That looks to be an excellent resource that I did not know about. This may be off-topic but I do not mind any potential repercussions as it is important to me to thank you for that link. So, yeah, thank you. I will actually read all of it and will share the link with other like-minded people. I read some of it and am glad that this is online (and in this format) so, again, thank you for taking the time to link to the site and to that page.
How about if you know you are being investigated but DO NOT know that this investigation is likely to include your browser history or online behavior? This does not seem impossible, it does seem unreasonable in this particular case, but it may be something that should be addressed. I do not ask this question out of a desire to be snarky, I am unaware of the answer or people's opinions on the subject and am truly interested in learning.
One would have to be even more dense to think it is double jeopardy. One does not go to jail, for example, if found at fault for a civil offense. This is well established law and not subject to debate. I suppose we could debate if the law is just, what we can not debate is the fact that this is the law.
This does not mean that I agree with the law. Just because the legality is not subject to debate in our current system does not mean that the system can not be changed or improved*. I would be remiss to opine on the subject though. This is one of those rare subjects where I do not hold an opinion. I know of no better way to achieve monetary compensation when wronged but, at the same time, this system is full of abuse potential as the burden of proof is so much lower. Perhaps raising the standard of proof but being more lenient in admission of evidence? I have no idea. I can not say that the system is broken nor can I say that it needs to be improved.
*: This is similar to someone like Snowden being a patriot (an analogy, not the same thing -- not congruent but analogous) in that one does not need to support the current government, or their practices, to be patriotic. One is perfectly free to advocate something like an adherence to the Constitution and still be considered patriotic. For example, I do not support or like any currently elected official - not one single one. I wish to make changes to the entire elected body. I wish to adhere to the fourth and fifth amendment more strongly. This, to me, makes me more a patriot than the guy who accepts the status quo through ignorance (in the sense that they simply do not know).
>>Do you truly believe that every criminal found not guilty should also face a civil trial for damages after being found not guilty?
Then you tell them what they believe.
>>The person found not guilty of breaking into a house should face civil trial for damages to the broken window by your standard.
The most amusing part is you ascribe the law and how other people use it, a statement that in no way implies their position, as being their opinion. The logical disconnect is amazing and I am not sure what sort of mental gymnastics were used to reach these conclusions. They opined on one single case, a case that has already reached a conclusion and has been resolved completely in the courts - with no successful appeals and no constitutional violations. In other words they mentioned how preventing justice in a civil court was bad. This is one of the very principles our country was founded on. You are free to find a different country but we have well established laws that are not always unjust.
TL:DR I do not think you are actually interested in discourse nor are you interested in the answers to either question. Your uneducated and inflammatory response is childish, ignorant, and unequivocally stupid.
You are conflating criminal murder with civil wrongful death. The two are not the same and the preponderance of evidence is lower in a civil trial than it is at a criminal trial. In a civil trial one must only prove that it is more likely than not (not even remotely the same as beyond reasonable doubt - which is not the same as beyond all doubt) the defendant is at fault for the accused act. Additionally, civil trials in this type of case are not the same as civil trials brought by the state. A state may charge you for a civil offense, such as a parking infraction, where no jail time is possible in the judge's verdict. A civil trial, in civil court, is brought by a person/company/organization and is against the same. No verdict from such a trial can include penalties greater than a monetary judgment. The penalties may not include anything that limits rights or removes rights. The penalty may include transfer of property, money, and such. This is separate and has no impact on criminal charges.
I am not a lawyer. However, does that make more sense? I am not saying I agree with this, I am not offering my opinion on the subject. I am simply stating how it works.
This is technically true but I feel some clarification is in order. If one does not adhere to the judge's orders, perhaps by failing to pay the adjudicated monetary penalty, then one is guilty of contempt and may well be placed in jail. This does not mean that civil trials can put someone in jail but, rather, someone can end up in jail due to not adhering to the penalty portion of the trial. Contempt is indefinite as well, so one could, theoretically, languish in prison for longer than they would have if they had lost the criminal trial.
I know of no case where they have actually spent more time in prison for contempt than they would have if they had received a guilty verdict in a criminal trial. This does not mean it has not happened, it means that I do not pay attention enough and have not searched and found someone who has had this happen or that, simply, it has not happened at all. I mention it because it is a possibility and people do go to jail for contempt when they fail (are unable?) to adhere to the judgment. They may be unwilling or they may be unable to meet monetary penalties, for example, and will likely end up in jail because of this. If they are able to but unwilling to then I have no sympathy. If they are unable to and end up being incarcerated then they are even more unlikely to be able to meet their financial obligations and that seems counterproductive.
Anyhow, I mention this not because you are wrong - you are 100% correct - but because people may assume that one can not end up incarcerated as a result of a civil trial. The penalty itself may not be incarceration but failing to meet the expectations lined out with the penalty can, indeed, result in a contempt of court charge which will likely result in incarceration.
Probably not. I am not sure how it could cause death except in some really illogical ways. At least not by itself at any rate.
a generation from now, we won't even recognize ourselves as the same society we started from
It is not even the same as it was when I was a kid. This is a good thing, in some areas - like civil rights, but not so good when it comes to privacy. One thing we do have now is the ability to fight against invasions of privacy better than we could before. We have cell phones to record and upload infractions. We have mass, easily accessed, media that enables us to be heard. We have online resources to read the laws and people to interact with who can explain them. We have community funding and activism for things people agree are just causes.
I reject the notion that my desire to not leave footprints is, in any way, admission of wrong-doing.
I refused to let a police officer search my vehicle. He tried and tried to find something to give him probable cause to do so - he spent a long time peering in each window, sniffing and looking, trying to get his light to show anything, something, that would enable him to search. I stood by my guns and insisted that he would need a warrant to get into my car to look around. He threatened to bring the drug dog down and I invited him to do so. I even offered to make the call for him. Eventually he tried to tell me that my refusing to allow them to search was suspicious enough to mean that it, the refusal, was thus probable cause to search the vehicle. I had a great laugh and his partner tried to not smile as well. I then informed the officer that I was rather old and not some silly teenager and that his attempt, which I lauded and gave him a good score for creativity, was not going to work and that he was welcome to call his supervisor. He eventually grumped the directions to Missouri, told me to leave immediately, and informed me that I was permanently banned from Kansas. That is no great loss but not even remotely legally binding. I had a good chuckle, he eventually smiled, and his partner kept shaking his head in disbelief while punctuating his actions with the occasional smile that he could not stop.
we have gone too far. we truly have. but at what point will people rise up and demand their rights back?
We have gone too far. Do not blame me. I generally vote third party. The last time I voted for either a Democrat or a Republican was when I voted for Clinton's second term. I was worried that the race may be close so felt obligated to help voice my opinion about his opposition. We get the government we deserve and, frankly, I could be convinced that there is a conspiracy and that there is a dark force behind the elections that is doing it not for power or money but for the LULZ. I suggest educated voting and either running for office yourself or supporting a like-minded friend by encouraging them to run. Start small, local or state. You may not have much of an impact but you could just affect enough change to get the proverbial snowball rolling. It is unlikely but not impossible and it may well be the only solution we have.
we stood there, watched it happen, did nothing.
No, YOU stood there and did nothing, other folks have been advocating freedom for many years - perhaps longer than you have been alive. We have not done nothing. We have spoken, been activists, and have tried to make people understand. Idiots blinded by beer and circuses have ridiculed because they were told to do so by their masters/party leaders. We have been labeled kooks, gun nuts, anti-American, unpatriotic, and many other names. We have been ignored. Just because you are finally seeing the light does not mean that others have not been aware and warning about this for a long time. Every law, even if it is a good thing, is a restriction of freedom. I do not ad
This is/. so what makes you think we need data? If we needed data we would do stuff like RTFA. My conjecture, without any data and entirely based on anecdotes (which are data no matter who argues the point), is that the only thing we do read, on a regular basis, is the manual. If we did not do that then we would not be chastising people to RTFM! So, logically, I conclude that we all read the manuals for any applications we use, plan to use, and that we all update the man pages with new information we come across or to supply missing content. And, of course, we all update the repositories with our updated manuals and then insist that people RTFM because, you know, that is what the damned manual is for.
Have him look into Forrest blades. They are expensive but the cut on them is planer quality OR better. I have had my planer recalibrated - it is within 1/10,000" and is fixed with new blades and the result from that is not much better than what I get (even with the crosscut) on the table or radial arm saws. They are costly but worth it for the quality and the labor savings.
Anyhow, regardless of technology, they are still planing lumber down to the standard size from the rough uncut sizes. I have a number of friends who work in the industry. It kind of comes with the territory. I live in NW Maine and have a number of Canadian friends as well. (A lot of sawmills are in this area and more and more lumber is coming down, across the boarder, from Canada.) One of my closest friends is the head supervisor for the sawmill at Hammond Lumber, Belgrade facility, and a number of others all work in those mills (for now, until they too are closed). I also have a hobby of making wooden furniture and giving it away as a gift or making it for my own use. Sometimes I even make custom cabinets for friends and family at low/no cost as I find it therapeutic and enjoy the labor.
I guess my point is that I keep an eye on the trade. As I insist on quality I rip and laminate almost anything over four inches in width (flipping the grain so that it is less likely to warp even with mistreatment and an eventually damaged finish). So, I often use larger pieces of lumber (such as ripped 2x8" stock) to make counter tops or other thicker projects. Even if they do not need it, they still plane it from the standard rough stock sizes. It is rare but I do know people who use rough-cut lumber in construction - it is generally only used for sub-flooring, framing, base roofing, and things like that. I have seen a few people do runners with them but they generally do so because of lack of funds as do the people who use rough cut to do framing or similar.
I had the wood for my house harvested from my property. I then had a custom shop do the milling and had the lumber picked up and delivered to me by the same company. It was cost effective and the greatest form of land-use that I could think of. My Russian fireplace was done with on-site stones as well but that is digressing a bit too far.
If the question is, "Do they need to plane them as much today as they used to?" My answer would be that they probably do not have to. However, it is still standard practice in any mill that I know of and the only options I know of are, mill them yourself (much cheaper than it used to be), have them custom milled, or go somewhere that you can buy rough cut lumber. One of the primary reasons for planing them is because the wood warps. The removal of the stock gives a uniformity that negates the warping after the wood has been properly dried. I do not know, but I speculate - I have never asked though I have visited, that kiln drying has also advanced due to new information and increased technology. As such, likely by more uniformity and even pressurization, the wood may well warp less now than it did, say, 30 years ago. This is entirely speculation and assumption and should be weighed as such.
I am, by no means, affiliated but I do swear by their quality and their sharpening service. Warning; They are VERY expensive for most people, prohibitively so - unless this is a business (where they make perfect sense). I tried them a long time ago based on a recommendation from a cabinet-maker friend and have since learned that they are worth the expense. I would not put them on an on-site chop saw in the construction field, that is not what they are generally designed for. They are for a nice, stable, shop that wants to ensure high quality production cuts.
Anyhow, the Forrest folks have a 30 day money back guarantee. I very highly recommend that your relative give them a try the next time they
What he is buying is known as unfinished lumber. The reason a 2x4 is smaller is because it is planed down to that size to make it smoother and more consistent. All lumber, finished, is trimmed the same amount as a standard here. This should not be confused with sheet material which is the size it says it is.
You mean you do not have 10 years managing Windows 10 in an "enterprise environment" and have complete working knowledge of PERL 5.22 as well as three years experience with that version? Pfft... I am hiring a nice gentleman from India.
A willingness to bet is not evidence. It is not that I do not agree that people should be vaccinated. I disagree with the draconian methods proposed here. I suggest education and encouragement. More so than we do now. We simply should not do this by way of force. We should also be certain to prove that it is a problem that justifies intervention.
What if I do not panic because I have an alarm and I own guns - and I live in a no-crime area. I know that last part sounds crazy but it is basically true. There may be a drunk driver or speeder on the road but I am a half mile from the road, in an unincorporated town, and have exactly six houses within maybe 20 miles of my property. There *could* be crime here but, realistically, the closest you are going to come to crime here is, well, me.
I live in NW Maine, I have a saltbox envelope house with passive solar. With the heat off, entirely, I hit about 60f at night on the coldest days. I may hit 72f on the warmest days of summer. Lots and lots of spray insulation - have them return after five years to refill it as it settles.
If I could do it all again I would do a small raceway and dual voltage BUS lines EVERYWHERE. I have passive solar (envelope salt-box) with solar panels and solar thermal. I would have done a heat sync but I am already into ledge that had to be blasted. I would have done a geodesic dome but, alas, I could not make it do what I wanted reasonably and being unreasonable was possible it was not worth the effort.
LOL Microsoft might suck but I do not recall them actually having a product that could kill you and your family (and neighbors if you live in an apartment).
Slashdot Mirror
That looks to be an excellent resource that I did not know about. This may be off-topic but I do not mind any potential repercussions as it is important to me to thank you for that link. So, yeah, thank you. I will actually read all of it and will share the link with other like-minded people. I read some of it and am glad that this is online (and in this format) so, again, thank you for taking the time to link to the site and to that page.
How about if you know you are being investigated but DO NOT know that this investigation is likely to include your browser history or online behavior? This does not seem impossible, it does seem unreasonable in this particular case, but it may be something that should be addressed. I do not ask this question out of a desire to be snarky, I am unaware of the answer or people's opinions on the subject and am truly interested in learning.
One would have to be even more dense to think it is double jeopardy. One does not go to jail, for example, if found at fault for a civil offense. This is well established law and not subject to debate. I suppose we could debate if the law is just, what we can not debate is the fact that this is the law.
This does not mean that I agree with the law. Just because the legality is not subject to debate in our current system does not mean that the system can not be changed or improved*. I would be remiss to opine on the subject though. This is one of those rare subjects where I do not hold an opinion. I know of no better way to achieve monetary compensation when wronged but, at the same time, this system is full of abuse potential as the burden of proof is so much lower. Perhaps raising the standard of proof but being more lenient in admission of evidence? I have no idea. I can not say that the system is broken nor can I say that it needs to be improved.
*: This is similar to someone like Snowden being a patriot (an analogy, not the same thing -- not congruent but analogous) in that one does not need to support the current government, or their practices, to be patriotic. One is perfectly free to advocate something like an adherence to the Constitution and still be considered patriotic. For example, I do not support or like any currently elected official - not one single one. I wish to make changes to the entire elected body. I wish to adhere to the fourth and fifth amendment more strongly. This, to me, makes me more a patriot than the guy who accepts the status quo through ignorance (in the sense that they simply do not know).
First you ask them what they believe.
>>Do you truly believe that every criminal found not guilty should also face a civil trial for damages after being found not guilty?
Then you tell them what they believe.
>>The person found not guilty of breaking into a house should face civil trial for damages to the broken window by your standard.
The most amusing part is you ascribe the law and how other people use it, a statement that in no way implies their position, as being their opinion. The logical disconnect is amazing and I am not sure what sort of mental gymnastics were used to reach these conclusions. They opined on one single case, a case that has already reached a conclusion and has been resolved completely in the courts - with no successful appeals and no constitutional violations. In other words they mentioned how preventing justice in a civil court was bad. This is one of the very principles our country was founded on. You are free to find a different country but we have well established laws that are not always unjust.
TL:DR I do not think you are actually interested in discourse nor are you interested in the answers to either question. Your uneducated and inflammatory response is childish, ignorant, and unequivocally stupid.
You are conflating criminal murder with civil wrongful death. The two are not the same and the preponderance of evidence is lower in a civil trial than it is at a criminal trial. In a civil trial one must only prove that it is more likely than not (not even remotely the same as beyond reasonable doubt - which is not the same as beyond all doubt) the defendant is at fault for the accused act. Additionally, civil trials in this type of case are not the same as civil trials brought by the state. A state may charge you for a civil offense, such as a parking infraction, where no jail time is possible in the judge's verdict. A civil trial, in civil court, is brought by a person/company/organization and is against the same. No verdict from such a trial can include penalties greater than a monetary judgment. The penalties may not include anything that limits rights or removes rights. The penalty may include transfer of property, money, and such. This is separate and has no impact on criminal charges.
I am not a lawyer. However, does that make more sense? I am not saying I agree with this, I am not offering my opinion on the subject. I am simply stating how it works.
Civil trials cannot put you in prison...
This is technically true but I feel some clarification is in order. If one does not adhere to the judge's orders, perhaps by failing to pay the adjudicated monetary penalty, then one is guilty of contempt and may well be placed in jail. This does not mean that civil trials can put someone in jail but, rather, someone can end up in jail due to not adhering to the penalty portion of the trial. Contempt is indefinite as well, so one could, theoretically, languish in prison for longer than they would have if they had lost the criminal trial.
I know of no case where they have actually spent more time in prison for contempt than they would have if they had received a guilty verdict in a criminal trial. This does not mean it has not happened, it means that I do not pay attention enough and have not searched and found someone who has had this happen or that, simply, it has not happened at all. I mention it because it is a possibility and people do go to jail for contempt when they fail (are unable?) to adhere to the judgment. They may be unwilling or they may be unable to meet monetary penalties, for example, and will likely end up in jail because of this. If they are able to but unwilling to then I have no sympathy. If they are unable to and end up being incarcerated then they are even more unlikely to be able to meet their financial obligations and that seems counterproductive.
Anyhow, I mention this not because you are wrong - you are 100% correct - but because people may assume that one can not end up incarcerated as a result of a civil trial. The penalty itself may not be incarceration but failing to meet the expectations lined out with the penalty can, indeed, result in a contempt of court charge which will likely result in incarceration.
are we going to be surveiled to death?
Probably not. I am not sure how it could cause death except in some really illogical ways. At least not by itself at any rate.
a generation from now, we won't even recognize ourselves as the same society we started from
It is not even the same as it was when I was a kid. This is a good thing, in some areas - like civil rights, but not so good when it comes to privacy. One thing we do have now is the ability to fight against invasions of privacy better than we could before. We have cell phones to record and upload infractions. We have mass, easily accessed, media that enables us to be heard. We have online resources to read the laws and people to interact with who can explain them. We have community funding and activism for things people agree are just causes.
I reject the notion that my desire to not leave footprints is, in any way, admission of wrong-doing.
I refused to let a police officer search my vehicle. He tried and tried to find something to give him probable cause to do so - he spent a long time peering in each window, sniffing and looking, trying to get his light to show anything, something, that would enable him to search. I stood by my guns and insisted that he would need a warrant to get into my car to look around. He threatened to bring the drug dog down and I invited him to do so. I even offered to make the call for him. Eventually he tried to tell me that my refusing to allow them to search was suspicious enough to mean that it, the refusal, was thus probable cause to search the vehicle. I had a great laugh and his partner tried to not smile as well. I then informed the officer that I was rather old and not some silly teenager and that his attempt, which I lauded and gave him a good score for creativity, was not going to work and that he was welcome to call his supervisor. He eventually grumped the directions to Missouri, told me to leave immediately, and informed me that I was permanently banned from Kansas. That is no great loss but not even remotely legally binding. I had a good chuckle, he eventually smiled, and his partner kept shaking his head in disbelief while punctuating his actions with the occasional smile that he could not stop.
we have gone too far. we truly have. but at what point will people rise up and demand their rights back?
We have gone too far. Do not blame me. I generally vote third party. The last time I voted for either a Democrat or a Republican was when I voted for Clinton's second term. I was worried that the race may be close so felt obligated to help voice my opinion about his opposition. We get the government we deserve and, frankly, I could be convinced that there is a conspiracy and that there is a dark force behind the elections that is doing it not for power or money but for the LULZ. I suggest educated voting and either running for office yourself or supporting a like-minded friend by encouraging them to run. Start small, local or state. You may not have much of an impact but you could just affect enough change to get the proverbial snowball rolling. It is unlikely but not impossible and it may well be the only solution we have.
we stood there, watched it happen, did nothing.
No, YOU stood there and did nothing, other folks have been advocating freedom for many years - perhaps longer than you have been alive. We have not done nothing. We have spoken, been activists, and have tried to make people understand. Idiots blinded by beer and circuses have ridiculed because they were told to do so by their masters/party leaders. We have been labeled kooks, gun nuts, anti-American, unpatriotic, and many other names. We have been ignored. Just because you are finally seeing the light does not mean that others have not been aware and warning about this for a long time. Every law, even if it is a good thing, is a restriction of freedom. I do not ad
This is /. so what makes you think we need data? If we needed data we would do stuff like RTFA. My conjecture, without any data and entirely based on anecdotes (which are data no matter who argues the point), is that the only thing we do read, on a regular basis, is the manual. If we did not do that then we would not be chastising people to RTFM! So, logically, I conclude that we all read the manuals for any applications we use, plan to use, and that we all update the man pages with new information we come across or to supply missing content. And, of course, we all update the repositories with our updated manuals and then insist that people RTFM because, you know, that is what the damned manual is for.
Have him look into Forrest blades. They are expensive but the cut on them is planer quality OR better. I have had my planer recalibrated - it is within 1/10,000" and is fixed with new blades and the result from that is not much better than what I get (even with the crosscut) on the table or radial arm saws. They are costly but worth it for the quality and the labor savings.
Anyhow, regardless of technology, they are still planing lumber down to the standard size from the rough uncut sizes. I have a number of friends who work in the industry. It kind of comes with the territory. I live in NW Maine and have a number of Canadian friends as well. (A lot of sawmills are in this area and more and more lumber is coming down, across the boarder, from Canada.) One of my closest friends is the head supervisor for the sawmill at Hammond Lumber, Belgrade facility, and a number of others all work in those mills (for now, until they too are closed). I also have a hobby of making wooden furniture and giving it away as a gift or making it for my own use. Sometimes I even make custom cabinets for friends and family at low/no cost as I find it therapeutic and enjoy the labor.
I guess my point is that I keep an eye on the trade. As I insist on quality I rip and laminate almost anything over four inches in width (flipping the grain so that it is less likely to warp even with mistreatment and an eventually damaged finish). So, I often use larger pieces of lumber (such as ripped 2x8" stock) to make counter tops or other thicker projects. Even if they do not need it, they still plane it from the standard rough stock sizes. It is rare but I do know people who use rough-cut lumber in construction - it is generally only used for sub-flooring, framing, base roofing, and things like that. I have seen a few people do runners with them but they generally do so because of lack of funds as do the people who use rough cut to do framing or similar.
I had the wood for my house harvested from my property. I then had a custom shop do the milling and had the lumber picked up and delivered to me by the same company. It was cost effective and the greatest form of land-use that I could think of. My Russian fireplace was done with on-site stones as well but that is digressing a bit too far.
If the question is, "Do they need to plane them as much today as they used to?" My answer would be that they probably do not have to. However, it is still standard practice in any mill that I know of and the only options I know of are, mill them yourself (much cheaper than it used to be), have them custom milled, or go somewhere that you can buy rough cut lumber. One of the primary reasons for planing them is because the wood warps. The removal of the stock gives a uniformity that negates the warping after the wood has been properly dried. I do not know, but I speculate - I have never asked though I have visited, that kiln drying has also advanced due to new information and increased technology. As such, likely by more uniformity and even pressurization, the wood may well warp less now than it did, say, 30 years ago. This is entirely speculation and assumption and should be weighed as such.
To save some Google time...
Here is the link to the Forrest products:
http://www.forrestblades.com/
I am, by no means, affiliated but I do swear by their quality and their sharpening service. Warning; They are VERY expensive for most people, prohibitively so - unless this is a business (where they make perfect sense). I tried them a long time ago based on a recommendation from a cabinet-maker friend and have since learned that they are worth the expense. I would not put them on an on-site chop saw in the construction field, that is not what they are generally designed for. They are for a nice, stable, shop that wants to ensure high quality production cuts.
Anyhow, the Forrest folks have a 30 day money back guarantee. I very highly recommend that your relative give them a try the next time they
What he is buying is known as unfinished lumber. The reason a 2x4 is smaller is because it is planed down to that size to make it smoother and more consistent. All lumber, finished, is trimmed the same amount as a standard here. This should not be confused with sheet material which is the size it says it is.
You mean you do not have 10 years managing Windows 10 in an "enterprise environment" and have complete working knowledge of PERL 5.22 as well as three years experience with that version? Pfft... I am hiring a nice gentleman from India.
A willingness to bet is not evidence. It is not that I do not agree that people should be vaccinated. I disagree with the draconian methods proposed here. I suggest education and encouragement. More so than we do now. We simply should not do this by way of force. We should also be certain to prove that it is a problem that justifies intervention.
No. I did not forget. I did not know about it. Thank you though.
Read. There are exceptions. I was quite clear about this. I was also clear about what was anecdotal.
I should buy a half dozen crates of Mosins and have a free gun zone.
What if I do not panic because I have an alarm and I own guns - and I live in a no-crime area. I know that last part sounds crazy but it is basically true. There may be a drunk driver or speeder on the road but I am a half mile from the road, in an unincorporated town, and have exactly six houses within maybe 20 miles of my property. There *could* be crime here but, realistically, the closest you are going to come to crime here is, well, me.
I live in NW Maine, I have a saltbox envelope house with passive solar. With the heat off, entirely, I hit about 60f at night on the coldest days. I may hit 72f on the warmest days of summer. Lots and lots of spray insulation - have them return after five years to refill it as it settles.
If I could do it all again I would do a small raceway and dual voltage BUS lines EVERYWHERE. I have passive solar (envelope salt-box) with solar panels and solar thermal. I would have done a heat sync but I am already into ledge that had to be blasted. I would have done a geodesic dome but, alas, I could not make it do what I wanted reasonably and being unreasonable was possible it was not worth the effort.
Buy a TV big enough so that you can't mistakenly put it into the microwave.
You fucking FOSS nuts will go to extremes to avoid having to install Windows. ;)
Most shotguns have a fairly well designed interface at that. They are quite easy to learn.
Or he just prefers a different sound.
...
woosh ...
I have been happy with Cambridge SoundWorks. Look into their "professional" grade stuff as much of their consumer stuff is garbage now.
LOL Microsoft might suck but I do not recall them actually having a product that could kill you and your family (and neighbors if you live in an apartment).