P.S. You might want to refinance through a friendlier lender should you wish to pursue off-grid power. You're certainly not locked into that mortgage lender (legally) so that might not be a difficult thing to get around. Certainly easier than changing local occupancy code.
Ok, I've spent hours looking through any info I can find on the relevant codes and there just isn't anything there that specifies "power from electric company" or even words to that effect. I have even found some codes that say that applications for power service "if requested" so some places seem to spell out that it doesn't have to come from a power company. I will keep looking, but it seems fighting any resistance in court would be possible given the verbiage in the existing codes in most locales. You have to meet building code, but there's no building code that specifies grid power. There may be occupancy code but I haven't found a single code that specifically says "power must be supplied by a power company" just that power has to be there. I am going to keep looking and thank you to those that did respond to me. I've asked for some more info from them if they would be so kind and I continue to research this.
I don't want a news source, I want a legal code document or mortgage terms. I will look at that link to see the municipality info and dive deeper. Thanks
Have an Amish family live in your house for a year. Then that family can plead freedom of religion, as Amishism forbids connection to public utilities.
There's another good point that blows a hole in the code requirement assertion. I am not able to find any occupancy permit requirement that says "from a public utility" or "from a utility company". They all just say that to meet occupancy you need water, power and proper sewage.
Show me an example of these codes please. I have been researching this for the past two hours and have looked at multiple occupancy permitting codes across the U.S. and there just isn't any such requirement that I've been able to find. Also, http://hardware.slashdot.org/c...
The hard part of that is most home mortgages mandate that the house remain hooked up to public utilities.
Can you point me at an example of this verbiage somewhere? I've been doing a bit of refresher research on this since seeing some of these comments earlier this evening and I can't find any provisions online (across multiple locales) in occupancy permitting or code that says a residential (single family dwelling) has to be connected to a public utility at all. I even checked FHA rules and they all pretty much say the same thing, that water, sewage and power have to be there but not that they have to come from a public utility. If the public utility provision existed it would mean water wells, sewage tanks and drainage fields on premises wouldn't be valid (and we all know they are). I should point out that my degree is in architecture and I immediately went into the codes and there just isn't anything there saying that electricity has to come from a power company anywhere, just like it doesn't say that water and sewage have to come from a municipality. Power, water and proper sewage/drainage have to be there for inspection for occupancy, but no provisions for the source (other than they can't be shared from another property in some cases). So, if what folks are saying is true I'd like to see an example of where these provisions are spelled out. Most of the mortgage stuff I could find, again, just points to meeting code for occupancy in order to qualify for the loan. Nothing about power, water or sewage having to come from a utility company. Are folks making assumptions here or is there some info somewhere I can look at?
To suggest that the government is a single entity which has a right to dispense with that which belongs to all of us is disingenuous at best.
I don't believe I suggested or implied any such thing. The government of the U.S. is elected by people from all over the U.S. and those representatives get together to decide on rules and regulations to govern the people and land the U.S. possesses. Just because you happen to be in the minority of people that think all land not private property should be used by the public any way they see fit doesn't make it so. The land does belong to all of us, but we don't get to individually decide what to do with it, and the people have spoken, the rules are in place. If you don't like them work through your government representatives to change those rules. Remember, you still have to convince the rest of us that what you want to do is correct otherwise the votes won't be there and your changes won't happen. That's how democracy works. You also seem to be describing the government as some giant profit center that's taking money from the people and doing nothing with it. Again, if you don't like what they do with the money or you don't like paying that money, see the steps above again for how to change that. Again, good luck. And where does it say in any government document that the land in question is "there for public use"? If that were true you could walk onto any military installation and do what you wanted because it's on Federal land! No, not how that works. There are rules and those rules are made by the people, for the people by people of the people, also known as our government.
I wouldn't call Ferrari a "fringe brand" anymore. Not since the 1980s, anyway, and even then their racing pedigree made them a household name almost everywhere in the world. Koenigsegg, Pagani, Noble, and a few others are fringe brands that make one off vehicles or limited run vehicles that only car enthusiasts know much about. That's what makes them fringe, their obscurity. Tesla started off as a fringe brand hand making every Roadster six years ago, but once they started mass producing the Model S they stopped being a fringe brand in my mind.
CFLs have ballasts that are very susceptible to electrical transients. [PDF] Typically, the cheaper the bulb the cheaper the ballast electronics are. This makes them vulnerable to "dirty power" and will shorten their lifetime considerably. The more expensive bulbs have better ballasts, but without surge protection they are also prone to early ballast failure. I have CFLs in my apartment and the wiring in this place is more than 40 years old and power generation in the town I live in is pretty spike prone and browns out almost weekly. I lose a bulb about every three to five years (on average, some longer) from the bad wiring in the place (shorting switches, just bad wires, etc.) and most likely from the dirty power. Just yesterday I lost the one in the overhead hallway light when I turned it on via the wall switch. That bulb was about five years old and a mid-range priced one from GE.
LED "bulbs" have AC-DC power converters in them that are also susceptible to power transients, but not as much so as CFL ballasts as the converters tend to have moderate surge suppression circuits built into them making them a little more robust. I do have a few of those around that I am experimenting with to see if they last any longer in my environment. Jury is still out.
The gist is, if your bulbs are dying early the problem may not (just) be the bulb itself but the quality of AC power being supplied to it, quality that may be affected by the wiring in your dwelling, the equipment between the dwelling and the generator, natural or external to the power system causes (CME, lightning, downed tree, car accident, damn squirrel!) and/or the power generation process itself. Remember they test these things and do quality assurance on them in a lab, with clean power and very controlled conditions. YMMV I should also note that incandescent bulbs failed at a much higher rate, replacing the same bulbs every two to three years and sometimes sooner depending on use case. The CFLs and LED bulbs are also prone to failure due to heat buildup so the ones I have in closed fixtures, e.g., overhead fixtures, do fail more often than the ones I have in open ones, e.g., table lamps.
1. Citation or some info to back your assertion
2. All lands west of the Mississippi were bought by the Federal Govt starting with the Louisiana Purchase
3. Those lands were opened up for homesteading under the Homestead acts starting in 1862 and homesteading on those lands (most given to people for free, up to 160 acres, growing in size with subsequent legislation) continued up through the New Deal
4. Bureau of Land Management then managed any land not acquired during those acts and continues to manage Federally owned and paid for (centuries ago in some cases) land
To say that the government doesn't have the right to do with the land as it pleases (land the government can show deed to) is disingenuous at best and subverting our government's rightful authority at worst.
America has it's own problems and poor and suffering, we need to take care of our own FIRST.
Let the African nations start acting responsibly and pulling their act together first.
Nice how you're an even bigger asshole, so free with everyone else's money....
I won't argue that we should be taking care of our own problems, but to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others and to ignore a disease that has the potential to spread across the world and decimate the world's population (including the U.S.) is not only un-American it's just downright immoral. And btw, it's OUR money and we all get a say in how it's spent, whether you like it or not! Now, I'm done with you. Go back to your selfish interests and myopic nationalism.
Start looking for denial of service attacks that constitute an army of comandeered drones swarming around its intended target. Just imagine what pwning the Amazon drone fleet would net you...
The total cost of the Mariner 4 mission is estimated at $83.2 million. Total research, development, launch, and support costs for the Mariner series of spacecraft (Mariners 1 through 10) was approximately $554 million.
If you divide the cost up between the missions it averages under $60 million per probe. Cheaper than the Indian probe! That's a much more realistic comparison of scientific programs. Folks, the U.S. did the sub $100 million probes to Mars in the 1970s. India didn't even have a rocket to reach Low Earth Orbit during that decade and only got there in the last fifteen years! Baby steps, and they've got a lot of catching up to do and have the benefit of some of our experience as they are our allies.
Or better yet, use things that you will remember, for me it's song lyrics, and then transpose numbers and symbols for characters using a pattern that you create and remember, e.g., "Row, Row, Row Your Boat!" becomes R0wR0wR0wY0urB0@t! I create secure, strong, easy to remember passwords that way and it's a process even a thrid grader can learn, probably even earlier. I do not advocate storing passwords nor wrinting them down unless they aren't used regularly. The ones I use often I keep in my head! It's just not that difficult to come up with a good scheme.
I tend to agree with this. Don't take away all the risks from these kids, they need to learn about the consequences of insecure passwords sometime. So their home page shows up in all pink, or all their notes have been translated to Ancient Egyptian - better now than when the stakes are higher. And they'll learn the lesson much better from personal experience.
Wholeheartedly agree. I would require my child to use the password(s) regularly and not rely on some tool to store them where they don't know what they are and can't remember them should something keep them from the application containing them. People don't know or forget passwords because they don't actually use them. I see this ALL THE TIME! People store their passwords and then forget them ause their brains aren't being used to store and recall them on a regular basis. I have only a few passwords that I don't know off the top of my head, and those I store encrypted, but the daily use ones I type in every time.
So... what you are saying, if I'm getting you right, is that Indian mission sent a Tata Nano to Mars, whereas NASA sent a Chevy Suburban...?
More like India sent a digital camera from 1993 and we sent one made today. It's the level of sophistication of the probe, what it was designed to do, etc. India is NOT at the same place that the U.S. as far as space travel and rocket capability, folks. Stop projecting! It's great that they got there, and yes, they did build ehitr probe using information from what came before in the U.S. (hindsight and all), but they are still in the early stages of their space program and this (comparatively) small victory is big for them.
Let's just give credit where it's due and learn from their success. We can't put our noses up and say our space program is a 2015 Cadillac Escalade whereas yours is a 1999 Honda Accord.
That is a valid point. However, we have to see whether NASA can manage to send the "$5000 car" at the same cost or lower than ISRO.
What is your logic behind that demand? What if NASA and other space agencies don't see the comparative value in sending the "$5000 car"?
Or how about, the information sent back from a $5000 probe wouldn't give us much insight. We've already sent the cheaper probes. India hasn't. People are projecting the U.S. status on other countries that are just now getting objects in orbit and to other planetary bodies like we're all in the same boat. It's like complaining about the cost of a microwave oven when the other guy only has flint and steel.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing they skipped Windows 9 because they didn't want it to sound like "Windows Suffering" in parts of the world!
Yeah, because just running it at all isn't causing suffering all over the world?
P.S. You might want to refinance through a friendlier lender should you wish to pursue off-grid power. You're certainly not locked into that mortgage lender (legally) so that might not be a difficult thing to get around. Certainly easier than changing local occupancy code.
Ok, that example is not a single family home, it's a duplex. Multi dwelling structures have different code requirements, so that's a bad example.
Ok, I've spent hours looking through any info I can find on the relevant codes and there just isn't anything there that specifies "power from electric company" or even words to that effect. I have even found some codes that say that applications for power service "if requested" so some places seem to spell out that it doesn't have to come from a power company. I will keep looking, but it seems fighting any resistance in court would be possible given the verbiage in the existing codes in most locales. You have to meet building code, but there's no building code that specifies grid power. There may be occupancy code but I haven't found a single code that specifically says "power must be supplied by a power company" just that power has to be there. I am going to keep looking and thank you to those that did respond to me. I've asked for some more info from them if they would be so kind and I continue to research this.
What lender did you use? i.e., who did you get your mortgage through? That's the info that will help me. Thanks.
I don't want a news source, I want a legal code document or mortgage terms. I will look at that link to see the municipality info and dive deeper. Thanks
Have an Amish family live in your house for a year. Then that family can plead freedom of religion, as Amishism forbids connection to public utilities.
There's another good point that blows a hole in the code requirement assertion. I am not able to find any occupancy permit requirement that says "from a public utility" or "from a utility company". They all just say that to meet occupancy you need water, power and proper sewage.
Show me an example of these codes please. I have been researching this for the past two hours and have looked at multiple occupancy permitting codes across the U.S. and there just isn't any such requirement that I've been able to find. Also, http://hardware.slashdot.org/c...
The hard part of that is most home mortgages mandate that the house remain hooked up to public utilities.
Can you point me at an example of this verbiage somewhere? I've been doing a bit of refresher research on this since seeing some of these comments earlier this evening and I can't find any provisions online (across multiple locales) in occupancy permitting or code that says a residential (single family dwelling) has to be connected to a public utility at all. I even checked FHA rules and they all pretty much say the same thing, that water, sewage and power have to be there but not that they have to come from a public utility. If the public utility provision existed it would mean water wells, sewage tanks and drainage fields on premises wouldn't be valid (and we all know they are). I should point out that my degree is in architecture and I immediately went into the codes and there just isn't anything there saying that electricity has to come from a power company anywhere, just like it doesn't say that water and sewage have to come from a municipality. Power, water and proper sewage/drainage have to be there for inspection for occupancy, but no provisions for the source (other than they can't be shared from another property in some cases). So, if what folks are saying is true I'd like to see an example of where these provisions are spelled out. Most of the mortgage stuff I could find, again, just points to meeting code for occupancy in order to qualify for the loan. Nothing about power, water or sewage having to come from a utility company. Are folks making assumptions here or is there some info somewhere I can look at?
To suggest that the government is a single entity which has a right to dispense with that which belongs to all of us is disingenuous at best.
I don't believe I suggested or implied any such thing. The government of the U.S. is elected by people from all over the U.S. and those representatives get together to decide on rules and regulations to govern the people and land the U.S. possesses. Just because you happen to be in the minority of people that think all land not private property should be used by the public any way they see fit doesn't make it so. The land does belong to all of us, but we don't get to individually decide what to do with it, and the people have spoken, the rules are in place. If you don't like them work through your government representatives to change those rules. Remember, you still have to convince the rest of us that what you want to do is correct otherwise the votes won't be there and your changes won't happen. That's how democracy works. You also seem to be describing the government as some giant profit center that's taking money from the people and doing nothing with it. Again, if you don't like what they do with the money or you don't like paying that money, see the steps above again for how to change that. Again, good luck. And where does it say in any government document that the land in question is "there for public use"? If that were true you could walk onto any military installation and do what you wanted because it's on Federal land! No, not how that works. There are rules and those rules are made by the people, for the people by people of the people, also known as our government.
I wouldn't call Ferrari a "fringe brand" anymore. Not since the 1980s, anyway, and even then their racing pedigree made them a household name almost everywhere in the world. Koenigsegg, Pagani, Noble, and a few others are fringe brands that make one off vehicles or limited run vehicles that only car enthusiasts know much about. That's what makes them fringe, their obscurity. Tesla started off as a fringe brand hand making every Roadster six years ago, but once they started mass producing the Model S they stopped being a fringe brand in my mind.
Why use statistics? Couldn't you just read the books and find out what's going to happen? Idiot
CFLs have ballasts that are very susceptible to electrical transients. [PDF] Typically, the cheaper the bulb the cheaper the ballast electronics are. This makes them vulnerable to "dirty power" and will shorten their lifetime considerably. The more expensive bulbs have better ballasts, but without surge protection they are also prone to early ballast failure. I have CFLs in my apartment and the wiring in this place is more than 40 years old and power generation in the town I live in is pretty spike prone and browns out almost weekly. I lose a bulb about every three to five years (on average, some longer) from the bad wiring in the place (shorting switches, just bad wires, etc.) and most likely from the dirty power. Just yesterday I lost the one in the overhead hallway light when I turned it on via the wall switch. That bulb was about five years old and a mid-range priced one from GE.
LED "bulbs" have AC-DC power converters in them that are also susceptible to power transients, but not as much so as CFL ballasts as the converters tend to have moderate surge suppression circuits built into them making them a little more robust. I do have a few of those around that I am experimenting with to see if they last any longer in my environment. Jury is still out.
The gist is, if your bulbs are dying early the problem may not (just) be the bulb itself but the quality of AC power being supplied to it, quality that may be affected by the wiring in your dwelling, the equipment between the dwelling and the generator, natural or external to the power system causes (CME, lightning, downed tree, car accident, damn squirrel!) and/or the power generation process itself. Remember they test these things and do quality assurance on them in a lab, with clean power and very controlled conditions. YMMV I should also note that incandescent bulbs failed at a much higher rate, replacing the same bulbs every two to three years and sometimes sooner depending on use case. The CFLs and LED bulbs are also prone to failure due to heat buildup so the ones I have in closed fixtures, e.g., overhead fixtures, do fail more often than the ones I have in open ones, e.g., table lamps.
Sorry, ignorant not "Insightful".
1. Citation or some info to back your assertion
2. All lands west of the Mississippi were bought by the Federal Govt starting with the Louisiana Purchase
3. Those lands were opened up for homesteading under the Homestead acts starting in 1862 and homesteading on those lands (most given to people for free, up to 160 acres, growing in size with subsequent legislation) continued up through the New Deal
4. Bureau of Land Management then managed any land not acquired during those acts and continues to manage Federally owned and paid for (centuries ago in some cases) land
To say that the government doesn't have the right to do with the land as it pleases (land the government can show deed to) is disingenuous at best and subverting our government's rightful authority at worst.
America has it's own problems and poor and suffering, we need to take care of our own FIRST.
Let the African nations start acting responsibly and pulling their act together first.
Nice how you're an even bigger asshole, so free with everyone else's money....
I won't argue that we should be taking care of our own problems, but to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others and to ignore a disease that has the potential to spread across the world and decimate the world's population (including the U.S.) is not only un-American it's just downright immoral. And btw, it's OUR money and we all get a say in how it's spent, whether you like it or not! Now, I'm done with you. Go back to your selfish interests and myopic nationalism.
Start looking for denial of service attacks that constitute an army of comandeered drones swarming around its intended target. Just imagine what pwning the Amazon drone fleet would net you...
Severe jail time?
Yoohoo, over here.
Just a quick follow up:
The total cost of the Mariner 4 mission is estimated at $83.2 million. Total research, development, launch, and support costs for the Mariner series of spacecraft (Mariners 1 through 10) was approximately $554 million.
From http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc...
If you divide the cost up between the missions it averages under $60 million per probe. Cheaper than the Indian probe! That's a much more realistic comparison of scientific programs. Folks, the U.S. did the sub $100 million probes to Mars in the 1970s. India didn't even have a rocket to reach Low Earth Orbit during that decade and only got there in the last fifteen years! Baby steps, and they've got a lot of catching up to do and have the benefit of some of our experience as they are our allies.
Cool tech of course with their compression for voxel data, but until they have real time dynamic lighting and global illumination ... *yawn*.
Yup, wake me when it runs something non-static and real-time immersive. Until then get off my lawn and let me go back to sleep.
Three letters: ERP Surprised no one said it earlier given how many enterprise admins there are in here regularly.
Or better yet, use things that you will remember, for me it's song lyrics, and then transpose numbers and symbols for characters using a pattern that you create and remember, e.g., "Row, Row, Row Your Boat!" becomes R0wR0wR0wY0urB0@t! I create secure, strong, easy to remember passwords that way and it's a process even a thrid grader can learn, probably even earlier. I do not advocate storing passwords nor wrinting them down unless they aren't used regularly. The ones I use often I keep in my head! It's just not that difficult to come up with a good scheme.
I tend to agree with this. Don't take away all the risks from these kids, they need to learn about the consequences of insecure passwords sometime. So their home page shows up in all pink, or all their notes have been translated to Ancient Egyptian - better now than when the stakes are higher. And they'll learn the lesson much better from personal experience.
Wholeheartedly agree. I would require my child to use the password(s) regularly and not rely on some tool to store them where they don't know what they are and can't remember them should something keep them from the application containing them. People don't know or forget passwords because they don't actually use them. I see this ALL THE TIME! People store their passwords and then forget them ause their brains aren't being used to store and recall them on a regular basis. I have only a few passwords that I don't know off the top of my head, and those I store encrypted, but the daily use ones I type in every time.
So... what you are saying, if I'm getting you right, is that Indian mission sent a Tata Nano to Mars, whereas NASA sent a Chevy Suburban...?
More like India sent a digital camera from 1993 and we sent one made today. It's the level of sophistication of the probe, what it was designed to do, etc. India is NOT at the same place that the U.S. as far as space travel and rocket capability, folks. Stop projecting! It's great that they got there, and yes, they did build ehitr probe using information from what came before in the U.S. (hindsight and all), but they are still in the early stages of their space program and this (comparatively) small victory is big for them.
Let's just give credit where it's due and learn from their success. We can't put our noses up and say our space program is a 2015 Cadillac Escalade whereas yours is a 1999 Honda Accord.
Actually, that's exactly what we're talking about.
That is a valid point. However, we have to see whether NASA can manage to send the "$5000 car" at the same cost or lower than ISRO.
What is your logic behind that demand? What if NASA and other space agencies don't see the comparative value in sending the "$5000 car"?
Or how about, the information sent back from a $5000 probe wouldn't give us much insight. We've already sent the cheaper probes. India hasn't. People are projecting the U.S. status on other countries that are just now getting objects in orbit and to other planetary bodies like we're all in the same boat. It's like complaining about the cost of a microwave oven when the other guy only has flint and steel.