cbr

42 ms·

361.
by cbr 11y ago
Thanks! Definitely look around; that's what it's there for. If you're interested in the donations stuff, I'd suggest checking out www.givewell.org -- their research is really top-notch.
362.
by cbr 11y ago
Just reread the inspection report; they didn't notice it.
363.
by cbr 11y ago
Sorry, typo for "dusty". Fixed.
364.
by cbr 11y ago
We did have a home inspection, but the only way to find this would have been to rip up the floor or bring in a mercury vapor analyzer, neither of which are customary (in the US or UK).
365.
by cbr 11y ago
No harm ever came to us as a result. I think you're probably right, but how do you know? It's very hard to compare yourself to a version of you who didn't have that kind of exposure as a kid.
366.
by cbr 11y ago
This is actually what we did: $5k deductible, filed for this once it was clear it would be well over $5k. But we missed a step: check the policy before you file to confirm that the policy actually does list coverage for the loss.
367.
by cbr 11y ago
We had to prepay before they would do the work, $2.5k at a time. They've probably been burned before by people who can't pay, and I can see why they would avoid that. We live well below our means so we can donate more, so we did h
368.
by cbr 11y ago
Breathing the fumes for an extended period of time? That's exactly what we would have had without the remediation.
369.
by cbr 11y ago
We bought the house in February. We might try to sue people, but it's pretty clear the previous owners don't have much money. (The house was mortgaged to within a few-k of the selling price, and they had stopped paying their mon
370.
by cbr 11y ago
I've now linked that from the article; thanks! (I read that page when I was first reading about this the night of the spill, but had forgotten about it. Holohan is amazingly knowledgeable about old heating systems.)
371.
by cbr 11y ago
I do understand why insurance companies don't want to pay for things that happened before the policy took effect. Otherwise people could do harmful things, take out a policy, and then file a claim. All sorts of bad incentives. On the
372.
by cbr 11y ago
They were initially using a Jerome meter to find the areas that needed cleanup, and then used the more sensitive but more expensive Lumex meter to finish the job. The first few days were with a less experienced crew (from the same company)
373.
by cbr 11y ago
We're talking about hail. Insurance companies cover hail damage all the time. (Actually, hail claims have been going up: http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/national/2014/05/02/248354... )
374.
by cbr 11y ago
Author here: happy to answer questions.
375.
by cbr 11y ago
A shopvac (or any vacuum not designed for mercury) would be a really bad idea: they vaporize the mercury and seriously distribute it around the house.
376.
by cbr 11y ago
Client hints are a nice solution, but they don't require an image format stored in progressive order. They work fine with storing multiple copies on disk, and the overhead of low-rez versions server-side is minimal.
377.
by cbr 11y ago
I say net loss because with current http the loss of closing the connection is typically much higher than the loss of downloading more bytes than you need. Connection reestablishment needs a lot of round trips.
378.
by cbr 11y ago
To use a range request the client needs to know what range of bytes it needs. Currently your html is: <img src="foo.jpg"> Now, let's say foo.jpg is progressive, and if you examine the file you can see that you n
379.
by cbr 11y ago
They claim this is good for responsive images: The download or file read operations can be stopped as soon as sufficient detail is available, and if needed, it can be resumed when for whatever reason more detail is needed.
380.
by cbr 11y ago
The downside is memory usage during compression. A non-progressive jpeg can be compressed locally but a progressive encoding requires the whole image. But this is only a small downside. (Converting JPEG images to progressive format is one
381.
by cbr 11y ago
Nope: http://www.jefftk.com/p/sri-against-the-great-cannon
382.
by cbr 11y ago
When their competitors can be 5x faster while still traveling to space that's not so hot. (And it doesn't actually travel to space unless you're on a satellite connection.)
383.
by cbr 11y ago
red and black posts for me to crimp my speaker wire to They tried that and no one wanted it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexus_Q
384.
by cbr 11y ago
If Firefox supports webp in the near future... Where are you getting this? My understanding is FF still doesn't intend to add WebP support. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=856375
385.
by cbr 11y ago
I read this looking to see if there was anything we could adapt for mod_pagespeed. Making images smaller without looking worse is, of course, what anyone optimizing images wants. Unfortunately, all they say about how they actually did the
386.
by cbr 11y ago
It's a 33% increase, or an increase of 1.07 percentage points. It's not a 1.07% increase.
387.
by cbr 11y ago
The metric divides compression ratio by log compression time. (Ignore for now the normalization to a standard compressor.) This is: r / log(T) That doesn't seem like a good metric, because it overvalues changes in T. F
388.
by cbr 11y ago
CRIME: TLS compression can reveal private headers, like auth cookies. Fixed by turning off TLS compression. Not applicable to HTTP because HTTP never had header compression. BREACH: Response body compression of a page where there's (
389.
by cbr 11y ago
That sounds a lot like sdch, which you can actually use today if you're serving to in Chrome or Opera. (Look for "Accept-Encoding: sdch".)
390.
by cbr 11y ago
Widespread adoption of Subresource Integrity could have largely prevented the Great Cannon attack earlier this year. Sorry, it wouldn't have. From the CitizenLab report [1] on the Great Cannon attacks: In the a

More ›