal by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      Depends on who complains about construction happening without a permit. Usually, changes over a certain dollar amount have to be inspected, so unless you're buying off the building inspector, someone will know.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    13. Re:weird but illegal by HomerNet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you nuts? That would keep the radiation *in*!

      Only if you have the shiny side facing in.

      --
      I have no tag line
    14. Re:weird but illegal by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 1

      If you read the article, they already did line the inside with tinfoil... They also use tinfoil blankets. These people are nuts.

      --
      Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
  21. Flame me, but... by afabbro · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's Sacramento, not Socromento, samzenpus, you oaf. Yes, it's a spelling flame, but it's the third one in three days. I guess the "editors" don't do much "editing".

    --
    Advice: on VPS providers
    1. Re:Flame me, but... by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I guess the "readers" don't do much "reading"... it's a joke.

      --
      Fuck it
    2. Re:Flame me, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The proper spelling is Excremento.

      Most of say, Suckramento.

    3. Re:Flame me, but... by jllawler · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Ah yes, at first glance, I thought this was an Arrested Development ref. (like here). Sacramende! And A.D.'s been renewed! Woohoo!

    4. Re:Flame me, but... by Tablizer · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      In the parallel universe they live in, it *is* spelled "Socromento". Jarge Boosh is also part of the nucular radeeashun plot.

    5. Re:Flame me, but... by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      Maybe they meant "Scrotumento"

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  22. Sacramento by mgmatrix · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It's spelled Sacramento, and they are protecting their home from physical threats.

    www.kxtv.com/storyfull1.asp?id=11032

    --
    Looking for something to do? http://www.grinion.com
    1. Re:Sacramento by Kinky+Bass+Junk · · Score: 1

      Could this be related to the new anti-riot vehicles, that emit microwaves and cause symptoms similar to the ones described by the family?

      --
      Anonymous Coward
  23. The best nuts are in California ! by timeToy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Though it seems to be a classic: http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-12/903959/tinf oil.jpg (from San Diego)

    1. Re:The best nuts are in California ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are insane. I'd never leave that much of my head exposed. You have to wrap yourself up good. Laugh you may, but they are already controlling your mind. You only think your thoughts are your own. You fools!

  24. just because by blue_adept · · Score: 5, Funny

    just because your house is covered in tin foil doesn't mean they're not out to get you.

    --

    "Is this just useless, or is it expensive as well?"
    1. Re:just because by Create+an+Account · · Score: 1

      ...and if they weren't before, they will be once the tinfoil goes up.

    2. Re:just because by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      No, just because your house is covered in tin foil, they are out to get you.

      I felt it was important that I reply to this for some reason...must be the mind-control rays...

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  25. Hmm,... by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

    ...I bet their aluminum foil bed sheets would need to be ironed quite often. :-)

  26. A whole family of loons! by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 0

    Not just a single loony, but a whole family! This kind of thing goes on all across the world with loonies deciding that enough government-sponsored bombardment of their brain is enough and takes the radical step of putting shielding up to prevent further abuse. This is the first time I've heard of a whole family going insane at once.

    Not to say that they aren't right, though. Radio waves from all directions are constantly bombarding every single one of us all the time. Moreso if you are a ham radio or CB operator because those waves are originating from you. And in some special cases, it may even be possible that the metal fillings in someone's teeth are picking up those radio waves and affecting the person in a strange way. But mostly, the radio waves that pass through us are mostly harmless.

    Should they be forced to remove the shielding because neighbors don't like it and find it an eyesore? I suppose that's about as legitimate as the family demanding the cessation of radio wave production from the neighbors. It's another form of gentrification and morally repugnant.

    1. Re:A whole family of loons! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, at least you aren't judgemental.

    2. Re:A whole family of loons! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's another form of gentrification and morally repugnant.

      You know what's odd about gentrification? The ones that actually do the work to bring it about are the ones that bandy it about the most when something they don't like goes on. What the hell is wrong with wanting to make a neighborhood not suck anymore? Would you rather have the buildings mismanaged to the point where they become condemmed and demolished?

  27. The Windows by SirDrinksAlot · · Score: 1

    Everybody knows all you need to do to block radiation and radio waves from reading your mind is to cover the windows....

  28. Legit reasons. by B5_geek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All they have to do is install it under the siding of the house, and it is legit, code-worthy, and kinda cool.

    IANAL but I bet this treatment violates neighbourhood 'quality' standards.

    One thing to remember, pot-houses do this to minimise the heat signature.

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    1. Re:Legit reasons. by foxhound01 · · Score: 0

      don't give them any ideas...

      --


      Linux is to the internet as Duct Tape is to the Universe.
    2. Re:Legit reasons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but that would create an even better Faraday Cage whereby any sort of radio frequency reception would be futile. Don't try using a cell phone inside, a portable phone outside, or even getting television reception. It won't work right!

    3. Re:Legit reasons. by City+Jim+3000 · · Score: 1

      No it isn't cool. It's totally crazy. And get the kids out of there if they have any.

    4. Re:Legit reasons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *DAMM* You just HAD to blow their cover, didn't you?

      And they had the redneck angle down pat...

  29. Oops! Sorry, guys! by Quinn_Inuit · · Score: 5, Funny

    If I'd have known I was causing them problems, I would've stopped trying to microwave their paint off their house as a practical joke.

    --

    Stop learning! Only you can prevent esoterrorism.
  30. Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sure there will be plenty of Tinfoil Hat Jokes and other posts, but after reading the article I'd say they need lithium, not aluminum. That is to say, the "radio waves" deal is typical in schizophrenic patients. Other common variations are people using radio waves to listen to what their thinking, people using high-tech devices to spy on their homes. The end result is a bunch of variations on the sheet metal siding. Those people that aren't familiar with metal and radiation commonly use cardboard boxes to cover all openings and windows.

    A misdemeanor charge isn't what's needed, a visit from a social worker probably is. There's a difference between being unique and unusual, and having mental issues.

    1. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by marko123 · · Score: 4, Funny

      If they put lithium on the side of their house, it would explode the next time it rained.

      (yes I did understand what you meant :)

      --
      http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
    2. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by fritzenheimer · · Score: 1
      ...after reading the article I'd say they need lithium, not aluminum....

      A maxim in critical thinking forums is that intelligent, reasonable people can have unreasonable beliefs. I know a few people personally with what I consider some really odd beliefs about on par with this aluminum siding family, but they are for the most part sane individuals. The epistomological authorities they trust are just "different" from what many of us trust as information sources.

      --
      RFM
    3. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A maxim in critical thinking forums is that intelligent, reasonable people can have unreasonable beliefs. I know a few people personally with what I consider some really odd beliefs about on par with this aluminum siding family, but they are for the most part sane individuals. The epistomological authorities they trust are just "different" from what many of us trust as information sources.

      I agree with you, but I have my reasons to believe the people protrayed in this article are not simply of the unusual beliefs school of thought, but rather have other critical issues.

      I'm willing to bet that the people with really odd beliefs would take rather reasonable steps in whatever they do in relation to that belief. Say, for example, that someone sane really believed that someone was bombarding their house with some kind of radiation. I would suspect that their first reaction would be to try detecting it with some form of instruments. If/when that fails, they would next attempt to minimize such effects by creating an effective faraday cage, not sloppily slap aluminum sheets that may or may not even be properly grounded, to the side of their house and sleep in aluminum blankets.

      One other reason I suspect it's schizophrenia is because they "act first, prove later". And apparently have only offered to produce evidence of said radiation AFTER the officials ordered they take down the sheet metal, and not when the neighbors originally complained. To a schizophrenia, everyone is out to get you. No point in proving anything, hell, they all know about it in the first place! Is it sane? Hell no, but it's the reason they act the way they do. I'm willing to bet hard cash that they will either never produce the evidence (much in an SCO like manner), or they will produce evidence that is entirely incomprehensible. Not stupid or lame, but literally incomprehensible.

      My uncle has schizophrenia, and has pretty much gone off the deep end. It started very mild and subtly some 30 years ago. He was simply weird and eccentric at times, but for the most part he was entirely normal so everyone thought he was just eccentric. About 10 years ago it came to the point where he obviously was not just eccentric, there was something very wrong. Even when he was totally weird, he was still kind, but there were moments of rage, anger, and general danger to himself and those around him. You can't keep a man in a mental institution against his wishes UNLESS a court orders it, so after a case of physical assault, he was taken to court. Unfortunately, he was in his "normal" moods while in court, thus the judge decided he wasn't nuts, but simply guilty of physical assault. My aunt had to divorce him and leave and hide because things only got worse and no one in the family could get him to take his medication or stay in the hospital. Last I heard he was seen digging the floor out of the house, burning "demonic" records (yes, vinyl) he bought, and has been in between phases where he hates himself, and those where he claims he's Jesus Christ. And yes, he complains that people are trying to listen to his thoughts, and cell phones are simply a cover-up for some radiation gun that is bombarding him with radiation. An attempt by the devil to prevent him from fulfilling his own prophecies. There is always, however, a humorous side to even the most serious situations. My Uncle, prophecizing his own acts and going nuts over devil radiation from cell phones, supports GWB. It's hillarious, and also hard proof that he really is nuts.

    4. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there will be plenty of Tinfoil Hat Jokes and other posts, but after reading the article I'd say they need lithium, not aluminum. That is to say, the "radio waves" deal is typical in schizophrenic patients.

      If someone who is schizophrenic feels better about wearing a tinfoil hat or living in a tinfoil house I think it's great. Tinfoil is cheaper than a lithium prescription. For all I know, they might be hearing voices in the same way that some people with dental work can pickup AM radio stations in their mouth.

      There's a difference between being unique and unusual, and having mental issues.

      From TFA it's a health concern from radiation, not mind control. Given I can cook a chicken breast with a microwave the assumption that radio can cause health problems is very reasonable. I welcome anyone who wants to construct a faraday cage and document any impact on their health. If they are right they might do the world some good, if they are wrong no harm, and if they are just nuts they are at least busy doing something that isn't impacting you.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    5. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by csk_1975 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I knew this guy who was given millions and a large shareholding in a public company by his father. He had to play by his father's (and stepmother's) rules which he wasn't doing and he seemed to think it was funny to aggravate them. So they hired some spooks to follow him and eavesdrop on him. He was never the sharpest knife in the draw and years of ADD drugs didn't help. So when he started getting paranoid and having "dellusional fantasies" about people spying on him and his house - which they were actually doing - this was the proof used to incarcerate him in a mental institution. Last time I saw him he was on drugs that had completely extinguished his mind. I am sure people much more qualified than I would testify that he was really schizophrenic (and they did when he was incarcerated) but its pretty sad that the proof of someone's psychosis can be engineered by simply spying on them and then telling them that they are paranoid - how do I know he was being spied on? His stepmother warned me off and offered photos showing that I had also been under observation.

      Obviously someone putting tin foil all over their house is a fair indication that their mental state should be questioned. But malicious people can (and do) take advantage of the common perception that paranoia about being spied on is proof positive of schizophrenia for the own nefarious purposes. Never underestimate how mean spirited and avaricious some people are.

    6. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, first of all if they are schizophrenic, they will slip deeper and deeper without treatment. Second, their actions are affecting the neighbors. Schizophrenics can often become quite dangerous in their delusions, to themselves and to others. And claiming that the radiation is causing these ill effects with no backing is a symptom of mental illness. So is the look in the eyes of the lady who lives there.

    7. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lithium isn't used to treat schizophrenia. For that you'd want anti-psychotics. But then that'd spoil the joke.

    8. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by HexDoll · · Score: 1

      take a look at this (requires flash)

    9. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Okay, first of all if they are schizophrenic, they will slip deeper and deeper without treatment.

      Actually I've found religion for example is a great vehicle for the mentally ill as it gives them something to hold on to. Keeps nutters happy and helps prevent them from being a threat to them selves and others.

      Giving such people something to do is the best form of therapy.

      Second, their actions are affecting the neighbors

      Yes, it's an eye sore... how terrible! Others in this thread recommended high grade aluminum siding which would stop the affect this has on the neighbors. I remember as a child I got investigated by the city for the "tree house" I had built. The tree house was nothing more than a foam cushion I happened to bring up in a tree so my butt wouldn't get dirty and was 100% hidden from view from the street, and a small radio/tape deck. The people who complained sited numerous safety and building code violations for my tree house which were investigated over a period of 14 days most of it were electrical inspectors who were under the impression that new outlets were installed which required proper grounding that was totally absent... totally absent because there was no electricity in the tree. Eventually they gave up as there was no construction what so ever and decided that the people who were phoning them on a daily basis were 100% off their rocker.

      And claiming that the radiation is causing these ill effects with no backing is a symptom of mental illness. So is the look in the eyes of the lady who lives there.

      Breathing in and out and drinking water is also a symptom of mental illness. I'm not saying you are wrong... someone putting on the tin foil hat after 9/11 could very well be mentaly ill. But at the same time, as a people we considered anyone who thought high voltage powerlines with cancer nuts. So I welcome anyone who wishes to take the time and study any possible ill effects exposure to human produced radiation and any benifit of faraday cage. Given in the past 30 years our use of radio has increased exponentially it's something worth looking into.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    10. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by AeiwiMaster · · Score: 1

      Well I think that scrizophrenic is just a label the doctors use on people that have discovered
      that the secret goverment use high tech devices to spy on them ;-)
      http://educate-yourself.org/dc/dclatestonmctowerar rays25may02.shtml
      http://educate-yourself.org/mc/

    11. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, lithium wouldn't be much help vs. schizophrenia. It's a mood stabilizing drug used to control manic-depressives.

      For schizophrenia you'd need some sort of anti-psychotic. (like haloperidol, risperidone, clozapine or seroquel)

      (but this is just me being pedantic o'course)

    12. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by robfoo · · Score: 1

      That sounds awesome! Where can I get big sheets of lithium?

      (I also understood what you meant. And the other guy, too)

    13. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Vince+Mo'aluka · · Score: 5, Insightful
      A misdemeanor charge isn't what's needed, a visit from a social worker probably is.

      How about just leaving them the hell alone and minding your own god damn business? Am I the only one here who respects freedom more than arbitrary "social standards" imposed by some central planning agency?

      --
      You took his stuff. You pound him.
    14. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

      or better yet, sodium

    15. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Zak3056 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So let me get this straight: you knew/know for a fact that he was sane, actually being followed, and that all of this was quite possibly engineered to end in the way it did... and you did nothing about it?

      With friends like you, who needs enemies?

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    16. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps everyone here should read about the Moscow Signal. Trust me, if you built your house under a mobile phone tower, after the first couple of sleepless nights you'd be wallpapering the house in tin foil too.

      If you just RTFA, they're not claming they want to stop radio waves that are used to read their minds or anything like that: they claim that excessive radiation is causing them health problems. While it's unlikely that the radiation is in fact excessive (to the point that it causes health problems), the perception is what matters for that kind of thing. Which is, I suppose, a kind of schizophrenia, but a largely unoffensive one that is probably on the same level as continually looking over your shoulder when walking alone down a dark alleyway.

    17. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The social standards involved are not arbitrary. Please fucking kill yourself, you ignorant little shit stain, before you move away from home, and spare us Yet Another Asshole that we'll eventually have to put down.

    18. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      You don't want big sheets of it, you want little granules, or powder. The higher surface area will make a bigger, more sudden explosion. Also, it'll work better with sodium instead.

      (I know this because my high school chemistry teacher had an anecdote about somebody blowing up a toilet (in the school) by dumping sodium into it)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    19. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      If you knew they really were out to get this guy, why didn't you do something about it?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    20. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by g051051 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you saw a neighbor laying on his lawn in a puddle of blood, would you just "mind your own god damn business"? Or would you try to get them help? These people are obviously disturbed, and need help.

      As far as "arbitrary social standards" are concerned, that's really the definition of civilization, isn't it?

    21. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by spook+brat · · Score: 1

      Are you from Gambrills, Maryland, by any chance? That happened at my high school, too, and my sister knows the stupid guy who did it.

      Of course, this has probably happened more than once...

      --
      Travel the Galaxy! Meet fascinating life forms... ...and kill them - http://schlockmercenary.com
    22. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by william.gunn · · Score: 1
      I can understand you were worried for your own safety, and I've never been in that situation myself, but it's just hard for me to imagine standing by and watching something like that happen to somebody, and not trying to expose the bastards somehow.

      How have the father and stepmother been doing? You can't do something like that to your own son without paying the consequences somehow.

    23. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Nope, I'm from Georgia. Then again, my teacher has a "New Jersey" kind of accent, so maybe she used to teach around there or something...

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    24. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by csk_1975 · · Score: 1

      I don't know for a fact he was sane - but he was no more unstable/dellusional than most. He certainly wasn't a shining beacon of rational thought, but then again what percentage of people are? The fact that a court determined that he was insane and saw fit that he should be incarcerated is most probably enough proof that he was insane, no?

      Yeah, whether or not I should have acted is a fair question. But then again what could have been done? Someone else held all the cards. When the odds are stacked up like they were and the guy wasn't willing to fight back (when he was still able I advised him to get really good legal representation - once you've been deemed mentally unsound all bets are off) then it really is a fool's errand.

      I didn't hang him out to dry. Maybe in some fantasy world I could have saved the day. But in reality self preservation is a strong motivation and these people were playing for keeps - shit they f'ed over their own son, what would they do to some meddlesome stranger? I really didn't want to know.

    25. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by lahvak · · Score: 1

      I have heard the same story 25 years ago in a different country on a different continent.

      It was from my 7th grade chemistry teacher. She demonstrated the effect by droping a tiny piece of sodium in a glass of water. She also showed us some marks on her desk and floor, and explained that in her class in the previous year, she accidentally droped the piece of sodium on a wet desk, where it started burning and whizzing around.

      --
      AccountKiller
    26. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      That's not the same story -- the one I heard involved chunks of porcelain flying through the air.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    27. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "From TFA it's a health concern from radiation, not mind control. Given I can cook a chicken breast with a microwave the assumption that radio can cause health problems is very reasonable."
      No not really. RUN the sun is a giant Hydrogen Bomb dumping out radiation! Find a fall out shelter many miles deep. No wait that will not stop those neutrinos. You know they go right through you like little bullets. That wind you feel is just like a tornado that destroyed a town, just slower!
      WE ARE GOING TO DIE!!!!!!
      See not very reasonable at all.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    28. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by lahvak · · Score: 1

      No, you didn't understand. When teaching about sodium, she told us the similar same story you are refering to. Then she demonstrated it on smaller and safer scale.

      --
      AccountKiller
    29. Re:Tinfoil Hat Jokes aside by marko123 · · Score: 1

      From memory, the further down from Hydrogen, the better the reaction with water.

      --
      http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
  31. welcome to /. by Darthmalt · · Score: 4, Funny

    only here could a story about tinfoil freaks turn into a serious discussion about how effective it is and how they can legally keep it up.

    1. Re:welcome to /. by Seumas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And why not? They have every right to do what they want with their house. Nobody is dying or being hospitalized because of their oh-so-dangerous tin-foil.

      Seriously... It should not be anyone's business what they're doing to their house or property as long as it isn't a serious health risk.

    2. Re:welcome to /. by Jeremi · · Score: 2, Funny
      It should not be anyone's business what they're doing to their house or property as long as it isn't a serious health risk.


      That's what I said, but they made me shut down my casino anyway. Bunch of fascists pigs running this town!

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    3. Re:welcome to /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First they came for the tinfoil freaks...

    4. Re:welcome to /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh aye. I was going to do some radical carpentry on my house and repaint, make it look like a giant penis, and they said I couldna. Fascists.

    5. Re:welcome to /. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      So?

      What your neighbor does is their business. As long as it isn't encouraging rats to populate the are and spreading diseases from all the garbage on your lawn. What, are they afraid someone's going todie from all the heat reflected off the tinfoil?

      Really, all of this "it depreciates my property value!" stuff is retarded. People like that are probably the same kind of people who don't want "them coloreds" moving onto their block for the same reason and talk in hushed tones to other old-bitty grey-haired bitches about how it used to be *cough* "such a nice neighborhood".

    6. Re:welcome to /. by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Buy a house in an urban or suburban area of California. Your opinion on the importance of property value will change in approximately 1.5 seconds... if you have an exceptionally strong will.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    7. Re:welcome to /. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of wind?

      The sheeting didn't look like it was fastened very well in the picture in the article.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    8. Re:welcome to /. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Yeah, property value is important. But you know what? So is having a life. They're HOMES. They aren't rareartifacts or museums. If you're buying a house in a particular neighborhood just for investment purposes, you should quit while you're ahead, because you're not bringing anything to your neighborhood. I mean, great, you want me to buy your house... and it looks pretty.. and so does your neighborhood... but you all are so uptight and picky and honory to each other - no thanks!

    9. Re:welcome to /. by Seumas · · Score: 2, Funny

      Whatever. You guys are just being uptight assholes.

      Next, you're going to tell me it's wrong to coat your entire home inch by inch in vaseline and roll around naked in it.

      I'm sorry, but if you're going to bombard me with all sorts of microwaves and shit, the least you can do is leave me to my vaseline coated, tinfoil abode.

    10. Re:welcome to /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      It wasn't the tinfoil that bothered the neighbor; being a geek, he was pissed that Tinfoil man didn't cut out one side, install a picture window so that we can see the rounded cables, the neon tubing, cooling fans, and requisite spoiler seen on rice cooker cars.

    11. Re:welcome to /. by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      Wake me up when it's time to invoke Godwin.

    12. Re:welcome to /. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I owned a home in Huntingtoin Beach California. Near the beach. Quite frankly, I don't care what my neighbors put on there house as long as it wasn't noisy, harmfull, or grossly illegal.(i.e. running a crack house)
      These things effect the property value very little.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  32. Odd by WhyCantIBeYou · · Score: 0

    Surely the FCC will be able to determine what the house is being bombarded with and put a stop to it? The mention of the first anniversary of 9/11 is kinda strange too.

    1. Re:Odd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does the FCC have the ability to regulate nothing? Because I kind of have a feeling that that's what they're being bombarded with.

    2. Re:Odd by WhyCantIBeYou · · Score: 0

      I have the same feeling but at least would give them benefit of the doubt...

    3. Re:Odd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who make legitimate claims get the benefit of the doubt. People who make outlandish claims who have at least ATTEMPTED to deal with them in a reasonable manner get the benefit of the doubt.

      But when you think your house is being flooded with radiation and your first reaction isn't to go get a Geiger counter, but instead to claim that your neighbors are trying to slow-cook you to death and then go out and coat your house with tin foil, then no, you're just fucking crazy.

  33. What a great idea by squidsoup · · Score: 1

    I bet they get awesome television reception!

  34. Aluminum Siding? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why not just re-do the house in aluminum siding? Then they can keep their crazy ideas and have a decent looking house.

    Put in some Low-E glass windows with a metal reflective layer and a metal roof and they should be good to go - until someone tunnels under their house, of course.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Aluminum Siding? by gmby · · Score: 0, Troll

      Why bother; just get proof and go shoot the bastards in self defence!
      Killing someone slowly with radio waves is just as deadly as shooting them.

      I'm from Texas; we shoot back!

      --
      I don't want a pickle; I just want a Motor-Cycle! A four foot cop arrived with a five foot gun!
    2. Re:Aluminum Siding? by swschrad · · Score: 1

      they can't tunnel under the house, Our Illuminati already has too many sensors under there to plot their brainwaves. they better not put foil inserts in their shoes, or we'll have to abduct them and place anal probes..................

      --
      if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    3. Re:Aluminum Siding? by poor_boi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Why not just re-do the house in aluminum siding?

      Because that would be hard. Leaning sheets of aluminum against your house is easy. Redoing siding (if you've ever done it) is hard.

    4. Re:Aluminum Siding? by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that people who cover their house in tinfoil may not exactly have the money for a renovation like that .Ofcourse they could just tinfoil the insides of the house

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    5. Re:Aluminum Siding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to buy a , Pat...

    6. Re:Aluminum Siding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Dang, another joke ruined... that's
      I'd like to buy a </i>, Pat...
    7. Re:Aluminum Siding? by RubberJohnny · · Score: 1


      What if aluminum doesn't really block the radio waves?

      What if that's just something they *want* you to think?

  35. So is tinfoil better than aluminum foil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what about more exotic stuff, like beryllium foil (used in x-ray machines) and gold foil (which can be thin enough to pass light through)?

    After all, if you are going to go to the trouble of... er... foiling radiation, why not choose the best type?

  36. Amatures... by PantyChewer · · Score: 1
    They should live inside a Faraday cage

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage

    Just to be safe...

    1. Re:Amatures... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean "Armatures" ??

  37. A better solution by jd · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Build a parabolic dish and steer it until the "radiation" is reflected away from the house. If it is real, it'll be focussed on the perp, who will either suffer horribly or be turned into a giant green monster. Either way, they'll stop being a problem.


    If, however, there is no radiation hazard, then nobody is affected and it's no more of an eyesore than all of the other satellite dishes out there.


    Now, there are known places where radio leakage from assorted sources has caused problems. There was a metal stadium in the Middle East - forget exactly where - where, whilst it was under construction, power tools would turn themselves on and huge arcs could be seen. Turned out that the stadium acted as a gigantic radio dish and was not only receiving signals from powerful radio sources, but was focussing them too.


    There have also been known cancer spikes in areas with (a) high humidity and (b) badly-maintained, sparking power lines. It is not yet proven that there is a causal relationship, but nobody has convincingly ruled it out, either.


    This particular case, though, smacks heavily of a family being traumatized by George Bush's "War on Terror" (Sept. 11th, in and of itself, was really a fairly negligable event - ten times that number die each year in car accidents in the US, and more than a thousand times that number are currently in prison in the US for violent crimes).


    Personally, I think the city should come to an agreement with the family. The family takes down the aluminum, agrees that the problem probably isn't real, but agrees to work with the city to sue the Federal Government for psychological damage to cover the expenses incurred and the treatment needed to deal with the PTSD the family has suffered with, because of GWB's attitudes.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:A better solution by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Excellent satire! I totally get your humorous tinfoil-hat-within-the-tinfoil-hat-story Meta Tinfoilness.

      Really now: the Bush administration is somehow behind this family's total lack of any critical thinking skills or capacity for grip on reality? It takes a lifetime of living with a broken brain, or some pretty serious actual mental problems to really believe the sorts of phantom problems that rule the lives of people like this. Latching onto current events in some way is completely typical, but that's correlation, not causation.

      But you do get full credit for an excellent Kook Impression. Nicely done.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:A better solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Read This.

      Now, it doesn't mean they're not completely nuts, but to some extent, George Bush's actions are responsible for this. Just like if I looked at someone funny, and they later thought they were cursed, they would blame my funny look for it. Rightly or wrongly, that's the train of thought.

    3. Re:A better solution by swedd · · Score: 1
      who will either suffer horribly or be turned into a giant green monster. Either way, they'll stop being a problem.

      Either you don't watch many horror movies, or this is some new usage of the phrase "stop being a problem" of which I was not previously aware.

      --
      Deny everything, admit nothing, demand proof, and reject the proof.
    4. Re:A better solution by greenrom · · Score: 1
      Sept. 11th, in and of itself, was really a fairly negligable event - ten times that number die each year in car accidents in the US, and more than a thousand times that number are currently in prison in the US for violent crimes

      Roughly 3000 people died from the terrorist attacks on 9/11. If those deaths had been spread throughout the United States over the course of a year, then you might have a point... but they weren't. On average there are about 6500 deaths in the United States every day. Even looking at a national level, an extra 3000 deaths in one day is significant. If you only look at New York, then the spike in the death rate is huge. If one morning there was a giant car crash in downtown Manhattan that killed 3000 people and caused $20 billion in property damage, would you consider that event negligible?

    5. Re:A better solution by molo · · Score: 1

      Sept. 11th, in and of itself, was really a fairly negligable event - ten times that number die each year in car accidents in the US, and more than a thousand times that number are currently in prison in the US for violent crimes

      I think you are missing the point. Its not so much the number of people that died, but how and why they died.

      -molo

      --
      Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
    6. Re:A better solution by jd · · Score: 1
      You can't just think on specific events. For example, air travel is remarkably safew, but if a given aircraft goes down, then a lot of people are killed, because of the sheer size of the thing.


      When you consider the sheer number of aircraft that are flying, the total number of times each one will fly, the total number of passengers who are safe overall, or just about any other global statistic, the severity of an air crash is put into some perspective.


      Another example is the recent Marburg outbreak. Something like 200 people have died from it, which is tragic to be sure, but when compared to the global picture, you see 5,999,999,800 who have not died, which means that I don't think I'm going to worry about Marburg just yet. The figures are high only in isolation, but isolation is the worst possible way to look at a number.


      When scientists are looking for cancer spikes, for example, they will look at the number of cancer cases against similar figures for similar regions or against the population as a whole, never in isolation. So, you will hear things like "compared to the national average", when discussing such cases.


      Also, cancers are examined over a long timeframe. Typically a year or even a decade, because the rate of incidence is actually quite low. You can't just look at one-offs and think that gives you the whole picture.


      This relates to September 11th. Instead of examining just that one day, because terrorist incidence anywhere in the world are relatively rare beasts, we need to look over a longer timeframe. A year, a decade maybe. At which point, that one big spike flattens out quite substantially.


      Compared to, say, a typical IRA campaign, where there are incidents perhaps every few days or weeks, the mainland US has had less than a dozen such situations over the past 20 years. That is, by any stretch of the imagination, exceptionally small and insignificant.


      The only reason it was of note is that the US packs people into gigantic buildings like sardines, which means that there were more people present to be killed. The IRA bombing of, say, Manchester and London, in around 1995-1997 caused a few minor injuries and that's about it. Two 1,000 lb bombs - equal in size to the Oklahoma City bombing, and absolutely nobody got killed.


      This is not in defence of terror or its tactics - it is a foolish approach, which desensitizes people (making the approach self-defeating) and causes innocent people to suffer grievous loss for nobody's gain.


      On the other hand, it is pointless to look at just the incident in and of itself, when there have been countless years of non-incident throughout the USA that are being ignored. It is the lack of incident, over the big picture, which seems to me to be much more telling.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    7. Re:A better solution by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Rightly or wrongly, that's the train of thought

      But that's exactly my point: people who wrongly (say, completely irrationally) arrive at a conclusion about something are, well, wrong. Hopefully you're not feeling guilty about the person whose entire life has been ruined (thinking that you've cursed them because you looked at them), and hopefully you don't feel any real kinship with people who assign guilt over something just as loopy. 9/11 would have happened regardless of who was in the White House that day. The things that were driving that were boiling along in the 8 years of the previous administration, and the plan was already in motion in the many months before hand. The presence of terrorists in the world is a fact, and whether this president or another told people that they shouldn't assume the worst about every Muslim in the country, and that we're doing what we can to secure what we can - it doesn't matter who said it. People as broken as the tinfoil house crew will have found their inspiration in the new Pope, Darth Vader, or a change in the paint job on the local police force's cars. The point of my comment was that, as usual, a slashdotter is leveraging a dumb bit of news to add to his/her personal mythology of Bush as some sort of Dr. Evil, and attempting to score some sort of rhetorical points therein. It's just idiotic and tiresome, but some other readers decided to mod it interesting.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    8. Re:A better solution by greenrom · · Score: 1
      The problem with your logic is that any event becomes negligable if you average the effects over a long enough time frame. The death of every person in Asia would probably be negligable if you averaged the effects over the span of human existance.

      I understand your argument that 9/11 might just be an isolated statistical spike that doesn't really indicate a change in the overall death rate caused by terrorist acts against Americans. On the other hand, it might mark the start of a period where there are significantly more terrorism related deaths than the historical average. My opinion is that 9/11 was a signigicant spike in a general upward trend, but not enough time has elapsed to tell for sure.

    9. Re:A better solution by jd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'm willing to concede that it may signify the start of an upward trend, and also that there is really insufficient time to determine that for sure. One of the problems with predicting these sorts of things is that - by definition - they are unpredictable.


      I guess one thing I'm working on is the observation that airport security has NOT improved at all since 9/11 and - in some cases - has even deteriorated. Another thing I'm going by is that Government networks have generally done badly on the computer security front.


      All of these indicate that those actually responsible for security in the field feel no real pressure to improve. If there really was an imminent danger, these people should either be feeling the heat from those who would attack them, OR feeling the heat from their superiors, possibly both.


      However, all of this relies on a critical assumption that anyone actually involved gives a rat's ass, if they're not the ones actually in any danger. This assumption may well be flawed, as it is not exactly a common human trait to do a job well because someone else might suffer.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  38. Help not Ridicule by bl968 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Should we be poking fun at the serious issues being raised by these simple folk. They sincerely believe what they are saying about the intentional bombardment of their home with radiation. Instead of ridicule, some kind hearted geeks should be going out there with various forms of detector equipment and identifying the source. Where's Egon Spengler when you need him?

    Who knows the Door Keeper and Key Master might be heading that way already to do the dirty deed and finally let the traveler loose into the world of men!

    --
    "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
    1. Re:Help not Ridicule by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      some kind hearted geeks should be going out there with various forms of detector equipment and identifying the source.

      And do you want to be the one to tell them that there is no problematic radition in their house? "You're part of the conspiracy!" and who knows what they might do to you.

      The folks here have mental health issues.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    2. Re:Help not Ridicule by zoloto · · Score: 1

      That's "Gate Keeper" and "Key Master"

      something to do with "gozer" from the first GhostBusters movie

  39. Ordinary Aluminum Siding by Deanasc · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Couldn't they have put up regular aluminum siding? The construction grade siding is fairly thick and complies with building codes. It's also paintable. The neighbors would never know it was there once it was on.

    Then again, I don't understand the reasoning of the average crank.

    --
    I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
    1. Re:Ordinary Aluminum Siding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Aluminum siding can also be installed with other materials underneath it to provide you with a more balanced spectrum of RF/microwave protection, you can build your own shutters, or buy real ones... someone mentioned window treatments, but really, what you want are good solid shutters, that let no light in, they can easily be removed/left open by future less paranoid occupants, and if you're in a hurricane/tornado zone, they're added protection against flying debris.
      the way those sheets of aluminum were stacked is going to be 'less effective' than properly designing your house to be RF/microwave proof.

  40. I don't know bout microwaves by Muhammar · · Score: 1

    but my shiny aluminized home keeps the neighbours away. They used to come complaining about my stereo a lot when I was playing "Careful with the axe, Eugene"

    --
    I doubt that we will ever figure out - and I suspect that even if we did figure out we couldn't do much about it
  41. Interesting Shot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've never seen my house from that angle before...

  42. Am I the only one misread it as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Crack Channel?

    To confirm you're not a script,
    please type the text shown in this image:

    newjieg /\/\/\<<ZZZ

    1. Re:Am I the only one misread it as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not a robot.

    2. Re:Am I the only one misread it as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, but you're a script.

  43. What were they smoking? by Veroxii · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who first read the url as "the crack channel"?

    Must be good stuff!

    1. Re:What were they smoking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:What were they smoking? by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      I thought at first it said "The Crank Channel", which would have fitted right in with the body of the article...

  44. f'ed up neighbors by bobalu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    there's nothing liberal about trying to keep some looney bin neighbor from bringing down the local real estate values.

    or, if there is, then i'm all for it anyway.

    --
    The revolution will NOT be televised.
    1. Re:f'ed up neighbors by EnderWigginsXenocide · · Score: 0, Troll

      Because their suffering that's being caused by stray radiation is so much less important than your property value.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups. -- 0 1 My two bits
    2. Re:f'ed up neighbors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Validity of claims is irrelevant. Indoor or at least properly installed by licensed professionals would not be a problem, as it is it does not even seem they attempted to acquire a building permit for the modification-and it as an amateur work without permit has not been inspected for safety. Property value is only one aspect, the safety of the family that did such is also a concern.

    3. Re:f'ed up neighbors by stor · · Score: 1

      Because their suffering that's being caused by stray radiation is so much less important than your property value.

      Eh? The first step in problem solving is identifying the nature of the problem through logical/ scientific means. You can move on to the solution from there.

      Speculating that there's a problem and erecting an eyesore of a solution is not the way to go.

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    4. Re:f'ed up neighbors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because their suffering that's being caused by stray radiation is so much less important than your property value.

      Suffering can be quantified. For example, the suffering caused by dropping a mug of coffee in your lap is generally less than the suffering caused by losing the use of all your limbs.

      Let us therefore consider the relative suffering here.

      The neighbors' property is being affected significantly; its value is probably falling by 20-30%, which could, for example, represent the difference between being able to afford cancer treatment and dying. That sounds like suffering to me.

      The tinfoil-house people's suffering is... uh... hmm, looks like they, uh, don't acutally have any evidence of any suffering at all. But they might one day. Possibly.

      So, we are comparing real, tangible, quantifiable loss of wealth, with some crackpots claiming that they're being harmed by something that has consistently failed to be proven harmful in 200 years of scientific investigation. Yes, I think I would say that their "suffering" is less important. Sorry, but it's true.

    5. Re:f'ed up neighbors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HELL YES IT'S LESS IMPORTANT!

    6. Re:f'ed up neighbors by PMuse · · Score: 1

      Is the grandparent daft? Liberals shudder every time the phrase "drive down the property values" is invoked. Just typing it has given me the screaming willies.

      Zoning laws and housing codes are a quintessentially conservative (in the sense of I-have-something-and-I-want-to-keep-on-having-it) proposition.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
    7. Re:f'ed up neighbors by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      there's nothing liberal about trying to keep some looney bin neighbor from bringing down the local real estate values.

      Right. When my right to profit trumps someone else's right to be weird, then that is most certainly conservative, not liberal. The liberal thing would be to encourage their self expression, even if brought on by a mental illness.

  45. Anyone else think this is stupid? by smashin234 · · Score: 1

    Maybe its just me, but it seems that their solution would not work for their supposed problem.

    How well does sheet metal block out radio waves? Don't people use aluminum foil to boost radio and/or TV waves?

    I just can't see this actually being that successful since people can get radios to work inside of large buildings made out of metal.

    Or maybe they are only blocking out "SPECIAL Radio waves put out by terrorists"

    1. Re:Anyone else think this is stupid? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1
      Maybe its just me, but it seems that their solution would not work for their supposed problem,/i>

      Their 'problem' is a brain cell deficiency. It's not supposed to make sense to rational people.

    2. Re:Anyone else think this is stupid? by polysylabic+psudonym · · Score: 1

      Sheets of a condutor will reflect radio waves. That's why aluminium (not a misspelling - I'm Australian) foil is used in some antennas.

      A text sketch:

      ( | )
      ( | )
      ( | )
      Anenna in the middle, radio waves radiating out both ways.

      Same, but with reflector (the right hand line):
      (( | ( |
      (( | ( |
      (( | ( |

      To usefully use this to increase a radio signal in a particular direction you need to know about wavelengths etc.

      To use it to block a radio signal, you just need to put the radio reflective material (eg aluminium) between you and the transmitter. Oh, you also have to make sure that it's sufficiently large to reflect the radio wave. You can avoid all calculations just by building a farady cage, surround yourself with foil in all directions.

      Of course, if you look at the photos that go with TFA (or it may have been a different report of the same thing - if so it's linked in an earlier post) you can see that these people have made one serious mistake - they've rested the metal between their fence and their house. The radio waves (electromagnetic radiation) are cheerfully passing straight through the fence. At least they've got foil inside too.

  46. Believers by bohemian_observer · · Score: 0

    Family also expects Christopher Columbus will be arriving at their water closet soon.

  47. NSA by Detritus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Too bad the NSA's engineering manuals are classified. They specialize in that type of construction. Nothing gets out. Nothing gets in. It still looks like a normal building, although the windows look somewhat unusual.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  48. The video is amusing to watch by MarkTina · · Score: 2, Informative

    The seem really certain that the neighbours are out to get them, though if they've proved it I've no idea why they don't get the police involved.

    1. Re:The video is amusing to watch by ONOIML8 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obviously you've failed to understand that the police are in on it as well. Every cop car is equipped with a mobile RF transmitter. So if they called in the cops then they're only going to increase their exposure to the killer death rays.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    2. Re:The video is amusing to watch by Adrilla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who says they haven't? But perhaps they weren't taken seriously, look at how 'seriously' they're being taken here.

      --

      "Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
  49. THE FOOLS! by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Insightful
    From the picture, it looks like they've got a satellite dish on their roof. Don't they know that that's just concentrating the radio beams from outer space, and then mainlining them through a coax right straight into their newly built echo chamber?

    But seriously, with that jumble of jagged strips forming a bunch of slot radiators, it's possible that certain resonate frequencies in their house have actually been significantly amplified above background levels.

  50. Which scenario makes more sense? by Senor_Programmer · · Score: 5, Funny

    D'Souza family. Obviously culturally acclimated as their house is not garishly painted behind the metal sheets (I saw some detailed photos on a live TeeVee newscast) is nutzo. The whol efriggin family.

    OR

    OR

    OR

    There is a single, LONE NUT, in their neighborhood who coupled the magnetron from his microwave oven to an antenna and is actually tossing photons at the D'Souzas.

    Seriously guys, which is more believable? It's California after all. Personally, you couldn't pay me enough to live in any city in that state.

    1. Re:Which scenario makes more sense? by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      Even if we did, you couldn't afford to live here. :-\

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    2. Re:Which scenario makes more sense? by keziahw · · Score: 1

      The generally agreed upon probability that any given family in California is nutzo is 0.6. Assuming that this applies to Sacramento, there is a 36% probability that the family is whacked AND there is a psycho microwaving them. And that's just if you assume the events are independent. If some lunatic IS microwaving them, that probably increases the probablity of the family being insane. I mean, maybe they've been doing this for like 50 years now. These people's grandparent's (one one side of the family or the other) could have been being microwaved, before their parent's were even born!! Note to Californians: the rest of the US has a .5 probability, so I'm not just picking on you!

    3. Re:Which scenario makes more sense? by JohnsonWax · · Score: 1

      Personally, you couldn't pay me enough to live in any city in that state.

      Don't worry. It's a near certainty that nobody can pay you enough to afford to live in any city in this state.

    4. Re:Which scenario makes more sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I should have excepted one place, but it's more town than city. I really like Santa Monica. It can't be much more expensive than Honolulu, can it?

    5. Re:Which scenario makes more sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we have a neighbor, a rather large woman with a pair of watermelon sized breasts who jogs topless at 4AM most days....

      Not in California!

  51. Surely we've got Slashdot readers in Sacramento? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can somebody with a digital camera run by there and take some pictures before this gets taken down? It sounds hilarious.

  52. The land of the free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My grandparents had something similar happen to them. Except they desserved it, a bunch of garbage in the front yard. http://chadwick.ath.cx/ -Chadwick Ferugson

  53. Hey, that's my house! by Wizarth · · Score: 1

    Hi mom!

  54. Lunatics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First we had people creating tinfoil hats to avoid alien abductions.

    Now, they tinfoil their whole house. What's up with that? Are they afraid of alien estate agents?

  55. Or vinyl over the sheet metal by lheal · · Score: 1

    ... since the neighbors will declare "unsightly" anything that isn't the right shade of Natural SandStone (TM).

    Perhaps there is aluminum siding now that has the look of Natural SandStone vinyl siding?

    Mustn't stray too far from the norm.

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
  56. It's NORTH Sacramento by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just another day on the boulevard, I've had a lot worse neighbors here.

  57. LINE THE WALLS by Postalbunny · · Score: 1

    If they can't have it outside, why not line insides of their walls with sheetmetal. Or easier yet, put the sheetmetal on the inside like wallpaper. Then the terrorist will THINK they're bombarding you, when in reality they "waves" will bounce back and hit them!

    1. Re:LINE THE WALLS by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      RTFA. The metal outside is in addition to the foil lining on the inside walls and a foil-like material (space blanket?) on their beds.

  58. what a crock by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Informative
    The D'Souzas said the bombardment began after the first anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and that the radio waves have caused them health problems ranging from headaches to lupus.

    As someone who has a family member with Lupus, I call absolute bullshit on this.

    Lupus causes haven't really been figured out. Furthermore, there's absolutely ZERO medical evidence that EMF/EMI causes or even aggravates Lupus. Trust me, I looked and looked after her doctor told her to "avoid cell phones and wireless devices whenever possible". I even emailed two mailing lists- one for researchers, one for patients- and came up with nothing. Nobody had ever heard of this. Furthermore, if their theory wer correct, we'd be seeing an explosion of Lupus cases (we haven't).

    The D'Souzas said they will comply with the order and remove the sheet metal, but they also plan to gather evidence to show city officials what they believe is a problem with radiation.

    That will be pretty tough, given there's next to no evidence EMF/EMI causes anything in people, and a lot of studies showing it has no discernible effects.

    The inside of the house is also covered with foil and the beds are covered with a foil-like material as well,"

    Sounds to me like they'd be a lot better served spending their money on a psychologist, not tin foil. Self-diagnosis ("radio waves are making us depressed, and giving us Lupus!") is a textbook sign of a hypochondriac.

    1. Re:what a crock by dbIII · · Score: 2, Funny
      there's next to no evidence EMF/EMI causes anything in people
      There's plenty, but the intensity has to be high. There were a large number of birth defects reported from pregnant women operating PVC welders in the 1970s (almost 100% in one plant, the pregnant women were given the "warm" machines to use in the winter, the bodies of the operators were heated up by induction), which is why more care is taken now to ensure that the sheilding is in good shape. EMF from a lot of sources obeys the least squares rule for intensity, so you have to be very close for even a strong souce to be a problem.

      As for the lupus, I would say they are crying wolf.

    2. Re:what a crock by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      As someone who has a family member with Lupus, I call absolute bullshit on this.

      Only on /. would someone make a(n arguably) rational argument against irrational behavior.

      But thanks. I'm pretty sure there was someone on here who needed the absuridity of this article pointed out in no uncertain terms.

    3. Re:what a crock by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      next to no evidence EMF/EMI causes anything in people
      Actually there's a massive amount of evidence. There are whole products dedicated to the protection and absorbtion of harmful EMFs.

      Perhaps you've heard of some of them - to name a few: sunscreen, sunglasses, umbrellas, microwave doors, UV filters, X-ray vests...

      It is so well known as to be considered fact that EMF in the ultraviolet and higher radiation can cause all kinds of dangerous mutations; that a lot of matter will absorb EMF energy in the microwave all the way through UV and convert it to (possibly) dangerous heat; and that specific frequencies of microwave radiation will cause excitation of water molecules, which can cause burns even more efficiently than simple absorption! So what do we have left? Well, I still haven't talked about the visible spectrum much, which in large doses can blind someone.

      What there is little evidence of is that frequency in radio range causes damage. If it does, it's certainly very subtle and not well known. Personally, I'm not willing to entirely dismiss the idea that any kind of radiation is harmful, as we already know that most of the rest of the RF spectrum can be, and there's no good way to prove a negative.

      On the other hand, I'm not going to be coating my house with aluminum on the off chance that it has an effect - which is likely miniscule since it has not yet been noticed.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    4. Re:what a crock by zambuka · · Score: 1

      From the Lupus foundation of America
      linky

      In particular the reference to genetics, antibiotics and stress as possible causes.

      I can guess the events leading to their health problems go something like this.

      Sep 11. Fear and worry about terrorism. News blasts the gullible with images of death and destruction, and the possibility of the use of biological agents.

      Family reacts by becoming a little isolationist and stocking up on serious antibiotics and other cleaning products to use around the house.

      One year later levels of antibiotics and cleaning chemicals reach a critical point and the family starts falling ill.

      Family goes to ill informed 2nd rate GP who spouts urban myth as fact. Or family just refuse to acknowledge that possibly all those cleaning products could be harmful, "after all they are cleaning products, how could something that is supposed to clean things possibly be harmful?" (Don't laugh, you probably all know someone who thinks like this ).

      Family chooses to blame neighbours for failing health, typical delusions kick in. The fashionable cause for mysterious illness is radiation. Family erects aluminium sheets for "protection".

      Neighbour politely asks for aluminium to be removed, family takes it as proof that something is up. Paranoia kicks in big time.

      The final phase is their story turning up on slashdot where they are mocked and ridiculed.

      But as parent posted, their money would be better spent on a psychologist. Still, someone should wander over there with the appropriate equipment and do some testing for radon and other harmful sources of radiation.

    5. Re:what a crock by T(V)oney · · Score: 1

      I wondered about the validity of their claim as well, so I went on a hunt for information about Lupus. One apparent cause of Lupus is UV radiation, which leads me to believe that shorter-wavelength radiation could cause it as well (link)

      I'm not trying to contradict you or anything (it still sounds a bit fishy to me), but I suppose it could be plausible.

    6. Re:what a crock by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      Which is why it's fortunate that no human broadcast device uses a wavelength shorter than UV. Orders of magnitude longer, in fact, at minimum.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    7. Re:what a crock by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      A minor correction:

      "What there is little evidence of is that frequency in radio range causes damage."

      There's plenty of evidence that high-power RF can doe plenty of damage. Physical contact with an antenna radiating as little as 10-20 watts can cause an RF burn. And of course, there's the obvious example of microwave ovens (1000+ watts concentrated into a small chamber.)

      Thanks to the inverse square law, the chances of being in an RF field strong enough to be harmful and not knowing EXACTLY what's causing it (ooh, look at the huge feedhorn/antenna!!!) are slim to none. Even wood siding would be sufficient to block/absorb a significant amount of any type of RF that would be absorbed readily by the human body.

      Basically, RF can cause significant damage via short-term heating. This requires very high power levels and close proximity though. Cell phones don't emit enough RF at their maximum transmit power to even cause damage if ALL of the power were absorbed by a fraction of a square centimeter of the surface of your skin (such as if you held a 1/4 watt resistor running at its maximum power).

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    8. Re:what a crock by Mathness · · Score: 1

      I even emailed two mailing lists- one for researchers, one for patients- and came up with nothing. Nobody had ever heard of this. Furthermore, if their theory were correct, we'd be seeing an explosion of Lupus cases (we haven't).

      Just to point out something less tham obvious.
      Some diseases are so rare that only a few medical doctors even know about them.
      Some even are so rare to only have a handful of known and documented cases (like 1 patient in 20 years).
      And the chance of them doing reading a public mailing list is very small.

      The point is, just because you couldn't find anything, doesn't mean anything per se.

      --
      Carbon based humanoid in training.
    9. Re:what a crock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't argue with your experience, but I too know someone who's been diagnosed with Lupus. Granted, that's just one diagnosis which she has received in over a decade of chronic illness.

      Initially, the diagnosis was clinical depression, then, she was told it was all in her mind. Then she was told it was Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) / Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), a more recent diagnosis has been that she is suffering from Lyme Disease, but that it is in a very advanced stage having remained undetected for ten years and more.

      In that time, she has seen a vast horde of doctors, multiple specialists for each of the above diagnoses, psychiatrists, and many others. The diagnoses, advice which she has received from these folks have been at best confusing, and at worst flatly contradictory. When seeing psychiatrists, she has had to visit some very disturbing institutions with very broken people all around her.

      All of the above on top of the fact that she has been very seriously ill, and regularly has to attend insurance interviews to defend the fact that she is ill and is actively trying to do something about it.

      And boy, is she doing stuff about it. She has eliminated lots of bad stuff from her diet. She only eats organic, free-range, unprocessed, home-cooked food. She has eliminated sugar, salt, wheat, coffee, tea, alcohol and a variety of other ingredients from her diet. She has bought a water distiller.

      Having been jerked about by traditional medicine for about 5 years, she also turned to alternative therapies.

      She too has been advised to avoid electromagnetic radiation when possible. She doesn't own a cellphone, her roommates have a microwave, but they have agreed to unplug it when not in use.

      This woman is a born fighter. Over the past ten years, I have seen her have good days and bad days. I have seen her manage a couple of dances at a family wedding, and spend the following week as a physical and emotional wreck.

      I have seen various courses of treatment ravage her body, I have seen others give her a great boost.

      I have trouble accepting the value of some of the courses of treatment which she tries, but I maintain an open mind. This woman has a very logical, scientific mind. When she was healthy enough to work, she was a senior programmer for a major national company. She did not go lightly into the realms of complimentary treatments, but after five years of attending a range of "normal" experts, undergoing a battery of (some quite intrusive) tests, all without successfully agreeing on a diagnosis, let alone identifying a cure, I can see why she was tempted to give it a try.

      If she said that she wanted her house fitted with an electromagnetic shield and had some detail on what she needed, I'd be over there with my tools in a hearbeat.

    10. Re:what a crock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe you're thinking of the radio waves used for casual transmission and communication. These people are claiming that they're being bombarded with radio waves that are intentionally powerful enough to harm them.

      Not that I'm supporting their claims, just poining that out.

    11. Re:what a crock by kc0re · · Score: 1

      But there's no scientific evidence that says that theirs ..not.. either.. is there?

    12. Re:what a crock by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      EMF from a lot of sources obeys the least squares rule for intensity
      What has EMF got to do with fitting a line to a set of data points?
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:what a crock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My dad is a retired electrical lineman, now in his seventies. He spent forty years working literally inches from 30,000 volts.

      The EMF was so strong he couldn't wear a watch, it would magnetize and quit as soon as he got close to the top of the tower.

      He now spends his time making pocket knoves and square dancing. His only medical complaints are a bad back (from being hit by a car) and some skin cancer on his nose from forty years in the sun.

      If EMF were dangerous, Dad would have died decades ago.

    14. Re:what a crock by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      This falls under the "something has gone wrong and there's nothing we can do about it" category. We all do silly things, even when they don't make a difference.

      Heck, I started losing hair about 10 years ago. When I mentioned it to my barber, she recommeneded dropping the heavy-duty shampoo/conditioner for baby shampoo. I did, and I've lost very little hear since. It probably made very little difference, but I use baby shampoo to this day and don't plan on changing.

      Heck, if she'd told me to wear my socks inside out, and my hair had stopped fallin out, I'd probably do that, too. When the issue is dear enough, correlation is just as valuable as causality, if it works.

      As for EMI/RFI, yes it can be bad. There are few ways it can be bad enough to cause insideous, gradual damage without causing immediate, obvious damage. These folks are, as most people have surmised, nuts.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    15. Re:what a crock by stephenbooth · · Score: 1
      EMF from a lot of sources obeys the least squares rule for intensity

      I think you might have meant the 'inverse squares rule' (the intensity of an electromagnetic field varies with inverse proportion to the square of the distance from the source).

      Stephen

      --
      "Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
    16. Re:what a crock by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?"

      no, it's just you.

      heh.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    17. Re:what a crock by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Ummm. I guess you did not pass physics. Microwaves are much longer than UV. You maybe correct about shorter-wavelength radiation but if you go to a higher frequency than UV you are thing getting into soft-xrays.
      BTW shorter wavelength = higher frequency

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  59. You're just saying that because you work for THEM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the frequency, kenneth???

  60. Cape Coral Florida by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely this is also illigal in Cape Coral Florida home of the statute violation to park a pickup truck in plane view of the street.

  61. I wonder.... by pthor1231 · · Score: 1

    ..if they use cell phones, cause you know those cause cancer too. Its kinda rediculous that they think that their neighbors have been bombarding them with radiowaves. There are radiowaves in the air all the time. It's not like there is some sorta voodoo sick ray.

  62. Seems obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    If they want to keep the foil the objection is to the side of the house being silver and highly reflective.

    Paint the foil. Then check out family rates with the local Shrink.

  63. It isn't about California by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Not only are you not a Californian, but you've obviously never owned a house -- or owned one that was worth so little, you didn't obssess over things that might affect the value of your property. In most of urban California, you have to sell your soul in order to afford a house -- which makes people insanely aware of anything that might lower property values. People will hassle you just for parking a rusty car in front of your house. And of coursethey pass zoning laws that minimize any and all activities affecting same. So forget about raising chickens in your back yard, or painting your house a funny color. And you damn well better take good care of your lawn, if you value your freedom!

    In that context, a strong reaction to a house covered with metal foil is most predictable. The only suprise is that the neighbors took the time to call the code enforcement people, instead of rounding up a lynch mob!

    If your situation is any better, don't feel too smug. Housing costs are going up everywhere, and the same obsesssion with property values is spreading like a disease.

    1. Re:It isn't about California by nolife · · Score: 1

      There is a fine line there though. Code and city regulations are normally for big picture items, like rusty cars in the yard, fences falling over etc.. Some HOA's take it to the extreme and complain about house number placement, number and type of trees, garage door always shut, limit of outside toys etc.. Where I live, the houses are far enough apart (avg 3-10 acres with many trees) that it does not matter what one does to their house as you probably can't see it from your house anyway. No HOA required luckily.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    2. Re:It isn't about California by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unless the covenent of your deed prohibits it, or you're a member of a HOA; you can tell your neighbors to mind their own damned business.

      I bought a house, it was average for the part of Pennsylvania that I'm from. It's in an upper-middle class neighborhood.

      The few weeks after we bought it, we discovered a leak in the basement. We had to get a backhoe to tear up a trench around two sides of the house to install proper drainage. It was like that for a few months, the neighbors probably didn't like it, but there was nothing they could do.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    3. Re:It isn't about California by Velox_SwiftFox · · Score: 1

      By the way, in San Jose you are allowed to keep chickens in your back yard. I think you can in Palo Alto too, the most expensive property I can think of offhand that is urban enough for this to apply.

    4. Re:It isn't about California by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meow Meow Meow.

    5. Re:It isn't about California by moranar · · Score: 1

      Well, this would probably go _with_ the housing code, not against it. Sure, nobody likes a trench next to the house. But neighbours with rotten walls is worse. Housing codes aren't exclusive to California. London (UK) has them, and I figure any big city with expensive estate has them too. I remember my uncles had to ask permission to build a small round window on a barely visible side of the house, for Bob's sake.

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea!"
      Gandhi, about Internet Security
    6. Re:It isn't about California by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not tin foil though. It's large sheets of metal just propped up against the house. That does become a safety hazard, not just a codes and conventions or property value issue.

    7. Re:It isn't about California by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Informative
      Unless the covenent of your deed prohibits it, or you're a member of a HOA; you can tell your neighbors to mind their own damned business.
      Absolutely incorrect. Every municpality in the US has building codes and zoning restrictions, many also have any number of civil and/or criminal codes, all of which limit what you may or may not do with or on your property.
      I bought a house, it was average for the part of Pennsylvania that I'm from. It's in an upper-middle class neighborhood.

      The few weeks after we bought it, we discovered a leak in the basement. We had to get a backhoe to tear up a trench around two sides of the house to install proper drainage. It was like that for a few months, the neighbors probably didn't like it, but there was nothing they could do.

      More likely there was nothing they could do in that particular situation or that they didn't care. That does not generalize into the statement quoted in the first paragraph.
    8. Re:It isn't about California by zerbot · · Score: 1

      We bought our house for 272K four years ago, just refi'd it, and it appraised for 370K, and given the asking prices for what is on the market nearby, it doesn't seem out of whack. There is no HOA, there are people nearby who raise chickens, you can paint your house any darned color you like, etc. The problem with these subdivisions with HOA's is that the houses are all cookie cutter, so anything that stands out even a little looks odd. The houses here are quite varied, so difference is the norm rather than being something to be bludgeoned out of existence.

    9. Re:It isn't about California by SamSim · · Score: 1

      This puzzles me. Is everybody in California trying to sell their house?

    10. Re:It isn't about California by ignorant_coward · · Score: 1


      I'd imagine some people in california who've lived in the same house a long time could sell it, move to a rural area, and retire on the proceeds--that is if property taxes haven't bankrupted them first.

    11. Re:It isn't about California by lahvak · · Score: 1

      Cannot agree more. In addition to that, most of the new subdivision houses are so incredibly ugly that covering them with aluminium can only count as an improvement.

      --
      AccountKiller
    12. Re:It isn't about California by fm6 · · Score: 1
      Code and city regulations are normally for big picture items...
      No, code and city regulations are for addressing the fears and loathings of voter/taxpayers who have most of their net worth tied up in an expensive house, and will vote out any politician they see as insufficiently protective of same!

      I say these things just to describe the psychology and origins of the anti-tinhouse edict, not to justify it. I actually find this attitude pretty repulsive. Then again, I don't own a house, and will probably never be able to afford one -- so I can afford to be cynical!

    13. Re:It isn't about California by fm6 · · Score: 1
      I'll take your word for that. But I suspect that you would have to claim the chickens as pets. I think most places restrict you to a maximum of 6 pets bigger than a goldfish.

      Least they seem to tolerant, I have to point out that Palo Alto is notorious for trying to keep non-residents out of city parks...

    14. Re:It isn't about California by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Obviously not. But when homes are as expensive as they are, it's not just a place to live, it's a long-term investment. And the current value of a big investment is always a concern, even if you have no plans to sell.

    15. Re:It isn't about California by Damvan · · Score: 1

      Umm, California actually has very low property taxes, thanks to Prop. 13. My prop tax is 1% the value, with a severe limit on how much they can raise it. In the 6 years I haved lived there, the value of my house rose from $175k to $450k and my property tax went up $50. Yes, that is an insane rise in price. Yes, if I had half a brain, I would sell and get the hell out!

    16. Re:It isn't about California by ignorant_coward · · Score: 1


      275K profit in 6 years...your profit alone is over twice the value of my 3BR house with an acre of land! No wonder some people say real estate is the new gold rush.

    17. Re:It isn't about California by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I'm amused that this post got so many "flamebait" mods. I guess I offended peoples' Libertarian sensibilities. Face it, people: not all restrictive laws come from fuzzy-headed liberals, fascistic reactionaries, and evil bureaucrats. Most actually come from decent ordinary people who see nothing wrong with having the goverment protect their property and lifestyle.

    18. Re:It isn't about California by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, I'd be willing to buy into the "brings my property value down" argument if I heard just as many "I'd like to give you $$$ since your improvement also increased my property value."

      I know you think these diode like regulations only result in upward pressure on property values, good neighborhoods etc. I disagree!

      --cdvl--

  64. So much for that... by AutopsyReport · · Score: 0

    Looks like their plan foiled :)

    --

    For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.

  65. Oh my god... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    I guess next they're going to complain that the FCC isn't doing anything to stop the broadcasting of the radio waves, too?

    Come on, guys, give me a break, the only way these people could be bombarded with radio waves strong enough to hurt them is if they lived right next to a 100,000 watt broadcasting tower that's only 5-10 feet tall, and even then, if they're getting sick, imagine how shitty the neighbors doing the broadcasting must feel? Hell, they're probably fried, along with every bird and pet and stray in the area, plus everyone else in the neighborhood.

    Let's go ask their neighbors if they feel bad or nauseous. Bet you cash money they say no, and these people will just be proven hypochondriacs, looking for good drugs.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  66. What'll the neighbors think? by michaelbuddy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you own a house an somebody does this in your neighborhood, I'd think you'd have an opinion about it. Life in the suburbs kinda sucks, but at the same time it makes sense. Your house is your property and it's affected by surrounding properties. "Hi, prospective home buyer, let me show you the garden..Oh don't mind the neighbor with the billboard in his front yard advertising his church. Oh and across the street is my neighbor Phil. he decided to pave his entire front yard so he could park his two RVs and his boat all year. Gotta love this place!"

    that kinda crap doesn't wash. Life is supposed to look normal, well trimmed, green and conforming. If for some reason what they believed was true, if they can't stand their rights being trampled on, they can put sheet metal on the inside of the house, between the brick and insulation.

    Most of the time this kind of transgression starts with several written and in person warnings, notices and then you're slapped with the misdemeanor or fine.

    --

    ...::----::...

    I am in no way affiliated with this sig.

    1. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by ONOIML8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah because gods forbid anyone who owns property or a home should be allowed to do as they please with it just because they own it. They must be forced to conform with government approved standards. If they can't handle that then perhaps some time in Siberia will teach them a lesson. If they offend a second time then the neighbors should be allowed to lynch them.

      But only neighbors who are party members in good standing.

      Who are these assholes who insist on acting like individuals anyway? Fucking Americans.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    2. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by l3v1 · · Score: 1

      Life is supposed to look normal, well trimmed, green and conforming.

      Yup, kinda sound like "it plays america the beautiful and tie a yellow ribbon". Thing is, life is not that simple. Of course I can understand that in a wider scope, the value of the neighborhood effects the value of the individual properties. Still, despite of being quite open minded [uhmm, or not] I'd feel a certain raise in my blood pressure if my neighbors would start thinking my porch is their porch. My work, my money, my life. Maybe I'm stupid, could happen. That said, I also can value a nice neighborhood, a nice front yard, and I probably wouldn't just smile on someone covering their house in aluminium or whatever. Thing is, I've seen very nice neighborhoods, in my country and in other countries, but such ridiculous stories usually doesn't originate from them.

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    3. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1

      Life is supposed to look normal, well trimmed, green and conforming.

      While this vision of life makes me want to vomit pea soup on priests, nonconformity is not a virtue in and of itself. I would not live in a community that said I couldn't paint my house black, or red, or some other traditional house colour (bland-as-f*ck pastels seem to be popular now), or that I couldn't have a basketball net in my driveway. However, doing something like this is clearly making the house look like shit (random sheet metal is attractive in almost NOBODY'S aesthetic), and consequently makes the neighbourhood look a little like ass. You can argue that a red house with a hoop in the driveway is "enjoyment of your own property". You can't say that piling sheet metal randomly against the fence and your roof is the same at all.

      Not to mention it's absolutely insane. Nobody's beaming microwaves into this family's house to try and kill them. If they had any proof of it whatsoever, they could call the cops. But they don't, because it's some off-the-deep-end schizo-hippie fantasy brought on by god knows what combination of mental illness, gullibility and moronic government bioterror warnings.

      --
      Freedom: "I won't!"
    4. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by moranar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Stallman said "Your freedom to throw your fist ends at the tip of my nose". Building ordnances are there for a reason, the same that forbids you from tanning in your underwear in the front lawn.

      You can't build whatever just because it strikes your fancy if it brings down the value of other people's property.

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea!"
      Gandhi, about Internet Security
    5. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What I don't understand is, why doesn't "you're not free to do whatever you want with your home" doesn't lower property values even more, since, well, it .. um .. lowers the value of property.

      Freedom is precious. Lack of zoning laws should raise value. Someone should say, "holy crap, your neighbor has that ugly sign up, and can get away with it? That means that if I live here, I can do ANYTHING!!"

    6. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by mtrichardson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      American ideals are such that (ideally) you can do whatever you want without harming other people. These people are certainly harming their neighbors due to the lowering of property values which, in an area like this, can be an intense, obscene amount of money. Nobody is stopping them from doing anything that doesn't affect property values, after all. There's not going to be anything happening for the tinfoil-like beds and the lining on the inside of the house. It's just the stuff that's harming other people.

    7. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      > You can't say that piling sheet metal randomly against the fence and your roof is the same at all.

      You don't have to say this at all. It might look like shit and provide no functionality, but it doesn't matter. They don't need to have a reason to do anything to their property.

    8. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! Can't tan in your underwear on your front lawn? I'm so glad I do not live in the land of the free, and instead live in a land with real freedom. Come on Americans swim the pond the waters lovely.

    9. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by kahei · · Score: 1


      Yeah! I own an anvil and I should be able to do anything I like with it, like dropping it on people's heads! I own a building and I should be able to do anything I like with it, like demolishing it while people are inside! I own a horse, and I should be allowed to do anything I like with it, like torturing it to death and --

      oh, wait, I forgot -- I'm not a libertarian.

      --
      Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
    10. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by nickstance · · Score: 2, Informative

      Stallman said "Your freedom to throw your fist ends at the tip of my nose". Building ordnances are there for a reason, the same that forbids you from tanning in your underwear in the front lawn.
      STALLMAN!?!?!?
      Try Oliver Wendell Holmes

    11. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by moranar · · Score: 1

      Well, I read it in an essay by RMS. Of course, it's entirely possible that he was quoting someone else, as you point out.

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea!"
      Gandhi, about Internet Security
    12. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by ONOIML8 · · Score: 1

      You're looking at this as though the glass were half empty. The higher ones property is valued the more one will be charged in taxes. So to say that lowering of property values harms neighbors might not be the case. I'm thinking you would first have to prove that someone lost money because of this before you could prove any harm done.

      If what they were doing on their property caused illness, maybe causing some sort of a public health hazard, that would harm people. This, a little tin foil on the house, does not.

      Some might even argue that it is abstract art and has the potential to improve the value over time.

      The idea that you can go around forcing your neighbors to maintain or improve the value of YOUR property is absurd. I can see it now, you want to sell your house so you go around telling your neighbors how to do their yard work and install fountains and siding and tell them that if the market value of your property doesn't increase at least 10% you'll kick their ass or take them to court.

      Ah, that's America.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    13. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no but you are an idiot.

    14. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      Yeah because gods forbid anyone who owns property or a home should be allowed to do as they please with it just because they own it. They must be forced to conform with government approved standards. If they can't handle that then perhaps some time in Siberia will teach them a lesson. If they offend a second time then the neighbors should be allowed to lynch them.


      Couldn't agree more, you just need to present your form signed by God himself granting you the land and permission to build on it...

      Oh, you were given lease to the land and permission to build on it by the government. A government that I paid my taxes for just as much, than not more so that you. But you can do anything you like on your government granted land, without having to care about the impact on other people?

      Got it. Let me get you a shotgun so you can shoot some people you don't like. After all, if they're on your land you can do whatever you like...

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    15. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by ONOIML8 · · Score: 1

      Nice theory. In reality you are taxed based upon property value. The higher the assessed value the more you pay. Which means that if you intend to occupy the property for the long term you are not encouraged to keep the value high.

      So your government who grants you land would seem to be sending a message on that front.

      Your shotgun arguement is a completely different matter. I didn't see anything in TFA that mentioned these people firing weapons at their neighbors, only that they had an unusual choice in siding for their home.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    16. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by ONOIML8 · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that the throwing of fists is a physical threat to someone and would be a completely different issue from the one at hand. How fist fighting can be compared with tanning in your underware as a freedom is beyond me.

      I suppose you would hope that your city enacts a law that prevents people from tanning in lime green shorts too.

      What if you intend to own and occupy your property for the long term. Your neighbors do things that cause the value of your property to increase which would cause your taxes on that property to increase. That is just as unfair.

      I've never heard of this Stallman character. There is, I would imagine, a very good reason for that. Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Payne.....they would be among those you should look to for words of wisdom regarding the concept of freedom in the USA.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    17. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by ONOIML8 · · Score: 1

      You take a large leap from ones choice as and individual to install a rather unconventional siding to direct physical harm to people and animals. You seem to think those are similar, could you explain please? And these libertarians you speak of, are they all so violent?

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    18. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by syrinx · · Score: 1

      Wow, you have a really fucked up idea of libertarianism.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    19. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by hab136 · · Score: 1
      You're looking at this as though the glass were half empty. The higher ones property is valued the more one will be charged in taxes. So to say that lowering of property values harms neighbors might not be the case. I'm thinking you would first have to prove that someone lost money because of this before you could prove any harm done.

      Tax collectors rarely lower property values because of asthetic issues, but the house will certainly not sell, or sell for less.

    20. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yeah because gods forbid anyone who owns property or a home should be allowed to do as they please with it just because they own it.

      OK. I'm going to buy every house around yours, and convert the whole thing to a rendering plant. How about that, DUMBASS?

      They must be forced to conform with government approved standards. If they can't handle that then perhaps some time in Siberia will teach them a lesson. If they offend a second time then the neighbors should be allowed to lynch them.

      Strawman bullshit. Typical refuge of those who have no facts. I'm suprised you didn't play the Nazi card.

      But only neighbors who are party members in good standing.

      So now the expection of rational behavior is facism? No wonder some of you vacuumheaded kids these days fancy yourselves rag tage members of the Evil Empire. A lot of you geek kids have a MASSIVE suprise waiting for you when you finally move away from home in your thirties.

      Who are these assholes who insist on acting like individuals anyway?

      Who are assholes like you who think any behavior is acceptable at any time?

      Fucking Americans.

      Two words, niether of which you have any understanding.

    21. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm...did you RTFA?!? This was quite a bit more than "a little tinfoil"! What if a piece fell on the mailman, or the house caught fire and a firefighter was injured trying to put it out? Give me a break - everyone has to live by some rules whether you like it or not.

    22. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by eth1 · · Score: 1

      Do you even actually own a house?

      Normally, I'd agree with you, but as a homeowner, there are other considerations:
      1 - I don't want to have to look at a trash heap every day
      2 - I want to be able to sell my house some day, and prospective buyers don't like looking at trash heaps, either.

      Any city has property codes you can look at before you move there - don't like them? Don't move there. Same goes for homeowners covenants & restrictions. And those rules are there for a reason. All it takes is ONE house in a neighborhood that looks trashy to start the whole area downhill. Maybe YOU don't care about the value of YOUR house, but your neighbors probably care about theirs.

    23. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by moranar · · Score: 1

      Seems to me you wouldn't get a metaphore if it bit you in the arse. And it seems to me that you're trolling too.

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea!"
      Gandhi, about Internet Security
    24. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      You can't build whatever just because it strikes your fancy if it brings down the value of other people's property. I think the real question should be why does some strange contraption built next door on property that is not PART of the property in question cause the adjoining property to lose value because of it? I mean seriously, you can build a privacy fence so you don't have to see the eyesore. I can understand more about atrocities in the front yard, but the back yard out of view from the street shouldn't lower property values for the surrounding properties.

      Perhaps the real problem is that we insist on defining property value not as the value of that actual property but that property along with surrounding property as well. This creates the situations where community organizations go nutzo and start requiring absolutely asinine things for the community members. (And I consider requiring all houses to be painted one of a small set of colors to be asinine. There are plenty of colors you can paint a house besides white, grey and brown and it still look quite nice.)

    25. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Oh, the "Lowering of property values" arguement.

      Nevermind that 1) your neighbors probably aren't looking to sell your house right now 2) a lower proprty value translates to a lower property tax and 3) people should stop being so self centered that they think they shouldn't even have to SEE something they dislike.

      The fact is the value of your home should be a function of lot size, condition of the house, and the amenities nearby (grocery store, gas stations, etc.). The fact that someone nearby has a pink house shouldn't matter... its not like you're going to be going into it anyway, right? So why do you care?

      But I'd like to apply your line of reasoning; I don't like fat girls in belly shirts, so lets ban that.

    26. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      So now the expection of rational behavior is facism?

      If the behavior is irrational, but not causing harm, than so what?

      Who are assholes like you who think any behavior is acceptable at any time?

      Any behavior that doesn't harm others is acceptable, whether you define it as normal or not.

      If its not harming someone, why do you waste your time worrying about what others are doing? Don't have a life of your own to worry about?

    27. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What if you intend to own and occupy your property for the long term. Your neighbors do things that cause the value of your property to increase which would cause your taxes on that property to increase. That is just as unfair.

      Property taxes are based on the appraised value of a house, not the fair market value. Furthermore, property that is a primary residence and is held long-term does not subject the owner to capital gains taxes on the increased value. Keep trying...you just may find a plausible negative aspect of one's property increasing in value.

    28. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (And I consider requiring all houses to be painted one of a small set of colors to be asinine. There are plenty of colors you can paint a house besides white, grey and brown and it still look quite nice.)

      Well, that's what happens when people are "in charge" and aren't held accountable for their ridiculous decisions. Instead of setting policies that benefit everyone, they naturally pick out things which they would personally like. Some people only want to see gray and brown houses in their neighborhood, but a good leader realizes that enforcing such a restriction would be petty and fairly unethical. Think about the types of people who would be motivated enough to want to become a decision maker of an HOA...we're probably talking about the most irritating pedants in the neighborhood.

      However, in this case we have a massive, awkward construction stuck on top of a house. No privacy fence is going to hide that eyesore. I think they should take it down but offer these people some ways to block radiation without disfiguring their house.

    29. Re:What'll the neighbors think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't build whatever just because it strikes your fancy if it brings down the value of other people's property.

      It doesn't. It doesn't affect the value of the property in any way. The property remains the same, and has the same value.

      How much you can sell it for is up to the market, and the market is allowed to fluctuate. People may choose to buy or not buy your property based upon whatever criteria they choose.

      This criteria, and the market in general, is free to fluctuate, and is usually expected to. If the Cult of Tin Foil Lovers decides to move to your town, tin foil on your neighbour's house may be perceieved as a benefit, and your "property value" may shoot up.

      If the Cult of Tin Foil Haters moves into town, tin foil neighbours on your neighbour's house may drive your house's value down. In either case, it's the same house, and the same neighbours.

      Under capitalism, you control what you own, but not all the parties in the free market. You seem to be advocating reading the mind of the market, then forcing the neighbours to obey what you think the market will do.

      That's not fair, from a freedom of expression point of view: you're limiting your neighbour's rights, in order to prevent you from taking a percieved loss in the market. And it's also anti-captialist: you're trying to dicate to the market that tin foil houses are always bad, without leaving it the freedom to decide.

      Who knows? Tin foil may become the next big thing! It's no more unlikely than a couple of guys in their garage going on to found Apple, or a young dropout who once went to Harvard making it big, or some whiny lady who runs a woman's talk show somehow ending up with a billion dollars...
      --
      AC

  67. But in Houston... by itsownreward · · Score: 1

    ...but in Houston, you can cover your house with disposed aluminum beer cans and it's considered outsider art. Sacramento may be flat and have hot weather like we do, but at least we celebrate our eccentrics.

    I've been there many times, including on the property when we went by while a tour was happening. It's quite a sight to behold, and beautiful in its own right.

  68. Also keeping in... by ta0 · · Score: 1

    the fumes from the family meth lab?

    -Ta0
    Low UID.
    Low postcount.
    The longest-running lurker on slashdot.

  69. Re:Oops! Sorry, guys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Actually could you turn it up the turkey I put in the window isn't quite done yet.

    Thanks

  70. Kathaksung? by brownpau · · Score: 1

    I'm wondering if this isn't kathaksung, a rather prolific woowoo who's been making the rounds of message boards all over the web for several years now. Based on his extensive paranoid rantings about the FBI trying to irradiate him via just about everything in his house, a foil-wrapped domicile would be exactly what I'd expect of him.

    1. Re:Kathaksung? by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 1

      Actually it sounds more like news2020, a familiar old soul to those of us who frequent the engineering Usenet groups. His entire focus was on being grilled via mysterious rays. He described many instances of being persecuted by individuals who obviously were just going about their normal lives before being accosted by this kook. We went so far as to explain exactly how he could construct a Faraday shield to completely eliminate electromagnetic waves, but he ignored this and continued to lament his fate. Complained about how the bottled water machine only made noises when he was getting water, described some lethal ray-projecting device his neighbors purchased which sounded exactly like a rowing exercise machine, etc. Everyone agreed he was a kook, we just couldn't decide if he was a kook who believed this stuff or a kook who would spend so much time pretending to be one on the Internet. Maybe it started off as a prank but slowly spiraled into a circle of self-delusion.

  71. Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

    Because metals have a high thermal conductivity. A metal walled grow room would put off an even bigger IR signature.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by pHatidic · · Score: 1

      How does that work? Wouldn't increased conductivity just mean that the heat would spread out more evenly over the surface of the metal walls before going through the wood?

    2. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but metal is not an insulator. Instead of buying 500 rolls of Reynold's, buy some damned insulation.

    3. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      But insulation won't help at all, because the point isn't to keep heat in, it's to get rid of it! The heat is produced by grow lights.

      Best thing to do is to start digging a geothermal sink, or tap a line to the swimming pool and use it as an evaporative cooler.

    4. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by RollingThunder · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily, provided you have something to act as a heat sink off that metal - something like welding copper water lines along the bottoms of the walls, and constantly running water through. That'd sump off the heat pretty effectively into the sewers.

    5. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey tard, if the heat is kept inside by insulation then it wont be leaking out where thermal sensors will "see" it. what's the point in heating up a room to grow pot if you're just going to try to "get rid of it!" ?

    6. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you live in the north, you're not trying to "heat up the room" to grow pot(unless you live in an extreme northern clime. The heat is a unneeded, unwanted by-product of the grow lights. Got it? Getting rid of the heat in a controlled manner is the ideal goal.

      Personally, I'd go with liquid cooled lighting setups. All those other steps mentioned are nice if you're building a grow box, but if you just want to run a small bit in a close or room corner, the liquid cooled light is the best bet.

    7. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, what you're all missing is that heat out = energy in by the principle of conservation of energy. Tin-foiling the interior of a house won't reduce your heat signature. Putting in better insulation will just make the inside of the house hotter while the outside stays the same; conversely putting in worse insulation makes the inside cooler while the outside *stays the same*.

      However, maybe putting up tin foil means you need fewer grow-lights, and that *would* reduce your heat signature.

    8. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Shhh... now the police are going to start monitoring the temperature of the water in sewers. Don't give away the best tricks.

    9. Re:Proof that physics and pot don't mix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not a good idea, since one of the ways they catch big growers is by looking at water use.

  72. And this is a Slashdot story... by Hosiah · · Score: 1

    why again?

  73. Tin pot crackheads? by koakapo · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, wonder if they ever got past the elementary physics of the device. For the shield to be effective it has to have an earth - and not just any earth either - they need one that's low impedance at the frequency they think is irradiating them. On the bright side - they may well have created the world's largest (ugly) capacitor, and who knows what the e and h fields are doing there - possible making them sicker?

    --
    ----- Every day we get up and make the choice that the thing we are doing is the most valuable use of our time. -----
  74. Re:You're just saying that because you work for TH by FunWithHeadlines · · Score: 1
    "What's the frequency, kenneth???"

    We know what it is, and furthermore we know you know what it is. Expect a visit soon...

  75. Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by core+plexus · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I'm from Ventura, and am unsure exactly where "Sacromento" is, but I'm glad I moved to Alaska as soon as I turned 18. I could build a house out of aluminum foil ('tin' foil is hard to come by) in my neighborhood, and no one would care, even though the cheapest house just sold for $275,000. Of course, I don't live in Los Anchorage, but I still have DSL, indoor plumbing, and a fire department 6 blocks away.

    -cp-

    Alaska -- America's most tax-friendly state

    1. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by friedo · · Score: 4, Funny

      On the downside, you live in Alaska.

    2. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by core+plexus · · Score: 4, Informative
      Yes, it's a hard life. Not paying state income taxes or purchase taxes, getting a check from the Permanent Fund every year for approx. $1,000, having all this fresh air and clean water and room to roam. Then there's the gold mine that I own. What a hassle it is to throw back the small gold so it can grow bigger. Heck, I remember once, when it got to -20 below zero for a couple of days. I had to drive almost an hour to find good skiing.

      Yep, I'm suffering here.

      -cp-

    3. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Tin foil is no harder to come by than aluminum or lead foil. Gold foil can be a bit expensive, and any foil is pricy if you want it to be particularly thin. Really what you want, though, is lead-tin alloy foil.

    4. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by blueg3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It must be nice to live in a state where there are apparently no kind of building codes. Tell me, does the state require that the schools children go to be built to any kind of specification, or is it okay if they're also made out of materials unsuitable for construction (eg. metal foils)? Is it okay for someone to sell you a house that's not suitable to live in?

      While the article isn't very well written, your complaint is just as poor. You might be glad you're no longer a Californian, but I'm almost entirely sure that it's not a California state law they're being charged under.

      Sadly, I often hear people say, "I should be able to pay to live in a neighborhood where aren't allowed to buy a house." It's under a similar but more reasonable principle that they're not allowed to cover their house in aluminum junk. They're (perhaps unknowingly) paying to live in an area where ugly houses aren't allowed.

      I suppose it's also somehow the State of New York's fault that in my apartment complex we're not allowed to put up satellite dishes.

    5. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by JeffSh · · Score: 1

      actually, building codes wouldn't be applicable here. I'm sure they are only violating some kind of local nuisance ordiance..

    6. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Zutfen · · Score: 3, Funny

      That sounds just like New Hampshire...

      Just without my own personal gold mine.

      or a bonus $1,000 a year...

      "Honey, we're moving to Alaska!"

      *smack*

      "Honey... recent developments seem to imply that we're staying in N.H."

      --
      I'm too lazy to enter a sig. Hey wait a second! You tricked me!
    7. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by lowrydr310 · · Score: 1
      I suppose it's also somehow the State of New York's fault that in my apartment complex we're not allowed to put up satellite dishes.

      Actually, the FCC passed a rule in 1996 that allows residents of apartment complexes/townhomes/condos to install a dish as long as it's within the renter's exclusive area such as a balcony, yard, or patio.

      http://www.dishnetwork.com/downloads/pdf/getdish/w hat_is/LLP_Release_Form.pdf

      So if your balcony or porch has a clear view of the satellite, then you shouldn't have any problems. The only place you can't put the dish is on top of the roof or attached to the side of your building, unless you have the owner's permission.

    8. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by spectral · · Score: 3, Funny

      -20 below zero? Why, upstate new york gets colder than 20 degrees (above zero). I'm moving to alaska, it's warmer! ;)

    9. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by lowrydr310 · · Score: 1

      I just left California too. Unfortunately I live in New Jersey now where things are more ridiculous than California (no liquor sales on Sunday?!?!?). In one city where I was looking to live there's an law that prohibits the use of charcoal grills! WTF?

    10. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Funny

      Different strokes.
      Some people would rather have good schools, a community, clean air, clean water, and a large amount of freedom.
      Others think that having a selection of 20 good Chinese restaurants they can call at 2:00 am for take out is more important.

      i will say that the people with the tin foil home are NUTS!
      If they REALLY believe that they are getting bombarded then just use a grounded fine metal screen. The could put it on the inside of there home and Spackle and paint over it! Oh wait the paint will probably cause there hair to fall out and their nipples to invert. Chemicals you know.
      They should not worry. I have informed my bosses at project Majestic to shift from microwaves to ELF so their shielding is now useless. Thank goodness HARP is on line now to deal with trouble makers like this.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    11. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I really envy you. I have enjoyed the time I have spent up there.

    12. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by fishdan · · Score: 1

      Looks like many of us will be joining you in New Hampshire.

      --
      Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
    13. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      "Unfortunately I live in New Jersey now where things are more ridiculous than California (no liquor sales on Sunday?!?!?)"

      That's definitely a local ordinance and not a state one, before anyone starts talking sh!t about NJ.

    14. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by trixy_1086 · · Score: 1

      I won a speech contest once with a speech that was essentially a rant about how lame New Hampshire is. To stay on topic, I really am from Sacramento. I swear the D'Souza family mentioned in this article has been in the news before, but anything worthwhile from Google eludes me at the moment.

    15. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by The-Bus · · Score: 1

      No, but seriously, on the downside... you're in Alaska.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    16. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by fafaforza · · Score: 1

      before anyone starts talking sh!t about NJ

      I think you're a bit late there.

    17. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by joggle · · Score: 1

      If you have an apartment facing south you can also place the antenna near a window (if there's no balcony). The window will drop the signal strength somewhat but it should still work.

    18. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by cornjchob · · Score: 1

      It must be nice to live in a state where there are apparently no kind of building codes. Tell me, does the state require that the schools children go to be built to any kind of specification, or is it okay if they're also made out of materials unsuitable for construction (eg. metal foils)? Is it okay for someone to sell you a house that's not suitable to live in?

      Would you like to be coherent for a second and explain how attaching sheetmetal to the outside of a house creates a lack of structural integrity? Would you outlaw siding if you had the chance? The only thing that would possibly be applicable safety-wise is if the metal isn't secure enough, a high wind may crack it loose and send it flying, though that could happen with anything.

      --
      We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
    19. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Zutfen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No state income tax: Check

      No sales tax: Check

      Voted best state to live in based on quality of life: Check

      One of the top spots in the U.S. for small to mid size tech businesses: Check

      Beautiful flora and fauna: Check

      3 Cities on the "100 Best places to live" list:Check

      Yeah, N.H. is pretty lame... I guess.

      --
      I'm too lazy to enter a sig. Hey wait a second! You tricked me!
    20. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      I'm just not being entirely clear. The Alaskan mentioned that he could build a house out of aluminum foil and nobody would care. I doubt that, is all. It is admittedly different from attaching siding to your house, but I'm not the one that brought up actually *building* a house from foil.

    21. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      seriously... I moved from California to go school here in Phoenix. No one told me it was going to be 115 to 120 in the summer!

      really though, I miss my old state; the beaches, weather, the girls, the weed... now I'm in the middle of a godforsaken desert where people are ALWAYS getting caught DUI, EVERYONE carries handguns, you can't buy alcohol past 2:00am, (an hour earlier than in Cali!!@#), and people somehow actually manage to drive EVEN WORSE than where I lived before -- This coming from a guy who lived near San Jose!

    22. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Damvan · · Score: 1

      And us Californians are glad you are not a Californian anymore. There are too many of us as it is, the more that leave the better. But I always thought that any non-native Californians should be kicked out so we can have our state back!

    23. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by core+plexus · · Score: 1
      "It must be nice to live in a state where there are apparently no kind of building codes. Tell me, does the state require that the schools children go to be built to any kind of specification, or is it okay if they're also made out of materials unsuitable for construction (eg. metal foils)? Is it okay for someone to sell you a house that's not suitable to live in?"

      Your research has paid off in making your comment so much more informed.

      We do, indeed, have building codes here, but it is recognized that an individuals freedom of choice is important. The codes in organized municipalities are stricter, and some subdivisions have covenants, but even remote and recreation properties have rules. The difference is that the rules are not ridiculous.

      Schools and other similar structures are actually built to stricter codes than you might find elsewhere, due in no small part to environmental hazards such as heavy snow loads, earthquakes, ice damming, etc. As for someone selling you a house that is unsuitable to live in, that is what inspection services are for. And you can't throw a rock without hitting one. Additionally, there is this thing called 'disclosure', and if all else fails, we do have Civil Courts here.

      -cp-

    24. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      To the people of Scaramento, though, having ugly aluminum siding on a house might be unacceptable. That's the community they've chosen to put together with their regulations. Unless these people happen to have been living there prior to such regulations being created, they've chosen to accept them in exchange for living in that area.

    25. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by trixy_1086 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here were some of points that I hit:
      The GDP of LA County alone is nearly double that of New Hampshire
      New Hampshire ranks 48th in the quality of its colleges according to US News and Reports
      Approx. 40% of private sector jobs are provided by foreign-owned companies, the highest of any state
      As of 2001, 6.8% of New Hampshire's GDP was exports, second lowest of any state.
      New Hampshire received approximately 35% more federal aid than it contributes tax dollars. Compare this to California, who's balance is 28% in the opposite direction.
      New Hampshire experienced a decrease in population of nearly 4%.
      Based on these facts, New Hampshire is clearly redundant. It offers little that is unique, and economically does very poor. I'm sure that it's a great place to live, but it doesn't cut the mustard when you compare it to other states. Here was my solution:
      Combine it with Vermont to form the state of New England, and splite another state into two pieces. The options for that were either Northern and Southern California, or East and West Texas. Admitting Puerto Rico as a state would be considered a last resort.

    26. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      I always find it odd that most lower 48'rs seem delighted that they have sales taxes and high state income tax. I think they are stupid that way. You tell them, once the politicians get their fingers in something like that, they keep taking and taking. And they wonder why they have high taxes.

      We on the other hand tax our big businesses so it doesn't hit the little guys. Then we even have some left over to share with people. You think someplace like california with all that big business would take the load of citizens and place it on the big companies.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    27. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      Alaska is a wondrfull place to live. How is that worse than living in one of the Concrete Monsters that you call cites down in the lower 48?

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    28. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      And how does Alaska check out? I know it has the first two for the most part.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    29. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      I'm ALL for splitting up Texas and California, but keep my Alaska SOlid! Besides, it's like we are split up already with our capital way off in Juenau, where it is hard to get to.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    30. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      I totally agree with your first comments. I just have the hardest time seeing how people would like to live in the concrete asphault monsters you call cities. Having people packed in soooo tight, with out even having a hint of nature. For example, New York has that big park in it. It is like a museum of what nature is supposed to be. Its like they are saying "this is what we paved over. Aren't you soooo happy?", which I don't get at all. I look at them and it seems like they broke their state and don't realize it. I sure hope the developers don't break my Alaska.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    31. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      Yeah, why they didn't just put up metal siding is beyond me. It would block the wave just the same as that metal they put up, but be safer. I understand them being forced to take it down cause the way they put up was half assed at best.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    32. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      Alaska has building codes in the larger cites and bouroughs. Actually their building codes are much tougher than most of the states seeing as we are both in a colder climate (higher insulation needed), and are in a high earthquake area.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    33. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      Some of us like the cold. Plus it is worth paying to live here.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    34. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      Its funny. The part of NJ that is messed up is Newark right accross from New York. I went to Philadelphia on vacation from Alaska and always heard crap about NJ, then I drove through on the way to the Newark Airport. I was puzzled as on up to the Newark, it was all green and pretty. I asked my friend and he said it was just that the New Yorkers look out at Newark which has refiners and manufacturing plants, and they have been publishing a bad rap for the whole state for years. Kinda funny really.

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    35. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Embedding a sentence as the subject of another sentence is a particularly obnoxious bit of Californianism.

    36. Re:Glad I'm not a Californian anymore by beef+curtains · · Score: 1

      But I always thought that any non-native Californians should be kicked out so we can have our state back!

      Man, I hope that's a subtle joke, as opposed to a staggering (but hilarious) display of ignorance.

      Joke, right?

      --
      Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
  76. Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might be actually able to see something. Or maybe his redneck neighbour is DDOS-ing him :)

    1. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by WankersRevenge · · Score: 5, Funny
      I guess we slashdotted his poor site ... I've attached the copy below ... check out the site once he get's it back ... the pictures are just hilarious. I pulled the links from the copy to save his server.

      ------

      In case you're wondering, this Web page is about my next-door neighbors. Since my neighbors have been driving me crazy and no amount of civilized reasoning and/or negotiations have worked - I have decided to dedicate a small corner of cyber-space to them.

      My family and friends are constantly asking me to tell them the "latest" thing my neighbor has done so this page will save me from repeating myself. Besides, I thought it would be fun. Everything you read here is entirely true, that's what makes it so funny. Enjoy!

      Background:

      My neighbors moved into the house next to ours in October 1997. It's a brand new neighborhood with new houses. Everyone's house looks beautiful but that's about to change. The new neighbors seem like normal people until shortly after they move in (more later).

      First, let me say that my redneck neighbor is not destitute or under-privileged. The guy owns a business, drives VERY nice new cars, he just doesn't care about his house. In order to protect the ignorant, we'll call him John Doe # 8 or JD8 for short.

      October 1997 - They are here!

      Well, it should have been a sign of things to come but my neighbors move into their brand new house. Inventory: 1 artificial Christmas tree, clothes, stereo system, TV, no furniture). The Christmas tree is nicely decorated (remember, it's October). We can tell what the tree looks like because the windows have no miniblinds so at night, you can see right into the house as you drive up. They have also decided to wrap some strands of Christmas lights around their front porch railing. I guess there's no electric outlet nearby because they never turn these lights on.

      October 1997 - 1st Home beautification project

      It's dark outside, I'm standing in front of my house and my neighbor does the following: He gets in his car, drives it up to the house on the other side of my house (this house is still being built). He backs his car up to the construction site and opens the trunk. He calmly proceeds to load up the trunk with bricks and 2x4s. Pretty clever, huh?

      The following night, at around 9:00pm he decides it's time to build a mailbox post. It's very nice. He used the stolen 2x4s from the previous night. It looks like it's made out of 2x4s except he didn't steal any that were long enough so he nails a couple of them together to get the correct height - I mean, it has to look just right! The mailbox post is not very sturdy so he braces it with an additional 2x4 (at an angle). Click here to see the mailbox (no bracing 2x4 though).

      He uses the bricks as edging for his flower beds. They look nice. Especially with the newly planted bamboo trees and the ten gallon fish tank (no fish, just water).

      November 1997 - The fence!

      I wake up to my wife telling me, "Hey, it looks like JD8 is working on a fence". Well I don't think much of it until she tells me that he's trying to build a fence around the entire house (front and back) and that the fence is going to be chain-link. We have some "covenant rules" that prohibit you from putting up a silver chain-link fence. Also, you cannot have any fence go past the back of your house. By now, I am freaking out. I can see the property value falling faster than his mailbox post.

      Anyway, I get to work and at 9:01AM I call our builder. I explain the situation to him and he agrees to pay JD8 a visit before the concrete around the metal posts dries. Sure enough, I get home after work and the posts around the front of the house are laying on the street. Not exactly what I expected but at least they're out of the ground. Tra

    2. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by node159 · · Score: 1

      This sounds too awfuly farmiliar, god I hate ppl!

      I wish we had cops like that here, all we have is noise 'control', who have no athority or power...

      --
      GPLv2: I want my rights, I want my phone call! DRM: What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
    3. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by dozer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or link to a non-slashdotted copy.

      http://totfc.net/misc/rednecks/

    4. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can`t stand those type of people.

      (With people I mean the people writing down everything about another person, which they shouldn`t care about)

      I guess they are just jealous...

    5. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 2
      You might feel differently if you were the one living next to them.

      Frankly, I feel bad for both parties; one is clearly insane, the other is driven to despair by his neighbor's insanity.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    6. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by cyphem · · Score: 3, Informative

      Google offers some pictures, small but neat. Excellent story :-)

      --
      Reading this signature is senseless so don't do it.
    7. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by ignorant_coward · · Score: 1


      Posting that story is probably the only way for that guy to make light of a really terrible situation. I used to live next to someone with a loud stereo and a rottweiler...it took real self control to not shoot the damn dog and burn down the bastard's house!

      My bet is that the 'redneck neighbor' is some guy that came across money and decided to live upscale but with absolutely none of the courtesy or neighborhood covenants mindset. Either that, or he is a really bad artist using his house and yard as the media.

    8. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I hate ppl"

      Self-hatred is not usually considered healthy, but in this case we agree and hate you too.

    9. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      I can`t stand those type of people.

      (With people I mean the people writing down everything about another person, which they shouldn`t care about)

      I guess they are just jealous...

      I realize this is /. and RTFA isn't in vogue, but did you? If you had you'd likely feel differently. This isn't minor nitpicky stuff, but things that include major city/county/state building code violations, laws against keeping livestock in the city, nearly burning down the entire neighborhood (he took out his whole back yard, it was winter and the grass was dry all around. He's very lucky it didn't take out the entire block), etc. The guy is probably trying to keep his sanity by writing about it.

      Besides, if you think it's such a horrid thing, then why are the police on the writer's side? At one point the officer gives the writer his personal business card and tells him if the neighbor causes any more problems (noise late at night in this case) to call and ask for him PERSONALLY to be sent out! The redneck neighbor is beyond just a nuisance, he's a certified hazard to his and those around him's health in the things he's been doing.

      So I think his just writing about it is rather tame. He could always press charges for numerous things, notify the city/county departments about the building code violations and health code violations and then let the neighbor end up trying to resolve all that without going broke. I'd say the guy's been incredibly reserved considering the circumstances!

    10. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by patchvonbraun · · Score: 1

      I'm so incredibly funking glad that I live way the heck in the middle of nowhere. Without neighbourhood convenants, authoritarian pig-bastard "property standards enforcers", etc etc. The litmus test, as far as I'm concerned is this: "is the state of your property a clear hazard to yourself or your neighbours"? If the answer is "no", then F.O.A.D.! I can't believe that in this world of rapists and murderers, people get so stuck on what colour you paint your house, or how many feet past the back of the house your "forbidden" chainlink fence is. Sheesh!

    11. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You CAN do that stuff in the middle of nowhere because you ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE, YOU MORON. When you have neighbors, you have to pay attention to the desires (and sleep!) of those around you.

      I'm as freedom-loving as the next guy, but fuck those that trash up the value of my house while causing vermin, safety, and noise issues. I may live in the south, but there's a big difference between southern living and white trash. The best way to keep from being confused from such a person is to not endorse and support those activities.

      Well, not being an asshole to begin with should suffice, but I think that may have slipped past your pea-sized brain.

    12. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      I saw this site a couple of years ago. I think I even found it through slashdot. It's funny but the dude is definitely obsessing about his neighbor. Yes the neighbor is an idiot, but damn, it's been a long time, get over it.

      bkr

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    13. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by jargoone · · Score: 1

      Uh, the page says it was last updated more than three years ago. I think he probably has gotten over it.

    14. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by teromajusa · · Score: 1

      I went with the other option. I live in the city, where people know how to mind their own damn business. People in the suburbs just don't seem to know how to get along with people who are different than themselves.

    15. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say he's insane, I just say he's phenomenally stupid.

    16. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by teromajusa · · Score: 1

      He may have some legitimate gripes, but he also has stuff like this:

      We wake up early on a Saturday morning to the sounds of a bouncing basketball. He's put a basketball goal about 15 feet from our bedroom window.

      Go look at the pictures. You can see that the place he put the basketball net is in his driveway where people usually put such things. The horror! So his neighbor isn't supposed to play basketball in his driveway on a saturday morning? Maybe he should just stay in his house and take pictures of the neighbors through his blinds instead. I know which one of these guys I'd prefer living next to...and its not the little weasel with the camera.

    17. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by AnyNoMouse · · Score: 1
      Go look at the pictures. You can see that the place he put the basketball net is in his driveway where people usually put such things. The horror! So his neighbor isn't supposed to play basketball in his driveway on a saturday morning? Maybe he should just stay in his house and take pictures of the neighbors through his blinds instead. I know which one of these guys I'd prefer living next to...and its not the little weasel with the camera.
      If you had read the entire story, you would have found that the neighbor's basketball hoop had been vandelized by someone throwing bricks through the backboard (also damaging the writer's house). The neighbor then put the hoop by the street for the garbage men to pick up. Not knowing if it was trash or not, the garbage men never took it. The neighbor then proceeded to put it in his driveway (with a broken backboard) as shown in those pictures.

      --
      -Redundancy Man strikes again!
    18. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by teromajusa · · Score: 1

      Yes, I read that. I'm not saying the other guy is a perfect neighbor. But does that somehow make the neighbor less of a snake? Not in my book.

      So he didn't know how to get rid of the basketball hoop. He clearly doesn't have a lot of common sense. If I lived next to the guy I'd have suggested he put a note on it letting the garbage men know it was trash. How hard would that have been? But then why should you when its so much fun to make fun of him instead?

    19. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by AnyNoMouse · · Score: 1
      Hey, I'm not arguing the nosey neighbor side, just correcting the facts. The basketball hoop is in the driveway now, because it was eventually moved there. If the story is factual, the basketball hoop was much closer to his bedroom window previously.

      --
      -Redundancy Man strikes again!
    20. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't know who is worse to live next to - bumbling idiot JD8 or self rightous nosey busybody with poor communication skills Joe.

    21. Re:Too bad he's running the site off on 28.8 Kbps by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      umm, which one is which?

  77. It's funny, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but the gp post doesn't bother me at all, and I would never mod it down.

    I wonder if it's because I'm not a whiny, borderline-Asperger's bitch who needs everything to be in its place.

  78. The 9/11 anniversary and psychosis by Quirk · · Score: 4, Informative
    "The D'Souzas said the bombardment began after the first anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks"

    There's an interesting, if not well defined, link between trauma and psychosis. Delusions and paranoia seem to have a strong link to widely shared public "concerns". I recently talked with a psychiatrist about paraniod schizophrenics and mentioned that there seemed to be a recurring theme of religious delusion and persecution. He, in return, said that in the 50's, paranoid schizophrenics, frequently complained of persecution by communists. The bogey man of the day seems to morph readily into paranoid delusions.

    On a less humane note, it's scary these people are procreating, but just to help things along this site should validate their paranoia.

    --
    "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
    Cohen
    1. Re:The 9/11 anniversary and psychosis by ONOIML8 · · Score: 1

      "...it's scary these people are procreatingit's scary these people are procreating..."

      You don't suppose that these people had children prior to suffering whatever trauma is causing the psychosis? Why is this so scary? Are you assuming some sort of genetic defect even though what you wrote about was trauma related?

      Perhaps the procreation is what drove them nuts. I know my own kids sure drive me up a wall at times.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    2. Re:The 9/11 anniversary and psychosis by Quirk · · Score: 1
      "Why is this so scary?"

      My guess is it's so very scary for their children.

      --
      "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
      Cohen
    3. Re:The 9/11 anniversary and psychosis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insanity is hereditary. You get it from your children.

    4. Re:The 9/11 anniversary and psychosis by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Even if they didn't pass on a genetic defect, isn't it possible that delusional people* could be unfit parents? Poor parenting can damage a child just as well (or even more effectively than) genetics.

      *these people may or may not be delusional, of course...

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  79. well, I may be drunk.... by Kulaid982 · · Score: 2, Informative

    but yes, yes I did read that URL as something do to wiht crak and chanels

    --

    Isn't it interesting how you come to recognize posters based solely on their sigs???
  80. Gate Keeper not Door Keeper [NM] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Further, the traveller was invoked by Gozer.

  81. They should tell them to... by snowdropper · · Score: 1

    Bite my shiny, metal house.

  82. nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's to reflect indoor lighting? I always thought a heat 'signature' was how they identified marijuana amongst other plants.

  83. Maybe Dish Network is to blame? by GweeDo · · Score: 1

    Look at the image in the article (yeah, yeah...you gotta RTFA). They use Dish Network...maybe THEY are making them sick!

  84. it also protects against... by KillShill · · Score: 1

    the police from conducting a warantless "Search" of their house using infra-red imaging to find marijuana etc... among other things.

    if they were smarter, they'd have lined the inside of their house.

    --
    Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
  85. Finally... by Albinofrenchy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Looks like /.ers are making the news!

    --
    "A man is but the product of his thoughts what he thinks, he becomes." -Mahatma Gandhi
  86. fucem, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fucem, fucemall

  87. What's the problem? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    I been to Sacramento a lot since my Dad retired there 10 years ago. All they is a little bit of paint for the outside to fit in with the rest of Sacramento. If you seen one redneck house from the outside, you seen them all.

  88. It was my idea to put the sheet metal up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's my house. It wasn't about keeping microwaves out, though. It was about keeping them in. I don't want anyone leeching my wifi connection!

  89. We tried working with Tin Foil Hats... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An employee suggested to me that we load Tin Foil Hats on a few employees here as an evaluation. I was skeptical at first but he explained the benefits of using it for our employee's day-to-day overlord protection. So I decided to let him install the Tin Foil Hats (TFHs) onto 5 employees to see how the hats got on. Besides, our IT manager had been using one on his head and it seemed to work fine, why not try it on the peddling masses?

    Once he'd got the employees up and running with TFHs we let the employees try it out. It all seemed fine to start with: protection was a pretty good replacement for EMI sheilds and the employees could still do their work as normal.

    Alas it did not stay that way. After a few days, I had lost count of the number of complaints received from users who could not find things they were used to or tasks they could not perform that they previously could with out TFHs. The final straw came when one employee lost several hours work when the TFH suddenly acted as a lightning rod, rendering him dead before the paramedics arrived and corrupted his project.

    Needless to say, the TFH team offered no support whatsoever. I made the employee remove Tin Foil Hats from the employees and lets just say he's not with us anymore.

  90. Sigh by cyberfunk2 · · Score: 1

    That people believe that microwaves are causing lupus and other maladies just is saddening.

    I mean, if I were gonna make my house an eyesore and invest what must be thousands in metallic "protection" you think i'd consult a real source, instead of the hundreds of quack websites out there.

    I mean, a quick search on wikipedia would set these poor people straight.

    People following quack science can be more dangerous than any diehard religious nut. (Cough, scientologists)

  91. Ahh.. Patrick Volkerding moved to Sacramento? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glad the tin foil hats were helping ole' Patty; too bad the fedz are (cough) interfering with his progress...

  92. They should install a faraday cage instead. by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    (Adam and Jamie did it in their cellphone + gasoline myth)

    I agree, that family might be a *little bit* (understatement warning) paranoid, but that doesn't give them the right to jeopardize their neighbors' eyes with sunlight - which was the reason for the suit in the first place.

  93. I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A neighbour of my parents did this as he slowly slipped further into insanity. When I lived at home, he was a normal guy with a job. I never met him, but he never did anything that would indicate there was anything wrong. However a couple years later it started. He became a reculse, lost his job, began screaming at imaginary things at all hours of the night. He worse an AFDB, coated all his windows in aluminium foil and so on.

    The neighbours wanted to have him comitted for his own good, but you can't do that just because someone is acting crazy, so it kept worsening. Finally he did something threatening and they were able to get him to a mental instution. There he was treated and drugs were able to return his grasp on reality... Unfortunately like many, he elected to stop taking them. This time, his slip to madness was forever, as he decided to kill himself.

    Now while I suppose it is theoriticly possible these peopel are being bombarded by radiation, I somewhat doubt it. Microwave radiation isn't known to cause ill health effects at low levels, and if it was at any kind of serious levels you'd know, it would interfere with all kinds of things. Now higher energy radiation such as gamma could, but aluminium won't do shit for that, I'll take a reasonable plate of lead at least.

    Also all kinds of radiation are rather easy to detect. If you are concerned you can get or rent the necessary equipment and check. Someone who was in thier right mind and genuinely worried would likely do just such a thing. I mean what if it's something like radon? That's really dangerous as it can release alpha radiation inside you, which is a serious health problem.

    I agree with the parent, this is likely a case of eairly schizophrenia and needs to be dealt with. With proper treatment, most schizophrenics can lead a normal life. Without it, they usually totally lose their grip on reality and often hurt themselves.

    1. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you and the parent you agree with are engaged in something seriously wrong with people today... Talking like you're experts on other people's mental problems while having the minutest amounts of information about them. The fact that you would do this, tells me that you are not competent professionals in this field, and that makes both your assessments all the more questionable.

      There are any number of mental disorders which could lead to this behavior, there could be drug abuse going on, or a history of hard drug abuse that has lead to braindamage. Further, it could just be some incredibly nieve people who have fallen for some conspiracy website.

      When people talk like big experts about others based on such flimsy bits of information, they are being ignorant asses. You can't diagnose schizophrenia or any other mental disease based on one piece of information and people who do that are being extremely socially irresponsible.

      Now, if you want to suggest that they should be given a psychiatric evaluation, that's fine, in fact, I think that might be a good idea, and that's just an expression of opinion. But saying things like "this is likely a case of early schizophrenia" is just plain talking out your ass, and could be construed as slander, regardless of whether or not you have training in this area. You simply can not make that judgement based on this one piece of information and any competent professional in this field will tell you that. Human behavior and beliefs are a very complex thing and multiple causes can produce similar effects.

    2. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, chill. They weren't giving a diagnosis. They were saying that a professional is needed to give a proper diagnosis and formulate a treatment. There is a big difference between those two. And they never claimed to be competent professionals in the field, but they seem to have some sort of experience dealing with people who have mental issues (likely personal experience, not in a doctor/patient relationship)

    3. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Well, as it happens I have a degree in psychology, however I don't really need to render any diagnosis. The man was clearly sick. People who are well do not coat their house in foil, scream at imaginary aliens at 3am, quit their job, and totally withdraw from society. Someone who does that needs help.

      Now I happen to know that schizophreina was indeed the cause here, that was the diagnosis for this person by the facility to which he was admitted before his suicide. However, even a freshman psychology student can tell you that behaviour like that is probably schizophrenia, it's very typical of that disorder.

      See something else you discover is that though humans are complex creatures, we have a lot of things that are common. If a person acts a certian way, there are common causes for it. The more behaviours they have that are consistent with a certian thing, the more likely that thing is indeed the case.

      In this case you have the aluminium foil coating their house, and the persecution complex of others sending "radiation" towards them to cause problems. Quite typical of schizophrenia. Am I 100% certian? Of course not, but I am certian this is highly atypical behaviour, and not something helpful to an actual problem of radiation poisoning thus I'm pretty confident in saying they need some professional help.

      However if you want to get all worked up over a post on a web forum, you go right ahead.

    4. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as it happens I have a degree in psychology

      Which makes you about as competant to render a diagnosis as a pre-med student.

    5. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Mad_Rain · · Score: 1

      Not only did you give an excellent diagnosis based on the available information, you handled the A.C. well. And as someone with a graduate degree in psychology, who has worked on a county psychiatric ward (not too far from Sacramento), I have to agree, this seems very much like schizophrenia.

      Not that you need to have that confirmed - The A.C. could use it though.

      --
      "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
    6. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you don't jump to conclusions...

      http://www.news10.net/storyfull1.asp?id=11032

      The D'Souzas, who live in South Natomas, are of Pakistani extraction. Since the terrorist attacks three-and-half years ago, the family believes they have be subjected to what they characterized as "covert and overt" hate crimes. According to the D'Souzas, the covert crimes include having intense microwave radiation directed at their house.

      Now all of a sudden, it starts to make sense. I know schizophrenia can run in the family, but the WHOLE family? Sure it could, but that's a really outside chance. I remember in the weeks following 9/11, how people who looked even remotely middle eastern, including INDIANS, would get out of my way and avoid eye contact with me. There was great fear. That was a very real phenomenon I observed. Now, mr. pysch student, care to tell me why people of that descent would be that scared? Hmmm? Schizophrenia? Persecution complex?

      Did it ever occur to you, that what could be occuring here is a complex form of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, brought on quite possibly by very real "anti-arab" sentiments and actions they very likely experienced after 9/11? Basically, each negative experience the family members had, amplified each others, and their fear was stoked by the rhetoric of the media outlets they were exposed to?

      How can you jump to conclusions based on the flimsiest of evidence and you don't think twice about the consequences of doing so, and consider yourself a student of science and a logical thinker? That wasn't a good diagnosis at all. If you were a responsible scientist in any way, shape or form, you would have agreed that conclusions can not be reached based on the given evidence. But you work in a county facility, so that says all I need to hear about you. NOT IMPRESSED. And I'm not saying this to insult, I know well the hacks that work in county facilities, they do a tremendous amount of damage through wrong diagnosis.

      In fact, if you really do have college level psych training, you need to get your money back from your teachers because they failed to teach you a very critical lesson... YOU CAN NOT MAKE DIAGNOSIS OF PEOPLES BEHAVIORS BASED ON 3 PARAGRAPH NEWS BLURBS. That's absurd, that's poor science, and irresponsible.

      And I don't need the color of authority by stating my credentials to advance my viewpoint, I'll let what I have to say stand on its own merit, because it does if you objectively consider it.

      Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy and your conclusions are highly questionable. You are a poor scientist

    7. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with the parent, this is likely a case of eairly schizophrenia and needs to be dealt with.

      This is the comment that what I said was directed to, but your reply focused on your justifications for the guy you knew more about. Now, I'm going to take you back to school here...

      I don't really need to render any diagnosis

      See above and then don't.

      See something else you discover is that though humans are complex creatures, we have a lot of things that are common. If a person acts a certian way, there are common causes for it. The more behaviours they have that are consistent with a certian thing, the more likely that thing is indeed the case.

      Spoken like a county shrink. Due to the complex nature of the subject, this of course can be right within a very tightly defined context, but in the context of diagnosing someone based upon an article in the news, it is completely wrong. Even in the context of diagnosing someone you personally know, there is still a substantial margin of error.

      If you really have a degree, then you must have some familiarity with the DSM, right? Do you know how many overlapping symptoms there are for many of the disorders listed in the DSM? We're not talking single symptoms, we're talking many symptoms found under many different disorders.

      It's simplistic thinking like this which has harmed a good many people in the form of misdiagnosis and it's a reason I commented. I have seen many people misdiagnosed by McShrinks who think this way. If you have not yet learned that the same behavior in two different people can have two entirely unrelated causes and in fact, OFTEN DO have entirely unrelated causes, then you don't understand psychology yet as you ought and I hope you're not practicing.

      In this case you have the aluminium foil coating their house, and the persecution complex of others sending "radiation" towards them to cause problems. Quite typical of schizophrenia. Am I 100% certian? Of course not, but I am certian this is highly atypical behaviour, and not something helpful to an actual problem of radiation poisoning thus I'm pretty confident in saying they need some professional help.

      As I indicated in my original post, I tend to agree that something not right is going on and they do need some help. The thing is, too many wannabe psych experts toss around the schizophrenia term as if it applies to any behavior we deem illogical. A true psychological scientist, must first ascertain the cause of this behavior. Unless you have talked to the people and heard their side of it, you haven't a clue as to the cause. Here's an article on the subject I found since then:
      http://www.news10.net/storyfull1.asp?id=11032

      What further info does this article add?
      The family is from pakistan. This is a biggie. Now you have to add cultural background into the mix, as well as the traumatic effects of 9/11 on people in this country who resemble middle easterners at all. This alone changes the whole mix, right there. Suddenly, a relatively logical source of the delusion, if it is delusion, can be hypothesized. That's a key difference between the delusions and persecution complexes of a shizophrenic and someone suffering from something else. The shizophrenic has unfounded fears that have no supporting evidence whatsoever. Whereas in this case, this piece of information indicates there may well be some traumatic experiences that these beliefs are built on, which means they can be unbuilt. If this is the case, then there is a good chance it is not schizophrenia.

      However if you want to get all worked up over a post on a web forum, you go right ahead.

      I get worked up because I take psychology seriously. I've had to deal with people on the wrong medication prescribed to them by hacks who tend to take a simplistic view of mental disorders, similar to the simplistic view you've offered here.

      That you have a degr

    8. Re:I agree, can be a sign of something serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read this:
      this is likely a case of eairly schizophrenia and needs to be dealt with

      That is attempting to diagnose someone with a serious condition. That is irresponsible.

      If they aren't competent professionals in the field, then they should not be making claims about other people like that. I'm not going to chill about this either, because these are the types of rumors that can traumatize people who are already hurting a good deal from their actual problems. I've seen it many times. This is a serious thing.

      The stigma surrounding schizophrenia is right up there with the plague, being a rapist, and a few other things. When people who have no business making such diagnosis of others start spreading rumors because of their half baked understanding of psychology, real people can get real hurt by it.

      In one case, the one that really opened my eyes to the enormous problem these arm chair shrinks have become, a man clearly lost his job because of rumors that he was a schizophrenic who wasn't getting treated. This forced the man to go public about his real problems, which were none of anyones business, as he then had to explain why he was found crying in an empty office one afternoon, talking to himself on two other occasions, and loudly said "no" while by himself in his office one day.

      The only person who witnessed these seemingly odd events that fits with the armchair shrinks idea of shizophrenia(he chalked up the talking to no one as being a hallucination), told this guy he felt he had schizophrenia and should get help. The guy told him he did not and that he should mind his own business.

      A few months went by and our client began to notice people treating him differently and acting strangely towards him. Friends stopped calling him, he stopped getting invites to lunch, and a lot of other problems. It turns out, that someone we never could identify had either saw over his shoulder or looked through his things, the business cards of the counselor and psychiatrist he went to(pyschiatrist to get anti-anxiety meds). This entered the rumor mill and seemed to justify the original rumors.

      Here's where this gets jacked up. He began to get paranoid. Why? Schizophrenia? NO. People really were talking about him behind his back and treating him oddly and he had no idea why. So then his counselor began to suggest that maybe there was something more serious wrong with him, and mentioned schizophrenia as a possibility. This really, pardon the french, fucked his mind badly and worsened his depression and he started drinking heavily.

      Eventually, he was told that his position was being eliminated and let go. A few days went by and he recieved a call from a friend of his from work, who told him that he had a relative who had schizophrenia and he knew how hard it was to deal with. It was at that point, that why people had been treating him strange began to make sense and he told his counselor, who then got us involved.

      Now, here are the critical things to understand:
      The last job review our client had resulted in a promotion and had not even the slightest blemish in the wording. Our client had worked for this company for over 6 years, and other than his first 6 month review which stated problems with being on time, there was no sign of a failure to do his job. His job performance only started to suffer after the stress of realizing people were shunning him began to compound his already difficult problems.

      What it turned out was, this person had begun to deal with some serious crap from his past. He was having flashbacks and waking dreams, which is why he was found crying and shouted "NO" "inexplicably". He was talking to himself in an empty room on advice from his couselor on how to deal with the stressful memories. He was on a break at the time and should have found a better place, but in his urgency to get his emotions out, he didn't find as private a place as he should. I forget the exact name for it, but it is one type of therapy used for

  94. Solution by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Replace it with duct tape.

  95. (regarding your sig) ninja death club? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    i hate to post stuff like this on slashdot, but i was one of the people who shelled out some money to join the Ninja Death Club, and I have yet to receieve anything, which upsets me greatly, for two reasons:

    1: I sent $20 in exchange for stuff in return, which has yet to materialise
    2: I was really looking forward to adding that stuff to my music collection

    I assume you're the guy who runs the website, and if that's the case, i'd be really grateful if you'd pass this beef along to somebody who's responsible for ninja death club, because things like this make me wary of contributing to internet artists in the future

    1. Re:(regarding your sig) ninja death club? by mcc · · Score: 1

      Hi,

      I'm not the Ninja Death Club guy, just his webmaster. The Ninja Death Club subscription materials really are still being mailed out, just slowly-- the last time I talked to Joe he was readying another release. What I would do is email Joe (mention your name/address so he knows which subscriber he's talking to) and he can give you a better idea of when the next release will be sent. Unfortunately I'm not sure which email he's using at the moment and I have to go to work now, so if you could please check back here later today I'll figure out his current email address and post it here.

      Thanks for your patience.

    2. Re:(regarding your sig) ninja death club? by mcc · · Score: 1

      Mr. Anonymous Coward:

      The person you want to contact is "themathletes at yahoo dot com".

  96. WRONG!!! by switcha · · Score: 1
    ther common variations are people using radio waves to listen to what their thinking, people using high-tech devices to spy on their homes.

    Think again, asshole! They use the high-tech devices to spy on my bones! My bones, I tells ya'!

    --
    You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
    1. Re:WRONG!!! by godfra · · Score: 1

      hahaha!!

  97. RIGHTS? by itzdandy · · Score: 2, Informative

    rights? hahaha haha ha ha a a . . ...

    the only way property values should have bering and a persons rights is when DIRECT damage is being done. for instances:
    1)you are burning your house and you catch your neighbors house of fire! or less extreme, the odor/smoke is drifting onto their property.
    2)you have weeds, your weeds are spreading to your neighbors property.
    3)anything else not along these lines, go F'ING LUCK!!!!

    1. Re:RIGHTS? by cranos · · Score: 1

      Yeah right on, if I want to run a crack house on my own property and run whores in my front end then fuck the rest of you!

    2. Re:RIGHTS? by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      And spitting on every person who comes to buy a house in the neighborhood, then beating them over the head with a baseball bat, you forgot that part.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    3. Re:RIGHTS? by itzdandy · · Score: 1

      your an idiot.

      this should be moded "+4 right on the money"

      crack = illegal / whores = illegal / direct damage via theft and vandalism

    4. Re:RIGHTS? by cranos · · Score: 1

      According to the parent poster, so long as there was no direct damage to the neighbouring properties then anything you did would be fine.

      The mere act of selling crack cocain or running a brothel does not imply that direct damage will be done to the neighbours.

      Also in many areas prostitution is not illegal, rather it is regulated by local government.

      Just remember under the Libertarian ideal, taking drugs would be perfectly legal right up until the time you piss off someone who can afford to pay the private police to lock you up.

    5. Re:RIGHTS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever heard of the "broken windows" http://www.cityofseattle.net/police/prevention/Tip s/broken_window.htm theory? Your house does not exist in a vacuum; besides the reduction of property values, you could be contributing to vandalism and other crime in your neighborhood if it looks like a piece of shit. What if you never mow your lawn and it gets infested with insects/rodents/etc., some of which decide to invade my place? You better believe you'd be responsible for it; the regulations help keep these kinds of issues from going to court.

      We have all of these extra laws and ordinances and so forth because some people don't have respect for others' property. You are part of a society; again, you don't live in a vacuum, whether you'd like to or not. Most people feel a social obligation to keep their lawns reasonably neat and not leave their garbage cans in the street all week; they know that they are less likely to get the respect of their neighbors if they don't. /Most/ of the time the ordinances aren't intended to force people to act in an unreasonable way and are in fact best for the community as a whole. Similarly, safety and emissions inspections on vehicles are best for the community as a whole. They may be a hassle for you if your car is a piece of junk, but the direct and indirect consequences of driving a vehicle that does not pass these inspections outweigh the inconvenience and restriction of freedom to you.

    6. Re:RIGHTS? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      oh, you mean nice law abiding crack houses that is running whores in a nice and quite manner. Thats fine.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:RIGHTS? by itzdandy · · Score: 1

      here is the problem in america

      technically, the RIGHT way is to allow a person to do anything or have their property in any state that does not infringe on anothers same rights. this is the CORE concept of liberty and ownership.

      so, if crack were legal and you could somehow keep people that are using crack on a piece of property without them traspassing, or throwing trash on, distrubing the 'peace' like noise levels or smells etc, or anything else damaging(directly), then it would be ok to have a crackhouse.

      the nature of the crackhouse makes it unacceptable, because of all the things that come with being a crackhouse like noise disturbances, gunshots, trash and rubbish being left on the lawn(to blow to the neighbors property), theft.

      you see, the crackhouse or anything that land is used for should not be "zoned" with neighbors property value being taken into account. polution laws, reasonable noise laws(reasonable being a level set for the exsisting neighborhood before developing a piece of property,more on bottom *A*)

      each law shouldn not need to be writen in such great detail or writen to be so descriptive BECAUSE the other simple laws to govern the people will also be applied to any situation.

      laws
      a)dont physically injur others
      b)dont steal or damage property
      c)do not harras, or become a nuisance via derogatory or explicit effort

      now how many circumstances does this cover for 3 simple laws? just think about it!
      add
      d)obey willfully signed contracts
      e)pay fair taxes
      f)do not fraud. fraud to be considered theft.

      and nearly everything else in 6 laws!

      *A*
      in a residential are, if their are people living in houses then the noise level allowance will be that of a residential! quiet! but if the piece of property had nothing within the range of the sound, then not sound rules! but if an industrial is in the immediate area, then noise levels up to safe levels are tolerable.

      --

      ok, directly on subject

      do the metal coverings damage the neighbors property? produce excess noise? fall of and land on neighbors property or in act of swinging cross the property line?

    8. Re:RIGHTS? by cranos · · Score: 1

      Th tree laws look very nice and could work if human beings weren't human beings. People are conniving bastards and will find a way through anything, this is part of the reason why our laws are so convoluted.

    9. Re:RIGHTS? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      crack = illegal / whores = illegal
      putting up loose sheet metal all over you home =illegal.
      Also a danger in a wind storm.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    10. Re:RIGHTS? by itzdandy · · Score: 1

      no, those laws dont and wont work because 'justice' systems have room for allowances and opinions.

      justice is facts and rights, not opinions. in a real justice system their would be no judges and these laws would work with a much better 'right' answer rate than any justice systems in place today.

    11. Re:RIGHTS? by itzdandy · · Score: 1

      crack = people hurt people = illegal

      whores = ?... why are whore illegal?

      putting up loose sheet metal all over you home = make the sheet metal secured to the building!!

      as a side note:
      contract = agreement to do something that you have the right to do or not due, and being legally bound to fulfill deal. a)sex is legal, b)buying services is legal c)buying sex is illegal???

    12. Re:RIGHTS? by itzdandy · · Score: 1
      from AC
      Have you ever heard of the "broken windows" http://www.cityofseattle.net/police/prevention/Tip s/broken_window.htm [cityofseattle.net] theory? Your house does not exist in a vacuum; besides the reduction of property values, you could be contributing to vandalism and other crime in your neighborhood if it looks like a piece of shit. What if you never mow your lawn and it gets infested with insects/rodents/etc., some of which decide to invade my place? You better believe you'd be responsible for it; the regulations help keep these kinds of issues from going to court.

      We have all of these extra laws and ordinances and so forth because some people don't have respect for others' property. You are part of a society; again, you don't live in a vacuum, whether you'd like to or not. Most people feel a social obligation to keep their lawns reasonably neat and not leave their garbage cans in the street all week; they know that they are less likely to get the respect of their neighbors if they don't. /Most/ of the time the ordinances aren't intended to force people to act in an unreasonable way and are in fact best for the community as a whole. Similarly, safety and emissions inspections on vehicles are best for the community as a whole. They may be a hassle for you if your car is a piece of junk, but the direct and indirect consequences of driving a vehicle that does not pass these inspections outweigh the inconvenience and restriction of freedom to you.


      so my insects destroy your lawn? thats pretty direct right? i mean my neglegence was fine until the damage fell on your lawn. you see? my property directly damaged yours!

      "best for the community as a whole" = communism

      the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few = communism

      in america, the individuals rights are supposed to be at the apex of any law. so screwing one guy because everyone else wants something a certain way is a violation of that persons rights!

      it would be 'better' to just kill anyone that did not contribute to society. overall it would, but that disreguards that persons rights. and that is the most extreme case but it is a violation of the same rights(+the one where you dont kill) as forcing a certain action with pain of penalty like make people fix a broken window.
    13. Re:RIGHTS? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      How does you smoking crack hurt anyone but yourself?
      If you think that there should be laws about hurting yourself well than the also covers prostitution, pron, and being nuts enough to cover your house in tin foil.
      Also making your house an extreme eye sore does hurt the value of the homes around you so it does cause harm.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    14. Re:RIGHTS? by itzdandy · · Score: 1

      does smoking crack hurt others? well, do you have a family? if so then yes. do you act in an insane manor and pose a threat to other people when in public? yes. now if you are locked in your home by yourself then i suppose smoking crack only hurts you.

      and IMHO if you WANT to be an idiot, your welcome to do it because you may just kill yourself and raise the collective IQ of the community.

  98. Stop touching yourself, Kent... by dilweed · · Score: 1

    Maybe they can put a ton of popcorn kernals and a 55 gallon drum of butter in the living room.

  99. What the family should do... by psykocrime · · Score: 1, Informative

    What they should do is; keep their aluminum shields up, and tell the city officials to go to fucking hell. And they should tell the city that if they come to arrest them, that the cops had better pack a lunch.

    This is ridiculous... as long as they are on their land, they city has no right what-so-fucking-ever to interfere with these people, as long as they aren't violating anybody else's rights (and hint: there is no such thing as the "right to not be offended by an eyesore").

    --
    // TODO: Insert Cool Sig
    1. Re:What the family should do... by Kinky+Bass+Junk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are many reasons that they can be forced to take it down. As it is shiny and metal, it could reflect into the eyes of pilots &c (long shot, but it is used). The residents of my city are forced to only use certain colour roofs, as we live in a primarily bushy area and it helps blend into the environment or something. The shields could also count as a 'structure' and have their removal ordered by the local government. Not to mention the fact that there is a "right to not be offended by an eyesore", if it causes a change in lifestyle or even minor discomfort, then it is required to be taken down.
      In conclusion, I win.

      --
      Anonymous Coward
    2. Re:What the family should do... by psykocrime · · Score: 0, Troll

      Not to mention the fact that there is a "right to not be offended by an eyesore", if it causes a change in lifestyle or even minor discomfort, then it is required to be taken down.

      So you think you have the right to force anybody and everybody in the world to conform to your standards, because you have a "minor discomfort?" Wow, how fucking retarded is that? You're gonna be in a for a big shock when you grow up and join the real world.

      How about this: Your idiocy is causing me minor discomfort and offending me right now, so can I just kill you so I won't have to hear your shit anymore?

      --
      // TODO: Insert Cool Sig
    3. Re:What the family should do... by cranos · · Score: 1

      How dare you try and enforce your standards on me, thats exaclty the kind of crap that the Libertarians are fighting against... oh wait I just read your sig.

    4. Re:What the family should do... by Kinky+Bass+Junk · · Score: 1

      Hey! I'm just basing this on local council policy where I live, it's probably different over there, but my point is that they can force them to take it down, not whether or not it is morally correct or anything.

      --
      Anonymous Coward
    5. Re:What the family should do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      When (if) you ever grow up, move out of your parent's garage, and pay for your own house with your own money from your very own job (probably working graveyard at Macs) then you might have a slightly different perspective on why it is not unreasonable to be expected to conform to certain generally accepted norms of behavior, and why it is kind of juvenile not to give a fuck for the feelings of anyone around you...

      But then again maybe not.

    6. Re:What the family should do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Priceless. First you lose a simple argument because you don't know what you're talking about. Then you whine like a little baby about it.

      The drugs, you're losing whatever edge you had...

    7. Re:What the family should do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, how is life in the trailer park these days?

    8. Re:What the family should do... by syrinx · · Score: 1

      Your post is causing me minor discomfort, and I had to change my lifestyle to read it. I therefore am having you arrested and sent to the gulag.

      Have a nice day.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    9. Re:What the family should do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're gonna be in a for a big shock when you grow up and join the real world.

      You mean the real world with its zoning regulations and rules and behavioral constraints? Holy shit, are you a VAST dumbass!

      How about this: Your idiocy is causing me minor discomfort and offending me right now, so can I just kill you so I won't have to hear your shit anymore?

      LOL! Typical Slashdot analogy from the braindead. You are a massive fuckhead of EPIC proportions, scumbag.

  100. Editing by vyke4lyfe · · Score: 1

    Since when does the governator do all the editing?

  101. Welcome to the PRC by Lucky_Pierre · · Score: 1

    People's Republic of California.

    --
    "Whenever the cause of the people is entrusted to professors, it is lost." ~ V.I. Lenin
  102. Actually, there is some evidence about EMI/RFI by postbigbang · · Score: 1

    Studies have shown that people in rural areas using mobile phones have a higher incidence of brain tumors. Additional incidences of higher frequency exposure have been shown to cause DNA changes, ostensibly by rattling your proteins apart.

    Lupus, an autoimmune disorder, is similar to temporal arteritis and other disease where the body actually starts inflaming and perhaps attacking itself through misidentification of conditions. Some feel that this might happen because of exposure to microwave leakage (ovens, and other 2.2-2.4Ghz items such as cordless phones, remote speakers, and 802..11b/g products) that cause localized inflamations that the body perceives as antigen reaction, then sends lymph and other things to do battle with non-existent, unidentified bad things. These 'soldiering' effects then, having not much to do, disrupt local tissues.

    No, there's not a lot of data out there. But we are indeed bombarded by all sort of stuff, and waiting for the producers of products to research (expensively) the reactions will be like waiting for Godot, or worse, the government

    A few years back, it was demonstrated to me that military radar could selectively fry a single goose in a formation from over five miles away. The poor things would burst into flames. Lower frequency RF, like living under a broadcast tower, doesn't seem to have as much problem as higher frequencies, including those that resonate water in microwave ovens. With so much spectra being used, few studies have been done stepping a few Hertz at a time, then looking to see what changes have occured, given various energy strengths, and localized conditions, like the presence of water and various minerals-- let alone DNA. Still further tests over a period of time given these variables, is entirely elusive-- there just isn't data.

    I wouldn't therefore dismiss claims out of hand, despite the fact that they sound superficially quite silly. Schizophrenia? Perhaps, but don't dismiss this entirely. Liberty requires accomodating goofy, yet harmless people.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    1. Re:Actually, there is some evidence about EMI/RFI by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Lower frequency RF, like living under a broadcast tower [...]

      It depends on the power of the transmissions. I don't recall if it was the Sears Tower, but I remember watching a documentary on a building that mentioned they had to power down the transmission tower at the top of it in order to do routine maintenance. If they didn't, the transmit power was so great that it would cause irreparable harm or possibly even death to anyone climbing up into it.

      The poster who claimed there's no evidence of harmful EMF probably has a very narrow concept of what exactly constitutes EMF.

    2. Re:Actually, there is some evidence about EMI/RFI by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "A few years back, it was demonstrated to me that military radar could selectively fry a single goose in a formation from over five miles away. The poor things would burst into flames."
      No not five miles away. This is a good example of bad data. Radar uses microwaves. Some military radars VERY POWERFUL. The Missile control radar for the Sprint ABM was about the most intense around and it could not fry a goose at five miles.
      Yes you do not want to stand in front of a F-15 with it's radar. The inverse square law is you friend.

      So far very low levels of RF have been proven harmless. Just like like can make you explode into flames if it is bright enough so can RF. It is really the same thing.
      Yes Virgina radio is just a different color of light.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  103. Re:The best part...this thread can finally die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No... aluminiumy.

  104. dumb asses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We ARE poisoning them; but we are putting shit in their water!

    HO! HO! HO!

    They get all thirsty nailing up aluminun sheets to the side of their house in the blazing sun, then go and GUZZLE the tampered water!

    Ho boy - what a riot! we laugh for hours.

  105. Wow. by MasterSLATE · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In other news, people from California are crazy.

    --

    [sig]www.masterslate.org[/sig]
  106. References? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you have a source for this? I'm thinking its more likely the PVC fumes were more of a problem than the electric fields. A quick google search didn't give me anything. I should know this, but I'm not sure- I think PVC is a thermoset, so it can't really melt without chemical changes (whereas thermoplastics melt with heat, before bonds start breaking). I think most of the polymer "welding" is with chemical solvents- but my knowledge is far from applied.

    By the way, I think you mean that the intensity of the field falls off as the square of the distance, but I've never heard it called the least squares rule. Could be an engineers thing, though.

    What really made reply, though, is that I get surprisingly bothered by the use of "EMF" for electro-magnetic field- because my textbooks sometimes use "$\Epsilon$MF" for electro-motive force, ye olde fashioned way of saying 'voltage.' Thanks, and please excuse the hangup.

    1. Re:References? by dbIII · · Score: 1
      Do you have a source for this? I'm thinking its more likely the PVC fumes were more of a problem than the electric fields
      The problem was studied, the feilds were measured and it was determined that the core temperature of the workers was being raised by an alarming enough amount and it was PVC sheets not the toxic monomer used to make it.
      so it can't really melt without chemical changes
      Look at the joins in flexible sheets of PVC - induction heating is used in a small area as they are passed through a machine and the two surfaces fuse together. Also consider PVC pipes, they are formed up and not cast like bakelite and phenolic resins. Chemical solvents are also used by plumbers, but just the right amount of heat applied to a small area gives better results in fixed installations. My source for the plastic welding plant birth defects was a BBC radio documetary re-broadcast on Australia's ABC Science Show a few years ago. The other source is general safety rules for operating induction furnaces, which generate much more intense alternating feilds to melt metal (magnetic metals melt more easily this way but you can still melt aluminium in an induction furnace without too much trouble).

      The worst thing about it was that the problem was understood (microwave ovens were already developed) but due to poor maintainace the sheilding wasn't all there on some machines after some time.

      I get surprisingly bothered by the use of "EMF"
      I get bothered by "IP" being used for intellectual property, instead of intermediate pressure or internet protocol - we've got to live with reuse and abuse of terms.
  107. I never had a problem with aluminium foil by zakezuke · · Score: 1

    I had one of those days where I ran out of newspaper, masking paper, and still needed to pain some trim. So I used aluminium foil. I never got as much as a dirty look from anyone, except a couple of friends who asked me if I had problems with voices in my head. The only saftey issue I could think was if the sun hit the foil just right and blinded someone, but as it was applied mostly to the north side I didn't see it being a problem.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  108. I have a solution to make everyone happy. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

    If the family suffering from this radio poisoning is reading this, I may have your answer:

    I too had this terrible problem, until I developed and tested a simple solution in pill form.

    I call it "The Placebo 9000". I can nearly guarantee this Sacramento family 100% protection against feeling like they are being poisoned by any sort of radio-waves.

    One month's supply for an adult of the Placebo 9000 is available for only $49.99.

    The Placebo 9000 is NOT FDA approved, because the chemical makeup of the product is so incredibly advanced, FDA scientists can only find simple sugars in the product. This is a good thing, because you DON'T WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO KNOW you're taking the Placebo 9000.

    If they find this out, they may decide to use more powerful radio-wave poisoning, which can lead to all of your symptoms to return. In this case, you'll need the Placebo 9210, which has been enhanced as an effective countermeasure to level 9B and above government produced interferences.

    The Placebo 9210 is $149.99 for an adult's one month supply.

    Written testimonies can be provided on request.

    --
    The Internet is generally stupid
  109. Down the street by NeuroKoan · · Score: 1

    This house is right down the street from one of my friends. He says its a pretty odd place (obviously).

    Hope to get some pictures soon.

    --

    "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation."
  110. I almost lost my tinfoil hat by nevdullc · · Score: 1

    I almost lost my tinfoil hat falling off my chair!
    ... when I saw this story, it triggered some thing in my deep memory.. I had the same problem in Vancouver B.C. ten or so years ago with my neighbours, only one thing that saved me. My trusty tinfoil hat, yep.. made it myself, cna't buy ones like this in the stores no.. I never take it off not even to sleep.
    --WARNING TINFOIL-HAT construction and use AT OWN RISK!!
    Works great make yours today!
    ;)
    TINFOIL HAT HOW-TO:
    good for keeping evil radio waves gov't conspiricies/ufo's or phone companies from frying your brain with their long range EMF trickery or listening in on your private thoughts etc.

    MATERIALS:
    50' roll of off the shelf tinfoil (from local supermarket or grocer) [try not to let anyone see you buying it or they might think it's strange (avoid suspision)].

    METHOD:
    Just giv'er 30 - 40 good wraps around the old noggin', try not to have any unshielded spots, ( leakage can produce unexpected failure of the tinfoil hat's shielding properties)

    MOD:
    I put some cool viking horns on mine and it looks really cool now, my wife won't let me wear it in public though, she's embarassed or something.

    ttfn,
    /nev/dull/c

    --
    Cthulhu Saves -- in case He's hungry later.
  111. So all I have to do to get on Slashdot is... by raam · · Score: 1

    ...cover my stupid apartment in tin foil. Is this a consipracy by the Reynolds company?

  112. Microwave Amplifiers on top of the House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you watch TFV, you can plainly see a pair of dish antennas, of the type that have built in microwave amplifiers. They undoubtably have coax cables running microwaves right into their house.

  113. electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and satellites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Hmmmm, anyone else find it "interesting" that these poor unfortunates are concerned about somebody's microwave oven tossing EMR at them but are, apparently, not concerned about the effects of the EMR from the satellites that are feeding their two satellite receivers? There's nothing on their roof and there are huge gaps in the sheeting that they have standing up against their house. No, those pesky little millimeter waves won't sneak through those spots.

    If, after getting the obvious psychological help, these folks still "need" to protect themselves they ought to look into something like SAF'N SHIELDED (tm) from International Paper Co. which is a nonwoven mat of metallic fibers that can be applied to their inside walls. It's been TEMPEST-tested (some versions attenutate by 100db) by the U.S. government. Maybe they ought to contract for the services of a good TEMPEST engineer as well.

    Then again, it's California ;-)

  114. The crack channel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, am I the only one that moused over the link and read "thecrackchannel.com" at first glance? :D

  115. I am terribly disappointed... by The+Breeze · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is SLASHDOT, for God's sake, and no one has pointed out the obvious:

    They just need to call up Scotty and get him to give them some transparent alumminum. That should stop the neighbors from complaining.

    Sheesh. News for nerds? How can you call yourself nerds if you miss such an obvious, pathetic pun?

  116. AM Radio anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Coast to Coast AM with George Noory has this on as a subject right now (0124 EST, 0524UTC)

  117. This metal covering is also dangerous! by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

    I think folks forget that the last rainy season we had two very strong storms complete with tornadoes (!) go through the South Natomas area of Sacramento. That house covered in all that metal "shielding" would be an extremely dangerous hazard in such a storm, since the metal pieces will be picked up by the strong winds and become a very serious projectile hazard.

  118. That, or by EtherAlchemist · · Score: 5, Funny


    Tinfoil on the inside of your house. After all, you don't want them to know you're on to them.

    You know who I mean

    --
    R(k)
    1. Re:That, or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rtfa and watch the video. Then entire inside of the house IS covered with foil - including the beds.

    2. Re:That, or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EtherAlchemist, we're on to you. We'll be sending men in black suits shortly. Don't try to run.

      Sincerely,
      You know who we are.

    3. Re:That, or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed.

      That's why I wear my Tinfoil hat on the inside of my head!

      Nobody ever suspects...

    4. Re:That, or by Cyram · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but when you want to relax on the front porch, you want to be protected. There's nothing like enjoying the view on your aluminum covered...oh wait.

    5. Re:That, or by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1
      Tinfoil on the inside of your house.

      According to the video, they've already done that and also have foil blankets on their beds.

      Folks, watch the video - otherwise you're missing out on the funniest part of the story.

      And what the hell is with the screwy font in the "confirm you're a smart autoposting script" image?

      --
      .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
    6. Re:That, or by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      And now, we know who you are.

      Please wait patiently while the unmarked black helicopters come.

  119. SPELLING by sabat · · Score: 1

    Jesus god! Check the spelling for chrissakes!

    SACRAMENTO not Sacromento.

    I love it when Taco calls himself a Journalist. Journalists can spell, and they have editors who correct spelling, just in case.

    --
    I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
  120. Just a test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no text feel free to mod to -333

  121. Coral Cached copy of the site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Coral Cache of site, some of the images are coming up.

  122. Nothing wrong with that by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

    Me and my freinds regularly line our flack jackets and camaflage trousers with tin foil to block the radio waves from the Gahandiist supressionist gouvernmentists,Its worked so well that my Freinds are now all totaly invisible (Did imention they are aliens here to save us from the Ghandiist lizard men).
    We all cary around .44 riffles with automatic clips all coverd in tin-foil as the lizard men can deactivate your guns otherwise and we need these guns as one day we will rise up and otherthrow the lizard men ghandiists .We shall bring about a new glory for the one true god Bill Murray Holly be his name.
    Our neighbours constantly bombard us with Electromagicnetic rays , We all feel it and it causes us to have excessive Gas when we drink beer (30 cans ).
    So we painted our house with 5 layers of lead based paints we bought during the 60s .
    And we coated the asbesto and mercury in tin-foil for that added layer of safty .
    As bill murray taught us , we need to get the mole men lizard people gopherites .
    So more power to them and if the feds try removing their tinfoil we will rise up against the ghandiists in order to protect our god given right to Astroturf carpets

    --
    The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
  123. HA by kernelpanicked · · Score: 0

    ROCK ON DJ8!! Gotta go...finishing up my tin foil wallpaper job.

    --
    Ubuntu: If at first you don't succeed, blindly slap a sudo in front of it
  124. archive - funny by no-one-important · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not sure why I care (perhaps because I've seen the damage a redneck can do), but here's an archive with the pictures... It's pretty funny.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20021015131654/http://w ww.knology.net/~carlos/redneck.htm
  125. Re:You're just saying that because you work for TH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't it written on the back of the CD case?

  126. I've gotta see this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some things just have to be seen in person. Luckily, I'm just a few blocks away!

  127. Hearing music on my phone! by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Some years ago, I started hearing music on my phone, even when no call was in progress.

    Of course, I just waited for station identification and found out which AM station I was getting. It turned out that the 50KW AM station nearby away had one of their three towers collapse in the 1989 California earthquake. Until they replaced it, their output pattern was distorted. I was in a really strong lobe.

    Adding a small bypass cap across the phone line helped the problem. But it took more filtering to completely cure it. I had to have the telco guys add some filtering on their side of the demark. And, years later, when I got DSL, that had to come out. Huge hassle. Three telco visits with test gear to get DSL working properly.

    1. Re:Hearing music on my phone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should have just gone to the station. They're required to provide you with filters specific to their broadcast frequencies if you're experiencing this problem. I had the same issue with one of my previous apartments. Had the telco put the general filter on the line then also added the station provided filter to my modem line. It did reduce the number of issues with the line, although the speed was still not up to par.

    2. Re:Hearing music on my phone! by m50d · · Score: 1

      I had the same thing with my computer speakers. Was hearing some music at a really low volume. Never managed to identify it, and it went away eventually, but still.

      --
      I am trolling
    3. Re:Hearing music on my phone! by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      I had this happen too, but it went away by itself. I never found out the station (other than that it was in Spanish).

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    4. Re:Hearing music on my phone! by Nimey · · Score: 1

      This used to happen at my parents' house. I would sometimes hear police broadcasts, never very clearly, on the computer speakers even when they were off.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    5. Re:Hearing music on my phone! by Suddenly_Dead · · Score: 1

      I've heard music (from a station I didn't recognize) from my computer speaker system, with the computer off. It was oddly rectified by switching the subwoofer off and then back on, though.

      The strangest things.

  128. Family Takes Down Metal That Covered Home by Zoyd · · Score: 2, Informative

    Family Takes Down Metal That Covered Home
    POSTED: 11:12 am PDT May 23, 2005
    UPDATED: 1:26 pm PDT May 23, 2005
    http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/4520485/detail. html
    .

    NATOMAS, Calif. -- A house that neighbors called an eyesore is starting to blend in after a Sacramento family spent the weekend removing the metal covering their house.

    The D'Souza family started taking it down this weekend. They claim neighbors are bombarding their home with harmful microwave radiation and it's making them sick.

    The D'Souza's lined the inside and outside of their home with metal and aluminum to block the rays, but the Sacramento city building inspector ordered them to take it down by Monday.

    The city says that all the metal is dangerous and that there is no evidence of radiation.

    1. Re:Family Takes Down Metal That Covered Home by whitehatlurker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Check out the link - there is a survey as to whether or not people think they should have been forced to remove the sheeting.

      --
      .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
  129. Satellite images from Google Maps by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 2

    I thought it would be cool to see if you could see the aluminum panels from space using Google Maps. However, the entire area around the D'Souza's neighbors' house is greyed out in both the satellite maps and the roadmaps. Weird.

    1. Re:Satellite images from Google Maps by zerbot · · Score: 2

      Um... those satellite images on Google maps are not real time. I found our house, and the house that we used to live in is only a few blocks away. We sold it to a guy who subdivided the lot and built a house in the back yard. The house was completed over three years ago, but there is no sign of it on the Google satellite images.

    2. Re:Satellite images from Google Maps by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 1

      It was a joke.. Ever looked at Area 51, or biological weapons research facilities, or other classified regions in Google Maps? They're often grayed out...

    3. Re:Satellite images from Google Maps by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 1

      It was a joke.. Ever looked at Area 51, or biological weapons research facilities, or other classified regions in Google Maps? They're often grayed out...

      I find this odd. I mean if they're supposed to be public entities then why bother greying them out completely? I understand maybe not providing resolution enough to see details but why grey them out?

      Someone suggested to me it was because of fear of terrorist attack. I find that hard to believe as these places can easily be located through other means and it's not like something nuclear has to be placed that close.

      As a semi on-topic idea - wouldn't it be effective to cover the tops of those places with metal so all the cameras get is a reflection of themselves or the sun? Stupid, I know, but still a fun idea.

      --

      "Bah!" - Dogbert
  130. Private property by stuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry. They might be as crazy as SCO but private property is private property.

    If the neighbors or the city really has something to gain with their house looking good they should either offer to pay for more attractive tin foil or offer to buy their house from them. Forcing a private property owner to decorate their home a certain way at gunpoint is not part of a free society.

    1. Re:Private property by lxs · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So your idea of a free society is one where everybody is allowed act like an asshole? There is a difference between not decorating your home a certain way and turning in into something that wouldn't look out of place in the favelas of Rio. If you live in a street with other people, you have to make some allowances to common taste. If you want to live like a bum, buy a piece of farmland, line it with trees and go nuts inside.

      Didn't you people ever watch Sesame street? Working together and respecting your neighbors that's what living in a civil society is about, not pissing off the entire world just because you're a freaking nutcase.

      It's called courtesy. Look it up sometime.

    2. Re:Private property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was not defending the actions of the idiots, he was defending their right to do it to their own house!

      I find the behaviour of half the population objectionable but I don't go running to the government demanding laws to coercively stop that behaviour.

    3. Re:Private property by a24061 · · Score: 1

      Are you generally opposed to planning/zoning regulations? If so, you won't complain when I buy the house next to yours and open a paper mill or a landfill. After all, it's private property!

    4. Re:Private property by ProfBooty · · Score: 1

      so if i don't like your shoes, i should have the right to make you change it?

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    5. Re:Private property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the worst analogy this week on Slashdot.

    6. Re:Private property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that you said this is an indication that you don't own property or you'd know better. Before I bought a house, I used to think like you did. I have heard about some very restrictive home owner covenents and I got curious, so I asked my best friend, a lawyer, about them. He explained to me that covenents were totally enforceable and courts had consistently upheld them. If you live in a covenent governed area, you have to play by the rules. From reading the article, it seems to me that the family is in violation of local home owner covenents.

    7. Re:Private property by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 0

      obviously you do not own a home

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    8. Re:Private property by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      I take it you've never lived in a gated community. They're like little islands filled with rich white assholes and their mexican maids and gardeners.

      They have rules like "You can't cut your grass on x day," or "You cannot water your lawn past xpm on Fridays," or "You cannot leave a car parked in front of your garage overnight."

      If you violate any of the rules, you can be fined.

      \They make and enforce their own laws, kind of like the little mini-cities in Snow Crash.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    9. Re:Private property by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I've hear the opposite: HOA covenants, unless written into the actual deed or adopted as part of local zoning, tend to NOT be upheld in court. This may be the result of most of the cases I'm familiar with being fairly minor (unauthorized but non-offensive paint colors, minor accessory structures, non-HAM antennae).

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    10. Re:Private property by zettabyte · · Score: 1
      Forcing a private property owner to decorate their home a certain way at gunpoint is not part of a free society.

      Holy cow! They're being threatened with death?

      I have to remember to never go to Sacromento [sic].

    11. Re:Private property by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Private property is private property.

      And municipal housing codes are municipal housing codes.

      When you buy a home, you're agreeing to abide by the rules in that location that pertain to home ownership. Some such rules are just common sense, like requiring a permit to dig around underground where the utility lines are. Some of them are excessively onerous, like Homeowners' Association bylaws. The rules in this case seem to fall somewhere in between.

    12. Re:Private property by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I am when they tell me how to decorate my house.

      Since papermills and landfills are hazardous, it is hardly an app analogy.

      A proper one for this case would be you'll move next door and paint your ouse dayglo orange. Which would be fine with me.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:Private property by crabpeople · · Score: 1

      um enforced courtesy is like enforced manners or enforced charity - it kinda defeats the purpose.

      if someone tells you be polite OR ELSE then you aren't really learning anything except how to be a conform. putting metal on the side of your own house that you worked many years to buy - i cant believe thats even remotely something that anyone could complain about. if you complained about something so trivial in my neighbourhood you would get laughed at and told to mind your own damn business. this article is absurd. who the hell cares what your neighbour is doing?? just stay the hell out of my yard.

      what if i think lawn after lawn of green grass is hellish? (i do) does that mean i can demand you cover it with plants or rocks?

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    14. Re:Private property by Xepherys2 · · Score: 1

      This varies a lot...

      Some cities even go so far as to have "tacky laws" that prevent stores and homes from looking "out of place". Regardless, there are city codes for a reason. A HOA is not a legal entity, per se (AFAIK), but a city is. If the city has codes against parking on your front laws, digging a pool without a permit, putting in a garage without a permit or... covering your home in sheet metal, then you are required by local laws to abide by those codes. Most codes are either, a) Put in place by your elected local government (mayor's office), or b) Put into place by a vote of local citizens. Either way, it IS democratic... and we live in a democratic society, not necessarily a "free" society. I think people tend to forget this sometimes...

      ~X

    15. Re:Private property by WorLord · · Score: 1

      " So your idea of a free society is one where everybody is allowed act like an asshole?"

      If everybody weren't able to act like assholes, you wouldn't be able to make this complaint without some form of governmental punishment coming your way.

    16. Re:Private property by djrogers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      HOA Covenants, Conditions, Regulation and are willfully entered into upon purchase of a home in an HOA. In fact, you have to sign a few documents stating that you have been shown the CC&Rs, and that you agree to abide by them. The reasons for wanting ot live in an HOA should be obvious to anyone who's had a neigbor like this destroy the 'feel' of a neighborhood.
      The way I look at it is this - if a bunch of like-minded individuals want to agree to a set of CC&Rs, why shouldn't they be allowed to?

      --
      Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
  131. Am I in Danger? by dark+grep · · Score: 1

    I am suprised my neighbors haven't done that too. In my house I have a very nice Cisco RF hub in the study for my work network. In the kitchen is a Linksys WiFi hub for the kids broadband. And in the hallway is another Linksys for the server network I host for a few friends. Then there are the four cell phones, the bluetooth stuff and the iPOD FM retransmitters (2). So far I hanven't been diagnosed with cancer once, so I don't see what people are complaining about.

  132. Satellite TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They seem to have forgotten that satellite TV is beamed at microwave frequencies. They need to cover the top of the house too! Actually, they could maybe rig a powerful laser into their dish and shoot the satellite down! That would do it.

  133. Ah.... by fudg3tunn3l · · Score: 1

    ...so thats where my neighbours moved to

    --
    Resident of Skara Brae since 1985
  134. The OFFICIAL tinfoil hat site by young-earth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Come one, come all, see this site and admire the stylish and attractive choices.

    Seriously, this guy worked for a real good friend of mine for a while, and he is real serious about this stuff.

    Yow...

  135. Look, even shrooming I could figure out this: by nekoes · · Score: 1

    This is absurd.

    --
    Hey, it's my OPINION that dogs have eight legs and make a sound like a car horn every time they take a piss.
  136. Pretty Vacant - Evidence of Abscence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely they whould be instructed on how to detect microwaves, so they can empirically test their paranoia.
    Microwaves, like many other wavelengths can be harmful in very high doses.
    The debate is whether they are harmful in the doses that people are recieving when using mobile phones/ Wi-Fi/ near a leaky oven.
    Just as you can start a fire with a magnifying glass, microwaves can be focussed and concentrated, as every pringles can wardriver knows.
    Clearly these people are experiencing ill effects. They have come up with a testable hypothesis, help them test it.
    Sure they may be psychosomatic symptoms or it may be stress related, but to dismiss someones belief without suggesting empirical testing is as ignorant as pinning all yours hopes on an untested hypothesis.
    I believe a radio can be used to detect microwaves, tune it to a frequency where the interference is greatest from a mobile phone and then it is a detector.
    Obviously a radio is not operating GHz, is the radio detecting harmonic frequencies or local EMF?
    Is there a more reliable yet easily available way to detect GHz radiation. If there were it could probably put a lot of peoples minds at rest or at least cause them to construct another hypothesis.
    Mobile phones have not been proven to be safe, neither is the contrary true.
    All too few studies have been done, some studies have concluded potentially harmful effects others not. The jury is out and in Britain our Surgeon General advises that young childrens use be limited.
    The definition of paranoia is not an improbable hypothesis, it is maintaining a belief in the face of incontrovertable evidence.

  137. Some scepticism please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    only here could a story about tinfoil freaks turn into a serious discussion

    Yeah right, because humanity knows absolutely everything about the effect of electromagnetics after such a hugely long history of scientific endeavour of hundreds of thousands of years. Oh, wait ...

    Remember Scottie's comment of "Barbarians"? Well it applies, and your calling those people freaks is the blind commenting on the blind.

    We're just children thinking we understand the world.

  138. And your point is...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are many cases of people smoking heavily all their lives and outliving those who never smoked. I'm sure there are heavy smokers who never developed lung cancer.

    This doesn't do anything to negate the position arrived at through years of study that cigarette smoking is a major causitive factor of lung cancer.

    I'm not saying that living in the middle of a few wireless hubs is going to kill ya. I'm not saying it's perfectly healthy. Just keeping an open mind. I don't think all the evidence is in.

  139. Since when is being odd illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you're missing the point here.

    They've been threatened with prosecution because of causing an eyesore, not because they're having mental issues.

    The right response from them should have been to check how to achieve compliance with local bylaws. Quite possibly just a paint job would have sufficed. And quite poossibly they're already perfectly legal --- after all, many modern houses are made in metal and reflective glass these days.

    Unless local bylaws state that building materials must not be reflective to electromagnetics, they haven't actually done anything wrong on that score. The neighbours are merely complaining that it's unsightly.

  140. I am by nature nutral-evil by Timberwolf0122 · · Score: 1

    Ie I swing towards the darkside but not asmuch as say a sith lord, anyway.

    I propose asmany slash dotters as possible surround said house and aim all there mobiles/buetooth devices 802.11x/ham radios/microwaves and on the count of 3 start a 5 minute bombardment. I for one think it woul be funny to watch them run about trying to save there brains.

    Or is it just me who thinks the mentaly ill are hear for my enjoyment?

    --
    In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
  141. Hire radio hams for full-spectrum monitoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well the sad thing is that what they're doing might not even be effective for what they want to achieve. You have to be able to measure the shielding effect of a material at the relevant frequencies before you can tell.

    What they should have done is call in some well-equiped radio hams for full-spectrum monitoring, or even to install monitors for them in the house permanently. They wouldn't need to be licensed for pure reception.

    While it may seem pointless to us, if it seems sensible to them then they ought to check that it's working at least.

  142. Well this is... by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    Absolute undeniable proof that the government is transmitting mind rays and doesn't want you wearing tin foil hats..

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  143. It's Aluminium. by Trevelyan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I had to say it after reading Aluminum too many times.

    See:
    http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/aluminium
    (May not work outside uk, try appending ?view=uk)
    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=239 1&dict=CALD

    I have been told the history on why Americans call it wrong, but I forget

  144. Paranoia by Jayman2 · · Score: 1

    Hey - Just because you are paranoid doesn't mena they're not out to get you!

    --
    -.sig sauer-
  145. Better: sink basement and live below ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They'd only have to line the ground floor with metal if they sunk a large basement and lived there ... the ground is pretty impervious to most electromagnetic radiation, except at extremely low frequencies down near the audio range.

    Hell, belt and braces, might as well line all six sides of the basement with metal if one is that paranoid. No chance of that being an eyesore to neighbours.

  146. Known short-range effects, examples by acaspis · · Score: 1
    there's next to no evidence EMF/EMI causes anything in people

    Actually all radio workers, including HAMs and radar technicians, are routinely taught about the short-range thermal effects of RF power.

    This form compares simulated exposures with the recommended limits. It says you should not stand at less than 6 feet from an antenna transmitting 100W at 900MHz, or less than 6 inches from a cellphone transmitting 1W.

    The uncertainty is about possible long-range non-thermal effects.

  147. I have an alternative explanation for these guys by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    maybe they suffer from
    aluminum poisoning .

  148. I fully agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn`t want to live to such a guy. Calls the police right after you have a party the second time....

    He should care about his own shit and not what other people are doing.

  149. EMI meter? by khrtt · · Score: 1

    The way they have that sheet metal with gaps between the sheets, it's not very effective against most EMI, and even if they had a good shield, it'd be no match for any other types of radiation that could creep up.

    There are so many things that could cause wierd health problems, and EMI isn't very high on the list. I'd check for allergies first, then for toxic crap in the air/water, and only then for radiation, and I'd start with gamma/neutron from radon and the like before even thinking of EMI. Unless you have a power line or a radio tower in your back yard, you are just not close enough to the source to be hit hard enough to cause health problems.

    I just can't get over that article last year about that woman that stuck her computer under the floorboards because she thought it was emitting toxic vapors at her, but she really was allergic to her cat. Tinfoil or sheetmetal, something probably is making them sick.

  150. intolerance of others by thomasa · · Score: 1

    I wish I had a good quote to put in here but our intolerance of different views and ways of doing things is one of the basic limitations of people. Intolerance has no survival value - that I can see - in our crowded age. In less crowded times the family that suffered intolerance could move to a less populated area but those days are over. Personally I like the biblical passage: "judge not or you will be judged". In other words mind you own business. But it is hardly practiced today.

    1. Re:intolerance of others by doppleganger871 · · Score: 0

      I'm very intolerant of anyone who tried to stop me from legally transmitting on any radio frequency.

  151. This only proves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that Portuguese are very smart people!

  152. Yes, but that's because... by StarCharter · · Score: 1

    We're all secretly hoping it turns out to help keep the popcorn from exploding and wrecking the house.

  153. Not a stupid as it sounds by cow-orker · · Score: 1

    Well, sheet metal does in fact block microwaves and there are microwaves all around us that you actually might want to block. The emissions of your neighbor's wlan and bluetooth equipment as well as their wireless and mobile phones come to mind.

    Do the microwaves cause health problems? Unlikely, I'd say, but the question is not settled yet. These people may be hypochondric, but they are not paranoid.

    Anyway, the neighbor's wlan may not degrade your brain, but it does degrade your own wlan performance, and tin foil certainly helps there. It also makes eavesdropping harder, which may be a valid concern, too.

  154. Or worse! by StarCharter · · Score: 2, Funny

    All of that metal might attract a tornado that thought it was a trailer park.

  155. Sure, sympathy for the tin foil people by smchris · · Score: 3, Funny

    On the other hand, try being the one _propagating_ the radio waves. Flight path restrictions exempted, amateur radio operators have a federal license to a 100 foot tower and 1000 watts output. Happy homeowners' meeting announcing that.

  156. Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its sad how if you don't agree with one way of thinking your automatically tagged as the complete opposite. If not liberal then crazy religeous nut case, if not religeous, then ignorant liberal.

    That's why there are "Fascists" and now "Liberal Fascists", the scary thing is the latter don't see it. :(

    1. Re:Mod parent up! by Morlark · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that realises the oxymoron here? "Liberal Fascists"? It's a contradiction in terms. The two are mutually exclusive. Fascist, by definition, implies authoritarianism, which is the polar opposite of liberalism. I think it's quite sad these days that nobody bothers to really think about what the words they use actually mean.

      --
      Santa's suicide mission go!
    2. Re:Mod parent up! by phlinn · · Score: 1

      The problem is, the current sets of belief generally referred to as "conservative" and "liberal" are both authoritarian in nature. "Libertarian" is a much closer fit to the original meaning of "Liberal".

      --
      "Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny! Free men pull in all sorts of directions" -- Havelock Vetinari
    3. Re:Mod parent up! by Retric · · Score: 1

      I think this has more to do with people trying to fit a subject as complex as politics into a two party system.

      I think schools are important but taking standardized tests every year is pointless who do I vote for? I think everyone should pay for SS not just those making less than 90k a year who do I vote for? I want to increase funding for fusion research but reduce funding for fuel efferent cars whom do I vote for?

  157. Asshole neighbors... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aside from the noise, it's his property and none of your damn business what he does with it...same for D'Souza family...

    1. Re:Asshole neighbors... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      The reflected light and eminating sound waves cross property lines and inflict harm upon the neighbors. The guy also poured used motor oil into the ground, which also can cause trouble for neighbors.

  158. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only person to note the fact that you don't give lithium to schizophrenics. It's for mood control, particularly of individuals experiencing a manic phase. It's often, though not solely, used for control of bi-polar disorders.

    Anyone else have a shrink for a parent?

  159. Why is this on slashdot? by karlandtanya · · Score: 1

    There's another forum for stupid shiat like this.
    Or is this the best we can do anymore?

    --
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
  160. talk to your neighbor? by cat_jesus · · Score: 1

    I don't even want to look at my neighbor. I certainly don't want to talk to him. Home is where we get away from human interaction.

  161. The Crack Channel? by lbmouse · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm just not awake yet... www.thekcrachannel.com just didn't look right when I glanced at it.

  162. Nothing to see here... by NathanM412 · · Score: 1

    I can't see any reason for paranoia from here? But seriously, it looks like they had taken it down before slashdot got to it. http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/4520485/detail. html

  163. I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From your dictionary discription it sounds as if these liberals could be nice guys but, Mr. Anderson, as you well know appearences can be deceiving...

    .

    Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas

    Check out reactions of "News for nerds" for the "starwars fans in costume" video story.

    free from bigotry

    Every one who doesnt agree with a liberal is obviously a racist fascist.

    Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others

    Lowering standards, grade inflation, prizes for all + see above TWO reasons.

    Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain,
    Canada, and the United States.


    Will never get into power, so can always be the good guys. Sort of like the "I love mummy because daddy always gives the punshment" reasoning.

  164. Buy a dictionary. by Gruneun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, it's a community code. It means the community got together and a majority decided that they wanted to live in an area with certain rules. Nobody is forced to live in the community and that same community can act to modify those codes whenever they please.

    This has nothing to do with race, national pride, or an unchecked autocracy. Therefore, the fascism label simply doesn't apply. I suggest you learn the meaning of a word before you start throwing it around.

    1. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Maestro4k · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Yes, it's a community code. It means the community got together and a majority decided that they wanted to live in an area with certain rules. Nobody is forced to live in the community and that same community can act to modify those codes whenever they please. I wouldn't be so sure of that. There are far too many incidents where residents have had to SUE the community organization to put a halt to it's nonsense. I haven't researched the particulars but I figure it must be a case where members are appointed and then run amok. I've seen stories of community codes requiring houses to be painted a particular color, requiring a specific type of railing be used on porches/decks (and we're not talking minimum safety specs here, we're talking ONE particular type of banner is what everyone is required to use), etc. To add insult to injury some of them will make these rules and not bother to grandfather in any houses violating them already. How would you feel if your "community code" got changed and then the organization demanded you tear down your entire porch railing and replace it?

      In some places it may a matter of democracy, but in all the bad stories I've read there appears to be no democracy to the organizations. Somehow, someway, they ended up becoming little fiefdoms for those in charge.

      This has nothing to do with race, national pride, or an unchecked autocracy. Therefore, the fascism label simply doesn't apply. I suggest you learn the meaning of a word before you start throwing it around. Before you start putting the smack down on someone verbally you should do your homework and make sure you're not wrong. I know that either the author of Kevin & Kell or This is True had a problem with their community organization over porch banners in the past year. (I'm pretty sure it was the author of Kevin & Kell, but not 100% sure.) What made it stand out in my mind was that they actually made the changes necessary to make the community organization happy only to find out right afterwards that several homeowners were refusing to comply and filing a lawsuit against the community organization. That certainly doesn't sound like a democratic process was used to decide the new policy does it?
    2. Re:Buy a dictionary. by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless we're talking about an encorporated municipal entity here a mere "majority" is insufficient to support these shenanigans. Either a contract is required AT TIME OF PURCHASE or a UNANIMOUS consent is required.

      A portion of the neighborhood can't just suddenly decide one day to play busybody with the rest of the neighborhood.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Gruneun · · Score: 1

      several homeowners were refusing to comply and filing a lawsuit against the community organization. That certainly doesn't sound like a democratic process was used to decide the new policy does it?

      Quite simply, yes. Using the court system to check the power of the city code enforcement or a homeowners' association would absolutely be considered part of a democratic process.

      Even ignoring that, was it a democratic process that elected those in charge? Certainly, there is no divine right to the positions, municipal or homeowners' association, and there's always recourse for replacing those people if enough affected citizens care to do so.

    4. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Bahumat · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the majority do not have a say upon the rights of the minority.

      Freedom, liberty, and justice for *all*. Ring any bells? There's a beautiful (though cracked) one that should come to mind.

      --
      "To pass through the jungle; silence, courtesy, ferocity, as the occasion demands." -- Kamau, "Proper Passage"
    5. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means the community got together and a majority decided that they wanted to live in an area with certain rules.

      If it is like most community codes, to say a majority of cummunity residents came up with the majority of the rules is false. Usually the rules are created by the developer, then the developer occupies the majority of seats on the community board until completion of the community. Home owners in the community can submit proposals to the board for consideration.

    6. Re:Buy a dictionary. by RexRhino · · Score: 1

      Community codes have a lot to do with racism, national pride, etc.

      For example, here in Toronto there is a group that wants to "protect" certain "lovely Victorian neighborhoods". Now, who feels nostalgic about the Victorian era? An era of racist imperialist conquering, an era of horrible sexual repression? Clearly this is the values of white upper class people feeling nostalgic about an era when they ruled the world. I don't hear immigrants from China or India saying how much they would like to live in lovely Victorian neighborhoods.

      Or recently in Vancouver, they passed a law to make sure that resterants were not emmiting "foul smells". Then they went after the places that emitted the "foul smells". Of course they didn't go after the French bakery, or the English Fish & Chips shops, or even KFC. They went after Indian and Middle Eastern resterants. "But those are the only resterants that got complaints". Well, of course, the "Community Standards" are there to enforce the standards of white, upper class people. It is the ethnic minorities that diverge from these "community standards".

      A law against having a big rusting truck in your driveway? Only poor people have old cars, and working class people often need trucks. Don't try to tell me that they are not trying to keep out people of "the wrong class".

      Yes, I don't thing the idea of community standards are going to go away in this era where people in North America and Europe are becoming rabidly totalitarian. But anyone who looks at things with a clear mind should be able to understand that estetics are not morality, and that nearly all community codes are to enforce segregation and the superiority of one culture over another.

    7. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      LOL, quite the little hypersensitive pessimist. By Victorian you can be assured they are only referring to the style of the architecture (which I happen to admire as well). You really think those sheep know anything about history?

    8. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Gruneun · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the majority do not have a say upon the rights of the minority.

      Living in a society must be terribly difficult for you. Part of democracy is accepting that sometimes the majority of people disagree with you and, to maintain the principles of that form of government, you have to accept it and move on.

    9. Re:Buy a dictionary. by KillerDeathRobot · · Score: 1

      I guess you've never heard of the concept of the tyranny of the majority, or the steps the founding fathers took to avoid it (such as the Bill of Rights).

      --
      Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
    10. Re:Buy a dictionary. by phlinn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you misunderstood him. If I am understanding the post correctly, he didn't think the newly implemented policy was implemented with a democratic process and was then fought by several home owners. He didn't say that the suit was undemocratic.

      --
      "Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny! Free men pull in all sorts of directions" -- Havelock Vetinari
    11. Re:Buy a dictionary. by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Majority rule = mob rule.

      EVERYONE has rights, not just the 'majority' of the people.

      I should be allowed to live in any community I choose, and still not be forced into their beliefs or way of doing things.

      So no, a community cannot enact whatever codes they please. Or would you argue that a majority of Christains can decide its ok to kill a minority of Musliums? Or a majority of men saying its ok to rape the women minority in their community?

      You'll just blow those off an say they are extreme examples, but who gets to decide where that line where its ok for the majority to dictate to the minority?

    12. Re:Buy a dictionary. by JonKatzIsAnIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It means the community got together and a majority decided that they wanted to live in an area with certain rules.

      Awww - they're so cute when they're young and idealistic, aren't they?

      These days, rules aren't decided by the majority. Rules (laws) are passed in order to pacify small groups who are very adept at making a lot of noise and attracting attention to themselves and their cause. The majority of people just want everyone else to leave them alone.

    13. Re:Buy a dictionary. by lahvak · · Score: 1

      I wish I had moderator points. Just look who is on your local community board or committee or whatever you call it. Would you be a member? I wouldn't, I don't have the time. Most people don't. You will probably find bunch of bored housewifes, few morons who are members because it makes them feel important, and bunch of nuts with nutty agendas of their own.

      By the way, the comparism with fascism was not so far fetched. In most communist countries, "street committees" or whatever they called them were the backbone of the party rule.

      --
      AccountKiller
    14. Re:Buy a dictionary. by coopex · · Score: 0

      Yes, damn those Vickies!
      Bastards are always so smug in their handmade bowler hats and tailored suits, and the women in their crinolines and cages under their fancy lacy dresses.
      Now if you'll excuse me, I've gotta get back to work

      "Shine your shoes g'vner?"

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    15. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever hear the term "Tyranny of the majority?"
      I didn't think so......

    16. Re:Buy a dictionary. by kjs3 · · Score: 1
      While I wouldn't argue that building codes have been used to unjectly keep "undesirables" out, I just can't let this pack of rubbish go by unchallenged.

      For example, here in Toronto there is a group that wants to "protect" certain "lovely Victorian neighborhoods". Now, who feels nostalgic about the Victorian era? An era of racist imperialist conquering, an era of horrible sexual repression?

      Oh, yes, of course...because, after all, nothing good was done by whites between 1837 and 1901. No architecture, no literature, no science. Every thought, expression and breath was intended to oppress someone. We should blot out everything from that era, no?

      Let's not beat around the bush: we are talking about racism. Just between you and me, RexRhino, I thought "racism" had something to do with the blanket generalization of unpleasant stereotypes across an entire ethic group. But looking at your writing, I guess when you do that to white Europeans and their American decedents, it's a different set of rules.

      Funny...this other word I know just came to mind. "hypocrisy".

      Clearly this is the values of white upper class people feeling nostalgic about an era when they ruled the world.

      Oh, yes...clearly. As in, there could be no other possible rationale. It could not possibly be that they like the architecture. Because it's a good neighborhood. Because they are lovely homes in historically meaningful neighborhoods.

      Nope. All racists, a klan robe in every closet, every one.

      I don't hear immigrants from China or India saying how much they would like to live in lovely Victorian neighborhoods.

      Because you haven't heard immigrants express an interest in a specific architectural style, that style...must....be.....racist......? You couldn't possibly be trying to make such a transparently idiotic point.

      The fact is that most immigrants couldn't care less about the fact that it's a lovely Victorian neighborhood.

      In my very large eastern city, our very large immigrant population, of which a thousand or so of Chinese & Indian extraction work in my company, immigrants seem pretty content to move into nice neighborhoods, regardless of style. Oddly, I've never heard one of them say "well, it's a very nice house, in a good area with good schools, but I simply can't get pass the fact that it's Victorian styling reminds me of the oppression visited upon my swarthy ancestors over a century ago". Nope...not even once (and I've helped a number of immigrant families navigate the baroque road to American home ownership).

      In other words, your entire premise is abject bullshit, and you are inventing rationales where none exists.

      ...nearly all community codes are to enforce segregation and the superiority of one culture over another.

      Because, you know, wanting a clean, safe neighborhood where you won't get a strip mall or garbage dump summarily built next door is racist. And anyone concerned with property values: racist, and a dirty capitalism . Concerned with aesthetics: whoa boy! Big gaping racist (unless, presumably, you are interested in hypothetical, idealized, non-racist aesthetics).

      What is the "Goodwins Law" equivalent where "Nazi" is replaced by "racist"?

    17. Re:Buy a dictionary. by celeritas_2 · · Score: 1

      hitler was elected with a majority

      --
      -- Checking emails and kicking cheats `till the day I die.
    18. Re:Buy a dictionary. by vacuum_tuber · · Score: 1

      You seem to be confusing the founding principles of the United States with European-style popular democracy. The nature of our constitutional republic is that the majority doesn't get its way if what it wants contravenes constitutional restrictions on the power of government or the relatively unbounded natural rights secured by the constitution.

      --
      Look at the bright side: there's always seppuku.
    19. Re:Buy a dictionary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      For example, here in Toronto there is a group that wants to "protect" certain "lovely Victorian neighborhoods". Now, who feels nostalgic about the Victorian era? An era of racist imperialist conquering, an era of horrible sexual repression? Clearly this is the values of white upper class people feeling nostalgic about an era when they ruled the world.

      You are a very, very sick puppy. The loss of the soviet Union must have been a terrible blow for you.

  165. Ignorance endangers. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    That much RF in your home, especially around children with developing brains, is not wise.

    It's not about high power microwaves causing ionization within cells. It's about something which is simply never discussed in any of the debates.

    The fact of the matter is that animal cells and brain cells in particular are designed to respond to in a wide variety of ways to extremely low level electrical currents. This is why gyrating metallic acupuncture needles inserted into key spots on the body can turn pain on and off, affect healing, etc. Brain chemistry is definitely affected by RF. This is not in question, and it is why the debate has been deliberately side-lined into the barely relevant Cancer issue.

    Fuzzy, groggy thinking is a direct result of RF pollution. You would be wise to do some research on this subject. There are demonstrable systems through which it is known that RF can affect cells. Pediatrician, Robert O. Becker had spent the last fifty years studying electricity and its relationship to living tissue and the human body.


    -FL

  166. What an idiot by EM+Adams · · Score: 1

    EMF doesn't cause anything in people? Go stand in front of an x-ray or gamma ray source and repeat that until you die of cancer. Or buy a MW transciever take the shielding off and see how long you can stand being in the room.

    --
    Posthuman since 2001.
    1. Re:What an idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The types of typical EMF the OP was talking about was obvious from the context. Do try to improve your reading and comprehansion skilss, you vast fuckhead.

  167. If they really think they had a problem... by ebrandsberg · · Score: 1

    Maybe they should have made the siding a bit more in line with homeowners requirements, like these guys do:
    http://www.alcoa.com/alcoahomes/Content/Siding.asp x

  168. Artificial Zero Radiation makes you sick by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    Ironically, if you seperate yourself from the world and live in a radiation-free environment, you get sick. Your body relies on repairing damage caused by low-level radiation. We've evloved with it since the beginning of time. The thing is if there is not enough damage to be detected the whole system doesn't get used and "backs up" like a clogged drain, while the undedected damage does not get repaired, ever and that leads to more problems later.

    I could venture to say it is that they put it up in the first place and now block the radiation that is actually making them sick. What started out as a safety concern is actually converted to a safety hazard by removing the concern.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  169. The right kind of people by ta+ma+de · · Score: 1
    This is a typical example of community not protecting itself and allowing the "wrong kind of people" to move in. Co-ops provide excellent loop holes that enable all types of discrimination. New York co-ops are notorious for keeping out the niggers, jews, fags and chinks -- did I miss anybody, Oh yeah, wops and spicks. As a result of discrimination, their property value is improved. All Americans should be concerned that unfavorable ancestry might interfere with personal gain and profit. Don't let your community go down the tubes. Co-op it today.

    In all seriousness, who cares if it is ugly and who cares if the neighbors value goes down. T.S.

    They should just be glad the guy doesn't like to masturbate in the living room at night with the curtains open and lights on.

    If anybody is not offended by this post, then I apologize, it was an oversight on my part.

    1. Re:The right kind of people by kianu7 · · Score: 1

      These people are ahead of their time, that's all. In 50 years, we'll all be wearing aluminum composite suits just to go outside and play on the swing set because of all the RFI and what not. Don't be afraid to embrace the future...come on people!

  170. oh the irony by timmarhy · · Score: 1

    the irony is they don't appear to be wearing hats in that photo, thus exposing them to the major source of radiation - the sun

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  171. Aluminum paint... by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 1

    I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and suggest something.

    Why don't these people just paint a few layers of metal paint over their walls then paint over the last layer with normal paint?

    Is it that there's not enough metal in the paint itself to make it worthwhile or is it harder to get?

    Inquiring paranoids want to know... ;-)

    --

    "Bah!" - Dogbert
  172. What was that woman thinking???? by MikeyToo · · Score: 1

    She was outside her house being interviewed WITHOUT her tinfoil hat!!!!!

    The really sad thing about this is the fact that in a couple of weeks the news people will be back again. They'll be doing a story about how the family went on a neighborhood killing rampage after being forced to remove their protective screens; the renewed radiation doses having driving them to become homicidal.

    What will the surviving neighbors say then?

    I personally am stocking up on foil.

    --
    "Well Ranger Brad, I'm a scientist. I don't believe in anything." - Dr. Roger Fleming
  173. Is the noise in my head bothering you by Ranger · · Score: 1

    Here in backwater Oklahoma you'll see plenty of people lining the windows of their homes, apartments, and trailers with aluminum foil. Of course it may have more to do with hiding their meth lab than protecting them from the orbital mind control lasers.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  174. At least spell the name of the city right by olyar · · Score: 1
    Its SacrAmento...

    Get it right or the aliens won't be able to find us on Google Maps.

    --
    Custom, hands-free Linux installs. Instalinux
  175. Coral mirror by loonicks · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Coral mirror by loonicks · · Score: 1

      Woops, that should have gone under WankersRevenge's post about the redneck neighbor. It's still too early in the morning.

  176. Property Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your property value is your problem.

    Which is precisely why I would pursue someone who devalued my property. Freedom is a great thing, but you have to understand that your rights end promptly where mine begin.

  177. Steel Siding by stuffduff · · Score: 1

    While it's not pretty, and requires some paint now and again, steel siding could solve a lot of 'Interference' problems. Back in the late 70's my Apple ][ would cause TV reception problems for the woman downstairs. I finally set it on a metal file cabinet and grounded it. She could no longer tell when I had the computer on. If I walk down my alley with my hp 4705 I get a new wireless network every few steps. One guy can't pick up his own wireless in his bedroom because the next house down's signal is so much stronger. In the long run we need to better understand the role of wireless in our society, not from a technical standpoint, but from a human one. How can we improve our circumstances while not degrading the situation of others?

    --
    "Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
  178. Meth by Hrothgar+The+Great · · Score: 1

    The guy (JD8) is most likely a meth addict. I've had several in my family and a handful of friends who have dabbled in it. It's not so much the late night parties; it's more the working on his car and his house at 2:00 or 3:00 or 5:00 A.M. bit. People tend to not sleep for several days at a run when they're tweaking.

    Plus, it's the most redneck drug available.

  179. earthquake concerns by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Loose, heavy stuff on structures can fall and injure even in a mild quake. You need to attach the alumninum siding well.

  180. What it looks like inside by kianu7 · · Score: 1

    A local reporter was able to snatch a photo of the inside of the home before being wisked away by Sacramento Police. Here is the picture. http://www.goodwyn.net/blog/images/AluminumFoilOff icePrank.jpg

  181. Use sealed lead panels behind siding... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 1

    Naah, something here reeks of retardation or criminality, or p(ossib|robab)ly both...

  182. Property value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how much taxes would an owner save a year if the value of a house goes down?

  183. Stop your liberal whining. by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

    For example, here in Toronto there is a group that wants to "protect" certain "lovely Victorian neighborhoods". Now, who feels nostalgic about the Victorian era? An era of racist imperialist conquering, an era of horrible sexual repression? Clearly this is the values of white upper class people feeling nostalgic about an era when they ruled the world.

    Ah yes, it's the white man that's keeping you down. Blame whitey for all your problems. If whites want to keep their neighborhood looking nice, it must be wrong and racist. However, when Chinese people want to keep developers from building public buildings in Chinatown, the resistance is applauded because they want to preserve the Chinese culture in Chinatown.

    When people want to keep white trash out of their town, again you complain. Who wants a sloppy redneck living next door with old cars laying on his lawn? It's going to lower the property value of your house.

    1. Re:Stop your liberal whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I especially like the comment about "an era of horrible sexual repression"... gee, what has the sexual revolution brought us? Rampant promiscuity, AIDs, STDs, divorce... man, sounds like an improvement to me.

    2. Re:Stop your liberal whining. by RexRhino · · Score: 1

      I am not "liberal" in the modern sense at all. Isn't property rights considered "conservative" nowadays? You are the "liberal", because you are the one who advocates dramatic government involvment in the lives of people that supercede their property rights.

      Here in Toronto, it is Chinese immigrants, as well as other immigrants, who are funding new development, starting new buisnesses, creating most of the new jobs, and adding to the economic and cultural wealth of everyone. And it is the white upper-class who are constantly trying to stop development or growth by using these "community standards" arguments. Of course, a wealthy white person doesn't need to worry about creating new jobs and buisnesses (because they are happy to have their established buisness have no competition, and they already have a job). Rich white people own most of the rental housing, so do they want to see new development of housing that lowers prices and competes with them? No.

      And the arguements they always give for their racist, anti-free-market government intervention is always "protecting our heratage", "protecting us from unchecked growth", "protecting the enviornment", etc., etc. But it is amazing how these "social standards" are always protecting the estetics and interests of the upper class and the expense of freedom and property rights.

  184. What pun? by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

    A pun (also known as paronomasia) is a deliberate confusion of similar-sounding words or phrases for comic or serious effect.

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  185. So, you're not a home owner by doublem · · Score: 1

    Do you rent, live in your Mother's basement, or just sponge off some friends?

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  186. Why is this "funny"? by g051051 · · Score: 1

    I don't see where people suffering from obvious mental problems should be a source for humor. This is certainly a low point for /.

    1. Re:Why is this "funny"? by kianu7 · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about these people having mental problems? They have a right to shield themselves from the malicious RFI interference that is preventing them from descrambling the Spice channel. This is basic stuff folks...1st amendment...the right to descramble prOn.

  187. Disect the name California by infonography · · Score: 2, Funny

    Cali meaning Heat
    Forni as in Fornication
    nia as in Narnia (A magical land)

    The Magical land of Hot Sex?

    And you wonder why this stuff goes on there.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  188. Tyrrany of the Masses by Java+Ape · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Sure, this family may be a bit off, but I agree with the posters who point out that, unless building codes have been violated or the public safety compromised, this guy should be left alone.

    America has many problems, most of which have been frequently pointed out on slashdot, where tinfoil hats are de'rigueur. I think this story points to the conflict between individual rights (a basic measure of freedom), and the mis-application of "democracy" to force the desires of the majority on everyone else.

    Most people live in white houses, obviously that's the preferred color. Perhaps it should be illegal for me to live in an offensive green one. Catholics outnumber all other religions, why SHOULDN'T they be able pass a law requireing the rest of us to attend mass, after all it's DEMOCRACY. The Religious right doesn't think we should do stem-cell research -- guess we'd better cut federal funding from one of the most promising fields since antibiotics.

    Unless he's endangering his family or neighbors, they should leave this family alone. Protecting propterty values by heavy-handed regulation should NOT the mandate of the government in a free society.

    1. Re:Tyrrany of the Masses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Building codes were violated. The metal sheets were not safely secured from all I heard on other stations. Since the area is prone to high winds, unsecured large sheets of metal also pose a safety hazard. They should have just gone with properly secured aluminum siding in the first place, but I suspect they went with the metal to get media attention.

  189. I've got my tinfoil hat on ... by murcon · · Score: 1

    http://eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php

    Hip, hip, hip, hooray ...

    My tinfoil hat will save me from your mind-controlling ray!

    1. Re:I've got my tinfoil hat on ... by aintnofun · · Score: 1

      I have some Reynolds underwear for sale...anyone interested?

  190. Cellphone signals by stephenbooth · · Score: 1

    Actually the first thing that came to mind when I saw that was a reminder of a TV science show I saw a while back. Apparently if you have a part of your house where you have very poor cellphone signal a good way to improve it is to stick a length of tinfoil to the wall about level with the height you typically have the phone (i.e. head height for most people). To get the best results try to put it on the wall opposite where the nearest mast is (i.e. if the nearest mast is east of you put it on the western wall) and try to stand very close to the foil. For various reasons I didn't understand when we did them in Electronics and still don't fully understand this improves the signal strength.

    Stephen

    --
    "Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
  191. Building Codes by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

    Not everywhere in the US has building codes.

    Clay County, AL, where I own land, only has
    Health Department rules for septic systems,
    but no building department that you have to
    get a construction permit from.

    Having said that, it would be wise to get
    plans for a house reviewed by an engineer
    and inspected when built. The government may
    not stop you from building, but an insurance
    company may decline to insure it if it is
    not built to some standard.

    Daniel

    1. Re:Building Codes by fm6 · · Score: 1

      And how much does it cost to buy a house in Clay County? The very name suggests you live in a rural area where housing prices are relatively low. If CC ever becomes an urban area where houses are expensive, and people view them as an important investment, you can count on new zoning laws and housing codes designed to protect property values.

  192. But Victorian houses?! by FatSean · · Score: 1

    You make good points, but I see no reason not to want to preserve a 'historical district' by making it law that the buildings must have a certain look.

    If the laws also required women to wear corsettes, and non-Bible-lovers to be assualted...then you might have something.

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:But Victorian houses?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wait a couple of years...

      The way things are going in the US, I wouldn't be surprised. Unless, of course, the Libertarians start winning elections.

  193. Please stay in the middle of no-where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...under your very own private rock.

    Uhh... and another thing, I'll be VERY disapointed with you if an airport gets built infront of your rock and you start bitching about being unable to sleep and the loud noise.

  194. Re:Neighbours from hell by GanryuMVP · · Score: 1

    These people would have past for neighbours where I grew up. We lived in the middle of the city, not a single block more than a quarter acre. Over the course of 6 years our neighbour had in her backyard: 4 dogs, 38 cats, 6 geese, 10 chickens, a pig! and a horse!... Then if our luck wasn't bad enough they moved out and an alcoholic who gave people he met at the pub board in return for fixing his house moved in. At night I got to hear them, completely shitfaced on alcohol, talking about how you can still have a perfectly good conversation with someone who wasn't university educated. Almost put me off education for life. I would have killed to live next to tin foil house people :P

  195. These people will sue their cellphone provider... by antispam_ben · · Score: 1

    when they need to make an emergency call and the signal can't get out.

    --
    Tag lost or not installed.
  196. I am a Californian by Changa_MC · · Score: 1

    > it doesn't matter, there are no rules in war.
    At the risk of being considered a troll, I should point out that this is an entirely American viewpoint. Other countries do have rules, even during wartime.

    --
    Changa hates change.
    1. Re:I am a Californian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> it doesn't matter, there are no rules in war.
      >At the risk of being considered a troll, I should point out that this is an
      >entirely American viewpoint. Other countries do have rules, even during wartime.

      Yes, the Geneva convention has been signed by many (all?) countries. The US has a `might is right` mindset. If Saddam doesn't abide by UN conventions (as interpreted by the US) then he's a "criminal" who is flouting all norms and requirements of international law. If Bush doesn't abide by them, he's simply "going it alone". This has been demonstrated time after time in such places as Nicaragua and Israel, to pick just two examples.

  197. How are things on the militia base? by WebCowboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Must get lonely out there in the middle of Montana or North Dakota or wherever you are, hours away from any other civilisation. You should get into town more--despite being "fascist" the good citizens of those towns really are nice people.

    Seriously though I'm guessing you have a bit of a warped sense of humour or you are a masterfull troll. Besides the fact that there ARE health and safety concerns associsted with prostitution and scrap vehicles, a typical community code is quite reasonable. If all people were reasonable and considerate there would be no need for such codes.

    Alas, a small but significant minority of people are complete jackasses. Given the chance these people will paint their houses hot pink with purple, orange and yellow trim and park a rusty old truck with two flat tires on the front lawn under the shade of their 12-foot C-Band dish (the one that pipes hard-core porn into their living room which they view with the volume on so high everyone on the block can count the orgasms).

    These codes might not be about health and safety, but they are about the right of law abiding citizens to live in realtive peace. Unfortunately, there are other types of jackasses who are the opposite--these are the ones that insist on hearing their favourite pins drop after 9PM, mow their lawns in a checkerboard pattern and wish everyone would do the same, and hold up city business with requests for more traffic-calming measures, more noise bylaws and more regulation of every little thing that slightly annoys them.

    If you find you are living in a redneck hellhole, or nazi-Stepford-suburbia there is a way to stop the madness. It is called "civic duty". Get involved in politics--especially at the local level. Attend the odd community planning meeting, endorse non-wacky candidates for office and vote for them...or at least vote for cryin' out loud. The latter form of jackass knows this already, and that is why California is so whacked that a government led by Conan the Barbarian is actually a vast improvement over the previous rock-bottom situation with Davis.

  198. Stop the racist nonsense. by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

    Here in Toronto, it is Chinese immigrants, as well as other immigrants, who are funding new development, starting new buisnesses, creating most of the new jobs, and adding to the economic and cultural wealth of everyone. And it is the white upper-class who are constantly trying to stop development or growth by using these "community standards" arguments. Of course, a wealthy white person doesn't need to worry about creating new jobs and buisnesses (because they are happy to have their established buisness have no competition, and they already have a job). Rich white people own most of the rental housing, so do they want to see new development of housing that lowers prices and competes with them? No.

    Stop blaming white people for all the world's problems. You might it sound like there's some vast white conspiracy aimed at keeping everyone else down. When a minority succeeds, you consider him "successful". When a white person succeeds, you consider him an "oppressor".

    Quit your whining.

    1. Re:Stop the racist nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's right, though; don't oversimplify his argument to "blaming white people for all the world's problems" and look at what he actually said.

      The rich (which happen to be white) in his community are trying to STOP all development of jobs and housing growth because it will "mess his shit up", for lack of a proper term, while the immigrants are the ones who are creating the progress, the growth in his community. He's not targeting all whites and saying that /they/ are the cause of all the problems, he's just saying that they're afraid of a little friendly competition :p

  199. Buy one, or just read the one you already have. by jonskerr · · Score: 1

    One entry found for fascism.

    Main Entry: fas&#183;cism
    Pronunciation: 'fa-"shi-z&m also 'fa-"si-
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
    1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
    2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.

    Nothing in the above definition (from merriam webster online) says a thing about the majority. And why would it? Fascism comes from the idiot majority getting too much power in their walmart-grubbing hands. If my recollection of history lessons is accurate, I believe the vast majorities of nazi germany and fascist italy both strongly supported the policies of "strong autocratic or dictatorial control". Mussolini himself defined fascism as "the merging of state and corporate power."

    Fascist policies on how a neighborhood looks may seem minor in comparison to the Patriot Act for example, but it's all part of the same mojo, snowballing its way up to mandatory church attendance and prayer-based corporate control of the minds and pocketbooks of america. It starts with small-minded suppression of dissent.

    --
    O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
  200. Re:Stop your conservative whining. by jonskerr · · Score: 1

    Still clinging to the past, and stuck on your idiotic view of some things as bad. Rampant promiscuity? Hear hear! I personally have shagged over 60 different women, a magnificent feat I could not have accomplished under your christian/victorian repression without spending a lot of damn money on prostitutes and exposing myself to greatly increased risk of the STDs you're on about. People haven't changed; they're promiscuous and non-monagamous by nature.
    Divorce? Yeah, now a woman can get away from a control freak like you who starts beating her 6 months after their marriage. Or people who married too young/naive/stupid etc can learn from their mistakes and make better choices next time.
    Come to think of it, it DOES sound like an improvement. Why don't you? Oh, yeah, it's dark in the place you've got your head stuck up into. You can't see how much better things are.

    --
    O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
  201. Aluminized paint inside ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember that paint containing aluminum that you could paint your walls/ceiling with to block your neighbors from surfing on your unencrypted 802.11 AP ?

  202. Alternate pronunciations by yoyhed · · Score: 1

    Perhaps he meant "sack of Mentos", "shack with Leno", or "scrawny Hindu"...

    --
    WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
  203. Hey! I know a place worse than that by far! by CloaknDagr · · Score: 1

    Like anywhere with Palos Verdes in the name in Los Angeles County, Rancho Palos Verdes, Palos Verdes Estates, etc.

    The Soviet Socialist Republik of Kalifornia has more nuts and more rules than any other group of commies combined. Where else could a Socialist Liberal from Austria call himself a Republican and get elected as Governator? Where else do people that live in cities that never see snow or mud buy huge 4WD vehicles and complain because SUVs don't have trunks to put all their junk in? Where else is the majority of the english speaking population incapable of reading "No Parking" signs?

    The problem with those people putting sheet metal on their house isn't that they're nuts, it's only that they're the wrong kind of nuts. If they had claimed, instead of protecting themselves from hostile orgones that they were protecting a rare beetle that took up nesting in their siding, the city would have given them an environmental award. Everyone in Kalifornia knows that rare bugs are more important than brain synapses, sheesh.

  204. It's called "the market" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The neighbors' property is being affected significantly; its value is probably falling by 20-30%, which could, for example, represent the difference between being able to afford cancer treatment and dying. That sounds like suffering to me.

    No, it's not "suffering". It's just the market. The neighbours don't have the right to unchanging market conditions, nor should they.

    If the tinfoil cult somehow catches on, and suddenly lots of people wants to live near a tinfoil house, and property values go up, do the tinfoil nuts suddenly get to complain that the neighbours caused them "sufffering"? After all, by not foiling, the neighbours are bringing property values down, right?

    No? Then why should the tinfoil people be punished for market flucations? People have different tastes: the market does what it does, and no one has the right to control other people's property to gain a market advantage.

    Otherwise, you end up with ridiculous situations, like a person of a different race not being legally allowed to move into a racist neighbourhood, because of the real, tangible decline in "property values" this can cause.

    Hint: loss of "property values" aren't a real financial loss; it's a loss of an opportunity to sell at a given price, and people have the choice to sell or not sell at a given price all the time.

    It's called a "market", and it's called "capitalism". Look into it.

  205. OTHER MICROWAVE CRIMINAL ATTACKS REPORTED by Broom+Hillary · · Score: 1

    It isn't widely publicized -- although it does leak into the mainstream media, occasionally, as in this case -- but thousands of people are reporting that criminals are using microwave radiation to attack them.

    This is not just in the USA -- also in Britain, France, Germany.

    For example, Germany: http://www.mikrowellenterror.de/ .

    Almost all the posts I've scanned, at least those that are on topic, immediately dismiss these people's claims as absurd.

    WHY? I'm sure you could easily modify a microwave oven yourself, and use it to harass your neihbors, if you wanted. I guess if you have such an inclination, you now know you are safe to go ahead. Anyone who complains about your attacks will be dismissed as paranoid. Hey, why not place a microwave oven where you can activate and control it by remote, and give this theory a test. It will be almost impossible for you to be caught, so why not?

    Potential military and covert use of microwave radiation is an active area of research. (Obviously not just microwave, but rather all forms of beamable radiation. Actually, implanted devices as well.)

    I believe I am a victim of involuntary experimentation in this research, my story is at http://www.geocities.com/mrmistermicko .

    Another informative site (perhaps the best, actually): http://www.datafilter.com/mc

  206. Re:Stop your conservative whining. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    I've seen your pic grandpa, 60 women when you're pushing 50 is no great feat.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano