quesera

47 ms·

781.
by quesera 2y ago
You've established that you don't know much about house construction. OK, definitely do not build a house until you do a little bit of research on the topic. But if the topic interests you, it's worth looking into. It's
782.
by quesera 2y ago
This post is literally about the value of building things with your own hands. If you do not derive value from that sort of thing, then what point are you trying to make? I have no desire to sew my own clothes, but I'm guessing you are
783.
by quesera 2y ago
I'll guess that was in a rural area in the US West? The further east and urban you go, the more rules you have to follow. This is, ultimately, sensible.
784.
by quesera 2y ago
> Troubleshooting an intermittent problem on a bathroom fan in a subdivided triple decker with common grounds -> hard I would generalize that to "locating and safely fixing problems inside closed walls or ceilings -> sometim
785.
by quesera 2y ago
I don't know what point you're making here. You can learn to do competent, inspection-passing, code-compliant, and never-problem-causing electrical work, adequate for wiring a full house, in less than a week. From your other comme
786.
by quesera 2y ago
I have never heard of a state drivers license requiring fingerprinting. I've lived in 5 states in the last 20 years, but none of them were Colorado. A quick web search suggests that CO requires prints for licensing as an auto or motors
787.
by quesera 2y ago
You will sell your house someday, so doing it yourself has more than just personal implications, which is why inspections are required. But you're wrong about the experience required. Everything you do in a house gets done repeatedly
788.
by quesera 2y ago
I learned it in a few days of work. You could too. I don't recommend YouTube though! The most complicated thing is knowing the code, which boils down to just a handful of simple rules for residential stuff. Most importantly: look it up
789.
by quesera 2y ago
But licenses are not awarded based on competence. They are awarded based on years of service as an apprentice and a journeyman to a master , who is effectively your pimp until you become a master yourself. Guess who certifies master trad
790.
by quesera 2y ago
I'm sure that's true. And it means that you do not know how to do electrical or plumbing work. That's fine! But take it from someone who does: it does not take years of training to be excellent at it. Household electric and p
791.
by quesera 2y ago
That's unnecessarily hostile. House building is not that difficult. And literally zero of the licensed trades (plumbing, electrical, HVAC, etc) cannot be learned by a smart and motivated person in 1-2 months at most , instead of the m
792.
by quesera 2y ago
Two pages is too few to effectively summarize some of the books in this genre. But two pages is far more than most of these books would deserve.
793.
by quesera 2y ago
Thank you for growing up. Not everyone does.
794.
by quesera 2y ago
You're not wrong, but if you just want to kill large groups of airline passengers, it seems like the TSA line would be the easiest place to do it.
795.
by quesera 2y ago
The (US) government generally does not have fingerprints for the majority of people who have never been arrested.
796.
by quesera 2y ago
The Unix universe obviously.
797.
by quesera 2y ago
Beavers maintain their dams. Abandoned dams are reclaimed by other beavers, quickly. They are more trustworthy than municipal budgets, by far. I've lived with beavers for a long time. If you and a beaver agree on the location of a dam,
798.
by quesera 2y ago
I think you don't know much about beavers? It's a bit tricky to get beavers to build dams where humans want them, but this story is about beavers that did exactly that. It doesn't scale, but it worked here. No irony needed. O
799.
by quesera 2y ago
> There's no interesting logistics problem in "when do the trains meet?" This is trivially resolved with "and the first train is carrying an urgent package for a passenger on the second train. When will the trains m
800.
by quesera 2y ago
"We won't use your dollars and efforts for bad and destructive activities, until we accumulate enough of your dollars and efforts that we no longer care about your opinions".
801.
by quesera 2y ago
The obvious answer is "visibility", but I'm also skeptical of the whole idea.
802.
by quesera 2y ago
There is absolutely nothing in their README to suggest that you are using the word "cult" properly.
803.
by quesera 2y ago
> the internet has enabled ordinary but gullible people to find exactly the supporting evidence they need to be considered insane by society If by "be considered insane by society", you mean "find each other, attract new
804.
by quesera 2y ago
> Sears could easily have been Target or Wal-Mart I don't believe this at all. Wal-Mart was already Wal-Mart, and while I have no love for them as a retail outlet, their execution is meticulous and aggressive. Sears was never, in
805.
by quesera 2y ago
Agreed. Thanks for working through it with me. :)
806.
by quesera 2y ago
I'm with you 100% here. Unbridled capitalism, especially on the scale possible today, is anti-competitive and consumer-hostile. And economically and socially destructive in the medium-to-long term. But still, given what it was, Sears h
807.
by quesera 2y ago
Interesting point, but I'll push back a bit. Whole Foods was a standalone viable business with high-quality retail locations. Sears was neither. But I'll certainly grant you that with the resources, a fantastic new model, and lots
808.
by quesera 2y ago
I agree with the bulk of this! But I maintain that the failure of Sears, Roebuck & Co. was the free market doing exactly what it's supposed to do. Market distortions due to consolidation are a huge problem. But Sears was not fit
809.
by quesera 2y ago
Punctuated equilibrium. Not sure if he's the originator, but I'm pretty sure I learned about it in a Richard Dawkins book.
810.
by quesera 2y ago
I don't believe you would have any trouble answering these questions for yourself, and I do not have any confidence that you are engaging earnestly.

More ›