GlockSpock

They used to be a “standard” that was of the better quality for a certain price point. I have seen them around $1,100, half that, and twice that. Now that there are so many, many options available, I wouldn’t consider them a “standard quality starter” anymore.

Avoid Corona!

There are who knows how many “new” viruses in the wild that have not jumped to humans. Bats carry lots of then. Viruses also mutate. Scientists like studying things.

I must be going to the wrong estate sales.

In no form do I intend for any of the following to support, promote, or insinuate any conspiratorial thinking or conspiracy theories regarding the origination source of COVID-19, henceforth referred to the virus. I do sincerely want the questions I ask answered, hopefully by people that have a better understanding of these things than I. I'm essentially basing the entirety of this conversation on the official WHO Timeline, found here. December 31st was when China reported to WHO that there was a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan. Now, today we are showing February 17th as being the first confirmed death from the virus in the United States. What isn't completely clear is whether she contracted the virus domestically or internationally. For my argument, it doesn't matter. Here is the article I'm referring to. The difference in time between those days is roughly 48 days. Keep in mind December 31st was only 114 days ago. So within roughly 48 days the virus had spread to the United States in one form or fashion and killed someone. Within 114 days, we are "where we are now" with 2.6 million confirmed cases worldwide. So, here is my question. Imagine you are a new virus with relatively similar symptoms as dozens of other diseases. You are allowed to infect 100 people in any one area of the world. You do. How long do you think you would spread before being discovered as something new? That is sincerely something I do not know the answer to, but I suspect it could be a while. How many times have I or you went to the doctor to be tested for "the flu" and it came back negative? Instead, we're told "it is some virus going around, I've seen cases like this all month, you'll be better in a week and call if you aren't". To my knowledge, it isn't exactly common for each and every virus to be investigated. Rather, trends are noticed and at some point perhaps looked into. What I'm saying is that, sincerely, I'm impressed if any country in the world discovers a "new virus" within a month of "hitting the wild". Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn't. I don't really know. I don't pretend to understand the science of epidemiology. My personally, and this is 100% a guess, I'm thinking 2-4 months being my guess for how long something such as a new virus is noticed and discovered. I do find it odd that the Doctor that "discovered" the disease was an ophthalmologist, but I'll just go with that one. But what if it circulated in the wild for two, three, maybe four months before being discovered as "something new". Going off the official narrative, 114 days is enough time "until now", but what if it had a head-start of 90-120 days? What if it has already made a really, really good "round", spreading across the entire globe (with absolutely no restrictions in travel, social distancing, stay at home, etc) already with unconfirmed cases 10x, 100x, or even 1000x the confirmed cases we have now. We have been seeing cases rise seemingly exponentially, but couldn't that be directly correlated to tests becoming available at an exponential rate? A few groups have performed antibody testing on different populations, read that article here. If that article is true, 50x (their low-end estimate) the official number (currently at 842,624 in the United States) is 42,131,200. That's about 12% of the United States population. If you have a worldwide population of X, infected population of Y, and then start exponentially testing (starting at "0") at rate X, imagine what the graph for Y (infected population) will look like as you roll out testing? I'm not saying it isn't bad. It is. People are dying. But people die everyday. What I would be extremely interested in seeing would be an average number of daily deaths worldwide from any cause for 2018 and 2019 and then compare that to the average number of daily deaths worldwide from any cause during this pandemic. In other words, has this pandemic caused deaths as a function of being alive to increase? Or is it simply moving deaths as a function of being alive from one column to another? Can anyone offer more insight into any of this regarding methodologies, epidemiology, etc? Even though I'm very worried about the longterm ramifications of all of this, I find it very intriguing to experience something that up until now I believe all of us have only read about in history books.

I wasn’t implying that you were implying.

Hey! No need to make it personal.

Tweet Trump. Let him know.

By looking at it I figured a shim would open it, but I lost it when I saw that it takes a standard handcuff key.

That's terrifying. Any good oil ETF's to suggest?

I hope he's a good one. Today he provided a Certificate of Liability Insurance. I called Liberty Mutual, they confirmed it is legitimate. I called my insurance just to generally see what they had to say. She essentially said that if for whatever reason something bad happened and his liability insurance didn't cover it, I could submit a claim to Nationwide and then Nationwide would likely pursue him/his insurance for losses. He has a $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate. I had a second company quote today at $3,600. That's a multi person crew, chipping, and hauling. Everyone wants to chip and haul. He said it would be "essentially" the same price with our without.

Yes, two of them. Well, I'm not sure "the same day", but he was looking at some of his trees to do sometime soon. So maybe...day 1 and 2?

That just involved cutting trees and throwing them in woods. No grinding, There's only one stump I'd want ground. It's a heck of a deal. I was quoted by company A $1,800 for one tree, and $1,500 for a different tree. $1,800 sounds great, I'll happily do it, I just wonder if it isn't too cheap. He did tell me he is going to be doing more work for my neighbor that day.

Lol. Well, I don't know how everyone assumed I was on board with going with someone not insured and bonded. I never considered using that "friend of a friend" one bit. So, I had the one company quote me $6,000 for the total job. That was roughly 6 trees, 2 of them being "big". I had someone come out today and quote $1,800 for the same job. Now, it isn't the same level of service. For $6,000, Company A will haul everything off. For $1,800, Company B is going to use a tractor to carry everything into the woods. This guy swears up and down he is licensed and bonded for $1,000,000. I asked him to send me proof and explained to him that I was advised to check up on it. He swears up and down he encourages people to verify his paperwork. So I think I will likely go for them. This is the same guy that spent a Saturday a few weeks ago at my neighbor's house. From what I could tell, he seems to do good work.

I would personally recommend: https://discordapp.com/

Unrelated to recent weather, unless you figure precautionary against future weather as counting. I have a number of pine trees that I'd like cleared. Two of them are large and too close to the house. The others may as well go too while I'm at it. I've had a mix of several different quotes, but am now hoping for a few more serious quotes to make a selection from. Questions 1) How likely is it, if at all, that the large and straight pines are worth anything to paper/lumber mill? I ask because a "friend of a friend" acted excited about cutting the trees for me for next to nothing because he seemed to think he could sell them to make his money. He's uninsured and I generally don't get a good feeling about going that specific direction. I guess what I don't want is to pay someone money to cut them, them convince me to pay a bit extra for haul-off, and then them sell it and double dip on the same trees. If the trees are worth something, I'd like to know. 2) Anyone recommend anyone good in the Cleveland area? I've spoken to two various companies and received quotes that vary, I'd like to see what the average quote. And...I know this isn't the best week for tree service.

Maybe. I didn't think Trump could beat Clinton in the last election. Well...someone who can out-tweet Trump. At least he spelled everything right and used complete sentences. I wish for that day. Candidate D and Candidate R both show themselves to be despicable and then Candidate I comes in as a reasonable alternative and secure enough of the "non-voters" to win.

Read that again. A Republican running as a third party. Example (just an example, with no reason to suspect anything as such would happen) Romney running as an Independent because he thinks he can beat Trump for the Presidency.

If that's who floats your boat. And if writing in Bernie doesn't satisfy.

Well...I don't realistically see any third party presidential candidate as being a real contender, at least anytime soon. I wish this wasn't the case. If third party candidates could provide a real threat, then perhaps the R's and the D's would find that they have an immediate and acute increase in hearing sensitivity. I don't fault anyone for voting third party. Sure, it may as well be "throwing a vote away", etc etc etc. I've heard it all. But the truth that if more people (vastly more, I admit) voted 100% for someone that was a good candidate rather than "the less bad guy", we'd be much better off. Just gotta get everyone to do it at the same time. I do wonder the prospects of a Republican running as a third party and thus splitting the Republican vote between those that hate Trump and those that love him.

Which...is exactly how ALL the REPUBLICANS and ALL the DEMOCRATS want you think.

I was going to say just write in @Erik88, but I'd assume he isn't yet 35. Maybe if we are still here in 2024...

We that’s just fake news. POWNED!

It doesn't matter what your ISP is or isn't. What's happening is Google is cutting the resolution of your Nest cameras as a whole to reduce overall network use. You have ISP A, B, and C. They can transport 10 DATA units each. That's 30 DATA units whole. Google has a service, Called NEST. All of their cameras, nationwide, use 20 DATA units. That means ISP A, B, and C only have a "spare" 10 DATA units. Google says, "Hey we will help!". They cut their resolution in half, therefore on a national level Google only uses 10 DATA units and now ISP A, B, and C have a spare 20 DATA units. That's essentially what happened. Netflix did the same thing in the UK (maybe worldwide) amongst others. It's to "free up the tubes" since the amount of videoconferencing, etc has went up potentially exponentially. Of course data units are called bytes and I made these numbers up out of nowhere, you get the general idea.

To my knowledge we don’t really have an official policy. Typically up to buyer and seller in negotiations.