Seems simple to me - did the computer (aka exit node in TOR speak) request the file? Yes? Sue them into the ground. "Proxy" you say? Well, we'll sue you until broke anyway. This isn't the same as a router or switch, proxies are not infrastructure in the mechanical sense but are programs which in this case could be argued were being used to skirt the law. That is how a lawyer would likely attack this and truthfully they wouldn't be far off the mark. You want to risk your home, savings, and future income on a bunch of "peers" understanding your very thin point on this? That they wouldn't also pile on a metric crapton of other charges based on additional files on your computer "discovered" while looking for this content? That the warrant would be wide enough to snare that and more? Goforit dude! I'll watch from the sidelines on this one.
From the standpoint of the node they lay out there to snare others it will look like your computer, despite acting as a "proxy" requested the files and for that reason they will attack you just as they attack users now. From their standpoint you're guilty and in reality you will have asked for the file even if it was for someone else. Kind of like holding drugs for someone else, how well does that work out these days? When the smoke clears, even if found "innocent" somehow, I'm betting you won't be willing to cheer the victory too much. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt I'm sad to say...
TPB never served up content, not ever, when it was serving up torrent links and has been pointed out they DO still serve LINKS. The "S" in his summary is typified incorrectly. In his example "S" is characterized as TPB, it's not. Instead "S" is the first USER who has submitted a torrent link to the TRACKER. The tracker never, not ever, not even once, passes any of the actual content information thru it. The Tracker simply tells the first person that asks for it how to contact the USER who has offered up the content - that's "S". This is a critical misunderstanding on the part of the person who wrote this IMO. What's weird is that the writer almost seems to understand it later in his writing but stating the TPB served up content pretty much screwed the pooch concerning his understanding torrents I think.
In addition, if I were a movie studio and a connection were proxied through a user's machine in the manner that he appears to be advocating rather than directly to a consuming user I'd still sue the proxy. My argument would be that the proxy did indeed download the content - and I'd be right. Never mind that the data was "just" passed along, I think an argument could be made that the proxy requested and received content and that no matter what was done afterwards I'd prosecute the proxy for having downloaded content. I might also attempt to find out who the originating user was who requested the content but I'd be happy prosecuting proxies because sure as hell after a few of them were coughing up tons of cash no one would be allowing their machines to knowingly proxy. It's for this reason that I won't become a TOR exit node or allow my WiFi to run wide open. Perhaps in those cases I could claim innocence, just as I might running this proxy idea, but the end result would be the same - financial ruin which is the example that the MAFIAA wishes to make in order to chill uses of this kind of technology. I happen to not be willing to take that risk with my current place in life. A very large part of his scheme rests upon the idea that a proxy isn't responsible for the data that passes through it, is that really solid legal ground? I'd argue not and proving yourself a proxy without declaring it openly, which would likely violate ISP TOS for most home connections, could be financially painful in any case. Does anyone REALLY want the Govt. kicking in a door and rooting through everything they own searching for this? Perhaps you're completely legal but I'd hazard to guess not everything they look at could be declared so once placed under a microscope, I'd prefer they stay out of home just in case.
That said, let's imagine a place where this was actually created. ISP already scream that Torrents take up a hugely disproportionate amount of bandwidth. What is proposed is a doubling or trebling (++) of that usage as the SAME bits get shuffled place to place in a bit of a shell game. Does this benefit the 'net?
IMO, there has to be a better way and I don't think that this is it. I wish I had a solution but from where I sit this sure doesn't look like a good one...
No actually I do not see answers to my questions so clearly as you and apparently others do.
No health impacts from this? So then you'd be willing to swallow it? Get it in your hair? Eyes? Lungs? Food? How about a gel capsule down the hatch? Did you see anything in either linked article that mentions this? I didn't. I see what is supposed to be a harmless acid and hydrogen mentioned as byproducts, nothing more. Hey is Graphene okay to swallow? Buckyballs? You might be surprised. You might not want to swallow any of this and you may also find that if it's produced in quantity that it will find it's way into our food chain or used as a weapon. I'm not against it, just not quite so quick to become excited. That you so quickly dismiss this line of thinking, along with others, is amusing.
Product of the reaction is an acid and hydrogen. With tap water? Sewer water? Distilled water? Are we going to be taking the equivalent of drinking water to use this? If it's potable water then it's a bit more valuable than something I'd drain a ditch to get. If on the other hand I can use ditch water and the result is this acid, hydrogen, and the waste from the water then we might kill two birds with one stone - hence my question concerning it and my concerns ref potable water. I didn't mention exhaust, I know what the byproduct of burned hydrogen was and thought that was obvious.
No water used to produce this? Another post mentions that it's much the same as a chip manufacturing process (is it?) - lots of water and other chemicals used in that. Some of those chemicals are nasty BTW. I see nothing in the article regarding usage of water for production either for or against so I'm interested in why you dismissed this so quickly. Can you cite anything regarding producing this? Do note that it says "significant energy and resources" in the article...
The article states that hydrogen and acid are created, it mentions nothing about the medium being completely consumed or chances of recovery recovery. Citation please.
Waste byproducts of creating these - also not answered and yet you find the question redundant? The process for creating these is simply stated as " significant energy and resources to produce" and nothing more is said. Where exactly did you find the answer concerning this? I'm betting they aren't simply grinding down beach sand and since the spherical shape appears to be important to the process that would seem to imply some sort of process such as vaporization. That you leap to the conclusion that this process produces NO waste is amazing. Again, cite your sources for the conclusion since you so readily dismiss the question. Hint: it ain't in the linked articles or in the minuscule announcement made in the further linked article.
What's the health impact of these getting into the ecosystem? Pass right thru a human? Cause serious disease? What happens when it hits the water IN a human? If this becomes in any way widespread these are going to be issues.
What's left after the reaction? Must the water be pure or can we produce power from dirty water and do what with what's left? Could this be used to clean dirty water by simply using the water for power? Is oxygen also produced from this - I'd think so right since water is H2O. Are the particles completely consumed in the reaction? No reuse? How much water is used in the manufacturing process to create these particles? What are the waste byproducts for the process of creating these particles?
Yeah, I use the autocomplete suggestions often. When I'm typing in a query it's often about something I want information about and if the autocomplete pops up with something close to what I'm looking for I select it knowing it's been asked and answered by Google using those terms previously. This is a pretty obvious way to use the search system and I suspect quite a few others use it this way too since Google has kept the autocomplete around despite controversy. Certainly when terms pop up I'm not searching for I ignore them (I'm an adult), frankly I seldom search a person's name anyway so this popping up wouldn't concern me a bit.
BTW everyone is making a great deal of noise over his bankruptcy having been annulled. When was it annulled? Was it years ago? Recently? How much debt did he walk away from? These are pertinent questions to be asked and while having this somehow "annulled" is well good and fine when you want to bitch at Google how about getting the whole story on it? It may be a past misdeed but the circumstances may matter a great deal to those considering his sefvices...
Take a look at unRAID. I'm currently running it and have been for years but am now also looking at NAS4Free and wow is it waaay more complicated to setup! It's going to be faster mind you and I can use it's NFS shares for VM storage but no way would I ask someone who wasn't willing to spend a few hours to set it up to try it out. I am considering trying FreeNAS too, especially since you seem to like it's interface better, but it's going to be VERY hard to beat unRAID for simplicity IMO...
use Plex as an IOS client. Run it on say unRAID as a plug-in or on a separate computer (I run it on a VM). Plex handles the DHCP issue and the piercing of your firewall, it can also sample down the media to allow it to stream on low bandwidth connections. For storage I do unRAID for many of the reasons posted elsewhere here and it's been working great or quite a few years for me.
I too have been running this for years and years now for pretty much all of the reasons mentioned. Recently I've begun having some REAL fun and have virtualized unRAID on an ESX host and am now able to run a bunch of other VMs too. I'm fiddling around with NAS4Free as a second NAS package to store the VMs and to create a cache drive for unRAID. Let me tell you, the software setup for unRAID is child's play compared to some of the fun I'm having trying to setup this other package. It's certainly doable and it can do ZFS, ISCSI, and other things but no way in hell would I recommend it for someone who just wanted to load up some software and quickly go. unRAID really does make things very easy and while I'm having a blast with my more complex setup it's overkill for most folks even geeks like myself.
I wouldn't just do a share on a Windows or Linux machine for sure, I wouldn't do a complex ZFS thing with even more complex expansion, but unRAID? Oh heck yes - I have even given away a couple of these boxes as Christmas gifts they're so easy to maintain!
Well... I have about 20TB worth of data, mostly static media, but many many hours worth of work building it. This isn't something I can stick on a portable and lock away I'm afraid. I could certainly backup my music to such a drive, and a I do, but the rest? Yeah not so much. I do need to backup the drive holding my ESX VMs but that's not looking like cake either. I'm protected from a single drive failure and I've had them more than once. If I lose two drives I lose the data on those two drives, nothing more (unRAID). A lightning strike or fire would suck to say the least...
Not exactly useless... There's a preclear script that many unRAID users use to beat up their drives while monitoring SMART. It doesn't just look at SMART for a thumbs up or down but monitors the various parameters that SMART throws out. Users run this multiple times in a row and find bad drives fairly regularly. I will admit that I've not been running it but judging from the numbers of folks who have been finding it useful and from the fact that warranties seem to be getting ever shorter I may begin doing so. I use a decent number of the 3TB drives that are always going on sale and I'm starting to think I'm tempting fate by not testing them. I've gotten spoiled in that my unRAID box covers my ass in the even of a failure but I see too damn many reports of new drives going toes up to not be concerned. I have 3 drives sitting on the shelf waiting to be loaded and I may beat them up beforehand just to be sure they won't screw me when I least expect it...
Tineye says no go, it can't be found. Not with an URL search and not with an upload search. I too am VERY skeptical but this photo isn't being found by the tools I know to use and I also note it has no EXIF.
If your machine has FireWire ports they can be used to directly access memory and obtain the keys - it would not be safe in this case. This is a well known forensic technique for doing memory dumps. Do not allow the machine to sleep or hibernate as this will also write memory to disk where it can be examined offline.
The solar lease places sound great! They even advertise in my state, however when you call them they don't service my area. Want to bet it's lack of Govt. incentives making it too expensive for them just as it does me? I'd make the capital outlay myself but it's too damned expensive right now.
No, tax credits and incentives are a GOOD idea. Yeah, short term we break even but long term when the hardware is paid off and still producing power and more plants don't have to be built it's a win win for everyone. We need more distributed power generation, people cannot afford to do it without help.
That's a standard grid-tie design and isn't poor design at all if you have a reliable grid - which most of us do. It's also an economical design given the costs and requirements of purchasing and maintaining a battery bank.
FALSE and FUD to boot. Solar panels return more power than was used to produce them and they do not die at the 20year mark, in fact many come with 30 year warranties and are still ticking at the end of that period. EROI is the term you're looking for and you're wrong about it.
Now if I could just find someone like you who's levelheaded and knowledgeable about this in my area willing to design and install a system without cleaning out my account. No State incentives here but I've got a tin roof South facing with zero shading begging to be covered in the damn things.:-(
The long view is to obviously go for solar, it makes sense in many ways. However the long view is VERY long. I pay less than $150 for my power each month, lose power seldom, and due to virtually no offered incentives would have to pay around $30K for a decent grid-tie system. If I could completely eliminate my power bill it would pay for itself in 8 years - surprisingly short actually. But what could I do with that $30K otherwise? Lots of things. This is why so few are jumping on this, I know of no one local to me that's done it. My home is ideal for this however and I'm watching this carefully hoping to do it but not if it's going to cost me $30K, that much money could be doing other things for higher ROI. Get it down to $15K or less and I'm on it. I fully agree that not having people go solar is stupid but our Govt. apparently doesn't see fit to push people that way despite the long term benefits and I cannot easily afford to do it on my own. Hell where I live no one stays in their home long enough to reap the long term benefits of going solar....
Oh and no way do I want a few K lbs of lead acid batteries in my home. Space is an issue, fumes, maintenance, and replacement costs all add up. I'd end up with them in a separate shed if I did this - yuck.
A/C isn't critical but asking people to go days and days when humidity is 80+%, temps are in the 90s+, and they have small children or elderly in the home and you might change your tune. Those kinds of conditions are what people were dealing with after than storm - it was nasty! Everywhere you looked windows were open and everyone was panting.
Most generator installs designed for a home are going to be natural gas and for short-term outages far cheaper than a solar install that was built for off-grid usage. Batteries require maintenance and often watering too. They take up space and weigh a great deal, you have fumes to consider as well. Running a home for days on just batteries isn't going to happen, panels are going to be needed or a generator. In that area (VA) there's zero state incentives for solar purchase, only the pittance from the Fed is available. Cost to install grid-tie would likely hit $30K for a normal sized home and probably double that for the ability to be run off-grid. Power fails seldom and most don't have power bills North of $150. Figure out the ROI and you can see why no one is jumping on this in VA. I know someone in Texas though who got both Fed and State incentives, his install cost him about $8K grid-tie, and he's saving about $100 a month. Now THAT I would be willing to do but $20K++? Forget it. Panels may have become cheaper but total system cost doesn't appear to have moved much at all...
You ought to read some of the electrical requirements for installing panels, it's not as cut and dry as you make it sound and the rules are changing as more things are learned. Read Home Power magazine to see the updates as they come. Everything from wiring strategy, to grounding, to mounting, and everything in between is covered. This is no dish install to do it right and since the panels generate power it's something you want to do right to say the least!
While it's true that solar panels have dropped they are still expensive and in many states there are few to no incentives offered to help defray the costs. The permitting issues he raises are also valid. If it were easier and there were incentives I'd be happy to spend a pile but as it stands now lack of incentives means few installs in my state and thus even fewer installers.
Also, this guy is an idiot. The fact is that panels on every single home would NOT prevent power failures unless they all also had battery banks which drive costs through the roof. Grid-tie systems are what most people install, surprise grid-tie relies on those very same copper wires this guy is crying about being fragile. I'd REALLY like to know what he means by "wired so they provide power when the grid fails" because without batteries this simply isn't feasible unless he thinks everyone should seriously upsize whatever solar install they might have planned. If he thinks that everyone should backfeed the power system then he also doesn't understand how dangerous this is. When a generator is hooked to the system in a power failure homes are disconnected from the grid in order to avoid killing power workers and from frying the generator as it tries to power the whole block. Trying to do this with panels alone isn't likely to have a better result. Grid-tie homes lose power just like everyone else, few have arrays and inverters big enough to power the entire home - their meters spin backwards at low loads only. Certainly batteries are an option but they require maintenance, have replacement costs, weigh a ton - sometimes literally, and can triple the cost of an install which is already damned high. If you're in the boonies and the power company wants $30K to string you a wire they make sense otherwise no you stick to relying on a grid connection. Power a few circuits for lights, say via LED, or other small things sure but you're not going to be powering a whole home on just panels without some storage and more complexity. Most systems aren't sized big enough to power everything except at peak power output which is a small portion of the day. Off-grid systems marshall their inputs into batteries to allow for occasional peak usage, he doesn't seem to understand that.
I don't think this guy has really thought through what he wants. He sees solar and thinks it's magic pixie dust, it's not. When the infrastructure breaks this stuff doesn't magically solve the problem. I'm all for more solar and putting it on everyone's roofs is a great idea but it's not going to solve the basic infrastructure fragility issue and might actually make it worse.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems simple to me - did the computer (aka exit node in TOR speak) request the file? Yes? Sue them into the ground. "Proxy" you say? Well, we'll sue you until broke anyway. This isn't the same as a router or switch, proxies are not infrastructure in the mechanical sense but are programs which in this case could be argued were being used to skirt the law. That is how a lawyer would likely attack this and truthfully they wouldn't be far off the mark. You want to risk your home, savings, and future income on a bunch of "peers" understanding your very thin point on this? That they wouldn't also pile on a metric crapton of other charges based on additional files on your computer "discovered" while looking for this content? That the warrant would be wide enough to snare that and more? Goforit dude! I'll watch from the sidelines on this one.
From the standpoint of the node they lay out there to snare others it will look like your computer, despite acting as a "proxy" requested the files and for that reason they will attack you just as they attack users now. From their standpoint you're guilty and in reality you will have asked for the file even if it was for someone else. Kind of like holding drugs for someone else, how well does that work out these days? When the smoke clears, even if found "innocent" somehow, I'm betting you won't be willing to cheer the victory too much. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt I'm sad to say...
oh bullshit. Citation? Anywhere? FUD...
TPB never served up content, not ever, when it was serving up torrent links and has been pointed out they DO still serve LINKS. The "S" in his summary is typified incorrectly. In his example "S" is characterized as TPB, it's not. Instead "S" is the first USER who has submitted a torrent link to the TRACKER. The tracker never, not ever, not even once, passes any of the actual content information thru it. The Tracker simply tells the first person that asks for it how to contact the USER who has offered up the content - that's "S". This is a critical misunderstanding on the part of the person who wrote this IMO. What's weird is that the writer almost seems to understand it later in his writing but stating the TPB served up content pretty much screwed the pooch concerning his understanding torrents I think.
In addition, if I were a movie studio and a connection were proxied through a user's machine in the manner that he appears to be advocating rather than directly to a consuming user I'd still sue the proxy. My argument would be that the proxy did indeed download the content - and I'd be right. Never mind that the data was "just" passed along, I think an argument could be made that the proxy requested and received content and that no matter what was done afterwards I'd prosecute the proxy for having downloaded content. I might also attempt to find out who the originating user was who requested the content but I'd be happy prosecuting proxies because sure as hell after a few of them were coughing up tons of cash no one would be allowing their machines to knowingly proxy. It's for this reason that I won't become a TOR exit node or allow my WiFi to run wide open. Perhaps in those cases I could claim innocence, just as I might running this proxy idea, but the end result would be the same - financial ruin which is the example that the MAFIAA wishes to make in order to chill uses of this kind of technology. I happen to not be willing to take that risk with my current place in life. A very large part of his scheme rests upon the idea that a proxy isn't responsible for the data that passes through it, is that really solid legal ground? I'd argue not and proving yourself a proxy without declaring it openly, which would likely violate ISP TOS for most home connections, could be financially painful in any case. Does anyone REALLY want the Govt. kicking in a door and rooting through everything they own searching for this? Perhaps you're completely legal but I'd hazard to guess not everything they look at could be declared so once placed under a microscope, I'd prefer they stay out of home just in case.
That said, let's imagine a place where this was actually created. ISP already scream that Torrents take up a hugely disproportionate amount of bandwidth. What is proposed is a doubling or trebling (++) of that usage as the SAME bits get shuffled place to place in a bit of a shell game. Does this benefit the 'net?
IMO, there has to be a better way and I don't think that this is it. I wish I had a solution but from where I sit this sure doesn't look like a good one...
No actually I do not see answers to my questions so clearly as you and apparently others do.
No health impacts from this? So then you'd be willing to swallow it? Get it in your hair? Eyes? Lungs? Food? How about a gel capsule down the hatch? Did you see anything in either linked article that mentions this? I didn't. I see what is supposed to be a harmless acid and hydrogen mentioned as byproducts, nothing more. Hey is Graphene okay to swallow? Buckyballs? You might be surprised. You might not want to swallow any of this and you may also find that if it's produced in quantity that it will find it's way into our food chain or used as a weapon. I'm not against it, just not quite so quick to become excited. That you so quickly dismiss this line of thinking, along with others, is amusing.
Product of the reaction is an acid and hydrogen. With tap water? Sewer water? Distilled water? Are we going to be taking the equivalent of drinking water to use this? If it's potable water then it's a bit more valuable than something I'd drain a ditch to get. If on the other hand I can use ditch water and the result is this acid, hydrogen, and the waste from the water then we might kill two birds with one stone - hence my question concerning it and my concerns ref potable water. I didn't mention exhaust, I know what the byproduct of burned hydrogen was and thought that was obvious.
No water used to produce this? Another post mentions that it's much the same as a chip manufacturing process (is it?) - lots of water and other chemicals used in that. Some of those chemicals are nasty BTW. I see nothing in the article regarding usage of water for production either for or against so I'm interested in why you dismissed this so quickly. Can you cite anything regarding producing this? Do note that it says "significant energy and resources" in the article...
The article states that hydrogen and acid are created, it mentions nothing about the medium being completely consumed or chances of recovery recovery. Citation please.
Waste byproducts of creating these - also not answered and yet you find the question redundant? The process for creating these is simply stated as " significant energy and resources to produce" and nothing more is said. Where exactly did you find the answer concerning this? I'm betting they aren't simply grinding down beach sand and since the spherical shape appears to be important to the process that would seem to imply some sort of process such as vaporization. That you leap to the conclusion that this process produces NO waste is amazing. Again, cite your sources for the conclusion since you so readily dismiss the question. Hint: it ain't in the linked articles or in the minuscule announcement made in the further linked article.
What's the health impact of these getting into the ecosystem? Pass right thru a human? Cause serious disease? What happens when it hits the water IN a human? If this becomes in any way widespread these are going to be issues.
What's left after the reaction? Must the water be pure or can we produce power from dirty water and do what with what's left? Could this be used to clean dirty water by simply using the water for power? Is oxygen also produced from this - I'd think so right since water is H2O. Are the particles completely consumed in the reaction? No reuse? How much water is used in the manufacturing process to create these particles? What are the waste byproducts for the process of creating these particles?
Hey, doesn't sound like a bad idea to me. It would probably be 90% men signed up tho!
Yeah, I use the autocomplete suggestions often. When I'm typing in a query it's often about something I want information about and if the autocomplete pops up with something close to what I'm looking for I select it knowing it's been asked and answered by Google using those terms previously. This is a pretty obvious way to use the search system and I suspect quite a few others use it this way too since Google has kept the autocomplete around despite controversy. Certainly when terms pop up I'm not searching for I ignore them (I'm an adult), frankly I seldom search a person's name anyway so this popping up wouldn't concern me a bit.
BTW everyone is making a great deal of noise over his bankruptcy having been annulled. When was it annulled? Was it years ago? Recently? How much debt did he walk away from? These are pertinent questions to be asked and while having this somehow "annulled" is well good and fine when you want to bitch at Google how about getting the whole story on it? It may be a past misdeed but the circumstances may matter a great deal to those considering his sefvices...
Take a look at unRAID. I'm currently running it and have been for years but am now also looking at NAS4Free and wow is it waaay more complicated to setup! It's going to be faster mind you and I can use it's NFS shares for VM storage but no way would I ask someone who wasn't willing to spend a few hours to set it up to try it out. I am considering trying FreeNAS too, especially since you seem to like it's interface better, but it's going to be VERY hard to beat unRAID for simplicity IMO...
use Plex as an IOS client. Run it on say unRAID as a plug-in or on a separate computer (I run it on a VM). Plex handles the DHCP issue and the piercing of your firewall, it can also sample down the media to allow it to stream on low bandwidth connections. For storage I do unRAID for many of the reasons posted elsewhere here and it's been working great or quite a few years for me.
I too have been running this for years and years now for pretty much all of the reasons mentioned. Recently I've begun having some REAL fun and have virtualized unRAID on an ESX host and am now able to run a bunch of other VMs too. I'm fiddling around with NAS4Free as a second NAS package to store the VMs and to create a cache drive for unRAID. Let me tell you, the software setup for unRAID is child's play compared to some of the fun I'm having trying to setup this other package. It's certainly doable and it can do ZFS, ISCSI, and other things but no way in hell would I recommend it for someone who just wanted to load up some software and quickly go. unRAID really does make things very easy and while I'm having a blast with my more complex setup it's overkill for most folks even geeks like myself.
I wouldn't just do a share on a Windows or Linux machine for sure, I wouldn't do a complex ZFS thing with even more complex expansion, but unRAID? Oh heck yes - I have even given away a couple of these boxes as Christmas gifts they're so easy to maintain!
Well... I have about 20TB worth of data, mostly static media, but many many hours worth of work building it. This isn't something I can stick on a portable and lock away I'm afraid. I could certainly backup my music to such a drive, and a I do, but the rest? Yeah not so much. I do need to backup the drive holding my ESX VMs but that's not looking like cake either. I'm protected from a single drive failure and I've had them more than once. If I lose two drives I lose the data on those two drives, nothing more (unRAID). A lightning strike or fire would suck to say the least...
Not exactly useless... There's a preclear script that many unRAID users use to beat up their drives while monitoring SMART. It doesn't just look at SMART for a thumbs up or down but monitors the various parameters that SMART throws out. Users run this multiple times in a row and find bad drives fairly regularly. I will admit that I've not been running it but judging from the numbers of folks who have been finding it useful and from the fact that warranties seem to be getting ever shorter I may begin doing so. I use a decent number of the 3TB drives that are always going on sale and I'm starting to think I'm tempting fate by not testing them. I've gotten spoiled in that my unRAID box covers my ass in the even of a failure but I see too damn many reports of new drives going toes up to not be concerned. I have 3 drives sitting on the shelf waiting to be loaded and I may beat them up beforehand just to be sure they won't screw me when I least expect it...
Tineye says no go, it can't be found. Not with an URL search and not with an upload search. I too am VERY skeptical but this photo isn't being found by the tools I know to use and I also note it has no EXIF.
If your machine has FireWire ports they can be used to directly access memory and obtain the keys - it would not be safe in this case. This is a well known forensic technique for doing memory dumps. Do not allow the machine to sleep or hibernate as this will also write memory to disk where it can be examined offline.
The solar lease places sound great! They even advertise in my state, however when you call them they don't service my area. Want to bet it's lack of Govt. incentives making it too expensive for them just as it does me? I'd make the capital outlay myself but it's too damned expensive right now.
No, tax credits and incentives are a GOOD idea. Yeah, short term we break even but long term when the hardware is paid off and still producing power and more plants don't have to be built it's a win win for everyone. We need more distributed power generation, people cannot afford to do it without help.
Only if we use white panels
That's a standard grid-tie design and isn't poor design at all if you have a reliable grid - which most of us do. It's also an economical design given the costs and requirements of purchasing and maintaining a battery bank.
FALSE and FUD to boot. Solar panels return more power than was used to produce them and they do not die at the 20year mark, in fact many come with 30 year warranties and are still ticking at the end of that period. EROI is the term you're looking for and you're wrong about it.
http://www.solareworld.com/solar-learning-center/myths-and-facts-of-solar-panel-systems
Stop spreading FUD.
Now if I could just find someone like you who's levelheaded and knowledgeable about this in my area willing to design and install a system without cleaning out my account. No State incentives here but I've got a tin roof South facing with zero shading begging to be covered in the damn things. :-(
Yeah, no chance any of us have been studying this for years. I do not think you understand the problem nearly as well as you think you do.
The long view is to obviously go for solar, it makes sense in many ways. However the long view is VERY long. I pay less than $150 for my power each month, lose power seldom, and due to virtually no offered incentives would have to pay around $30K for a decent grid-tie system. If I could completely eliminate my power bill it would pay for itself in 8 years - surprisingly short actually. But what could I do with that $30K otherwise? Lots of things. This is why so few are jumping on this, I know of no one local to me that's done it. My home is ideal for this however and I'm watching this carefully hoping to do it but not if it's going to cost me $30K, that much money could be doing other things for higher ROI. Get it down to $15K or less and I'm on it. I fully agree that not having people go solar is stupid but our Govt. apparently doesn't see fit to push people that way despite the long term benefits and I cannot easily afford to do it on my own. Hell where I live no one stays in their home long enough to reap the long term benefits of going solar....
Oh and no way do I want a few K lbs of lead acid batteries in my home. Space is an issue, fumes, maintenance, and replacement costs all add up. I'd end up with them in a separate shed if I did this - yuck.
A/C isn't critical but asking people to go days and days when humidity is 80+%, temps are in the 90s+, and they have small children or elderly in the home and you might change your tune. Those kinds of conditions are what people were dealing with after than storm - it was nasty! Everywhere you looked windows were open and everyone was panting.
Most generator installs designed for a home are going to be natural gas and for short-term outages far cheaper than a solar install that was built for off-grid usage. Batteries require maintenance and often watering too. They take up space and weigh a great deal, you have fumes to consider as well. Running a home for days on just batteries isn't going to happen, panels are going to be needed or a generator. In that area (VA) there's zero state incentives for solar purchase, only the pittance from the Fed is available. Cost to install grid-tie would likely hit $30K for a normal sized home and probably double that for the ability to be run off-grid. Power fails seldom and most don't have power bills North of $150. Figure out the ROI and you can see why no one is jumping on this in VA. I know someone in Texas though who got both Fed and State incentives, his install cost him about $8K grid-tie, and he's saving about $100 a month. Now THAT I would be willing to do but $20K++? Forget it. Panels may have become cheaper but total system cost doesn't appear to have moved much at all...
You ought to read some of the electrical requirements for installing panels, it's not as cut and dry as you make it sound and the rules are changing as more things are learned. Read Home Power magazine to see the updates as they come. Everything from wiring strategy, to grounding, to mounting, and everything in between is covered. This is no dish install to do it right and since the panels generate power it's something you want to do right to say the least!
While it's true that solar panels have dropped they are still expensive and in many states there are few to no incentives offered to help defray the costs. The permitting issues he raises are also valid. If it were easier and there were incentives I'd be happy to spend a pile but as it stands now lack of incentives means few installs in my state and thus even fewer installers.
Also, this guy is an idiot. The fact is that panels on every single home would NOT prevent power failures unless they all also had battery banks which drive costs through the roof. Grid-tie systems are what most people install, surprise grid-tie relies on those very same copper wires this guy is crying about being fragile. I'd REALLY like to know what he means by "wired so they provide power when the grid fails" because without batteries this simply isn't feasible unless he thinks everyone should seriously upsize whatever solar install they might have planned. If he thinks that everyone should backfeed the power system then he also doesn't understand how dangerous this is. When a generator is hooked to the system in a power failure homes are disconnected from the grid in order to avoid killing power workers and from frying the generator as it tries to power the whole block. Trying to do this with panels alone isn't likely to have a better result. Grid-tie homes lose power just like everyone else, few have arrays and inverters big enough to power the entire home - their meters spin backwards at low loads only. Certainly batteries are an option but they require maintenance, have replacement costs, weigh a ton - sometimes literally, and can triple the cost of an install which is already damned high. If you're in the boonies and the power company wants $30K to string you a wire they make sense otherwise no you stick to relying on a grid connection. Power a few circuits for lights, say via LED, or other small things sure but you're not going to be powering a whole home on just panels without some storage and more complexity. Most systems aren't sized big enough to power everything except at peak power output which is a small portion of the day. Off-grid systems marshall their inputs into batteries to allow for occasional peak usage, he doesn't seem to understand that.
I don't think this guy has really thought through what he wants. He sees solar and thinks it's magic pixie dust, it's not. When the infrastructure breaks this stuff doesn't magically solve the problem. I'm all for more solar and putting it on everyone's roofs is a great idea but it's not going to solve the basic infrastructure fragility issue and might actually make it worse.