February chat thread: Leap years make it longer, if you know what i mean

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > February chat thread: Leap years make it longer, if you know what i mean

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Enourmo posted:

So explain this poo poo

It's like 230, roommate and friends are yelling and stomping over something on TV. I finally get my nerve up, pop my head out, all them to cool it. They immediately apologize, been quiet since.

so why the gently caress am I now wide awake with adrenaline over a 2 second social interaction. BRAIN THE WHOLE POINT WAS TO GO TO SLEEP WHAT THE CHRIST

You probably need to smoke some weed.

# ¿ Feb 2, 2016 09:05

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:02

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

some texas redneck posted:

That would work, but those are also kinda pricey. I may wind up with one anyway though, it's a bit more useful (for me) than the one I first posted.

I keep the climate control on fresh air + keep a window open a bit whenever that poo poo is in my car.

Academy and the like usually have folding wagons like that for like $50. I've had one for two years with no issues. Hauled a lot of firewood with it.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2016 00:51

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Tide posted:

Buffalo Trace is mighty tasty. 9/10, will buy again.

That, Elijah Craig, and Bulliet is good stuff for $25.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2016 06:19

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Ferremit posted:

Oh gently caress off...

https://www.danmurphys.com.au/product/DM_383121/buffalo-trace-kentucky-straight-bourbon-whiskey-700ml
https://www.danmurphys.com.au/product/DM_385066/elijah-craig-12-year-old-kentucky-straight-bourbon-750ml
https://www.danmurphys.com.au/product/DM_140812/bulleit-frontier-kentucky-straight-bourbon-whisky-700ml

https://www.danmurphys.com.au/product/DM_383119/eagle-rare-single-barrel-bourbon-700ml

Someones making a tidy profit bending us over and loving us on liquor prices. And thats before you get to the spiders in the shelves.

You get health care and a mostly livable wage. I live in Alabama. I'd take the tradeoff.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2016 21:24

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Tusen Takk posted:

North: you can be uppity but don't live near me
South: you can live near me, but don't be uppity

Wasn't me that invented that, I forget who it was.

LOL if you believe that most people in the South, the home of state-sponsored segregation, are more OK with living near minorities. Half the time realtors won't even show houses in good neighborhoods to minorities, the other half the banks red-line them into lovely places.

# ¿ Feb 6, 2016 23:46

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Tide posted:

welfare stuffs

I'm not trying to be condescending, but are you aware that there is a lifetime cap on welfare, including food stamps? It's 60 months for Federal aid and Alabama state aid as well. They can still get aid for children with disabilities, but that's not welfare. And yeah, there can still be fraud for disability and unreported income, and there certainly is, but that's fraud and should be reported. You'll never have a system free of fraud. The whole "welfare queen" thing was mostly made up by Reagan and his cronies, and resulted in wholesale welfare reform in 1996.

# ¿ Feb 7, 2016 03:05

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

88h88 posted:

Dear lord American football is boring.

Do college matches have this many breaks to stand around and do nothing or is it just the big leagues? This is like gameshow levels of stringing it out for time. Advert advert advert advert advert 30 seconds of play, advert, crap commentary, advert, 30 seconds of play, advert...

Like listening to happy hardcore requires a plethora of mind altering substances to enjoy, does American football require similarly mind altering levels of booze or what? It seems the appeal right now is adverts??

The Super Bowl is the largest advertising opportunity of the year. It's by far the worst offender.

# ¿ Feb 8, 2016 01:21

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Rhyno posted:

One of my friend's dad is a d-day prepper, I'm just going to his house when poo poo goes down.

Where you will be promptly shot as an invader

# ¿ Feb 8, 2016 18:51

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Raluek posted:

An addition I have to make to this: Apparently, the Mini-SFP version of the Edgerouter-X has passive POE on all ports. I'm not sure if you can use one of the RJ45 ports as WAN/upstream, or if you are forced to use a Mini-SFP module. I haven't used an Edgerouter before, so I don't know how flexible its software is.

Raluek posted:

An addition I have to make to this: Apparently, the Mini-SFP version of the Edgerouter-X has passive POE on all ports. I'm not sure if you can use one of the RJ45 ports as WAN/upstream, or if you are forced to use a Mini-SFP module. I haven't used an Edgerouter before, so I don't know how flexible its software is.

I thought about going with the Edgerouter, but ended up with a Mikrotik instead. Half the price and the same capability, will do real routing protocols, BGP, MPLS, all that. I do use the Ubiquiti POE adapter though.

# ¿ Feb 10, 2016 23:57

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

meatpimp posted:

WAY too much of an impact for a sideswipe, look at the rear door crush and roof buckling.

In other news, Hell got a fresh new soul today. Goodbye, Scalia.

Best news I've heard this year.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2016 00:37

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

IOwnCalculus posted:

It has to do with the EPA suddenly proclaiming that it is (and apparently always was) illegal to modify / remove emissions equipment even on vehicles that are no longer driven on public roads. So any Spec Miata / E30 / LeMons / bomber car, or any other racecar that was once a registered car, must maintain all of its emissions equipment.

It doesn't have anything to do with street driven vehicles that continue to be street driven, since doing poo poo like test pipes was always illegal.

It's a bit ridiculous. Seems like they'd do better to ban small gas lawnmowers than to maintain emissions compliance on track-only production cars. It also doesn't do anything to reduce emissions on a purpose built chassis that was never emissions compliant.

So, I'm not a lawyer, but this guy says he is. His arguments seem reasonable, but I don't know for sure. I do know that SEMA's job is to freak out and pre-emptively get stuff moving in opposition to anything that might threaten their livelihood.

http://jalopnik.com/please-excuse-the-long-post-as-i-m-getting-a-lot-of-com-1758137608

SOME RANDOM INTERNET GUY (MAYBE A LAWYER) posted:

Please excuse the long post as I�m getting a lot of comments on this so I hope to break down all the arguments in one section. (Also it�s my birthday and I want to start billing so I�m not in so deep of a hole for this month!)

First point: The regulations themselves have a section specifying what vehicles the regulations apply to. It is as follows:

�A. Does this action apply to me?

This proposed action would affect companies that manufacture, sell, or import into the United States new heavy-duty engines and new Class 2b through 8 trucks, including combination tractors, all types of buses, vocational vehicles including municipal, commercial, recreational vehicles, and commercial trailers as well as 3/4-ton and 1-ton pickup trucks and vans. The heavy-duty category incorporates all motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 lbs or greater, and the engines that power them, except for medium-duty passenger vehicles already covered by the greenhouse gas standards and corporate average fuel economy standards issued for light-duty model year 2017-2025 vehicles.�

As you can see, it�s expressly clear that it applies only to heavy duty and medium duty vehicles EXCEPT medium duty vehicles already covered by light duty standards. That makes it pretty clear that light duty vehicles are out.

Second point: Patrick mentioned that the EPA stated that the �EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 1037.601(a)(3) to clarify that the Clean Air Act does not allow any person to disable, remove, or render inoperative (i.e., tamper with) emission controls on a certified motor vehicle for purposes of competition.� However, it�s important to note that 40 CFR 1037.601(a)(3) would be under 40 CFR 1037. 40 CFR 1037 covers heavy duty vehicles, not light duty vehicles. Light duty vehicles are covered under 40 CFR 86. You can�t reasonably apply a clarification buried in one section of regulations to another section. Such an interpretation is unlikely to stand up in court as if the EPA wanted the clarification to apply to light to heavy duty vehicles, they could have inserted the section into 40 CFR itself rather than 40 CFR 1037. (Think of 40 CFR as a tree and 40 CFR 1037 as a branch. Once it�s branched off, the words only cover that branch.)

Third point: McDonald (who works for SEMA) asked for clarification as to the EPA�s stance on converting certified vehicles to race cars. Now I�m not sure how he worded his question, but the key word here is �certified.�

By the EPA�s definition, certified vehicles are vehicles used for highway travel. They mention as such by stating that they�re primarily concerned with tampered vehicles used for road use. This is pretty much been the case for a long time. Basically, if you drive your vehicle on public roads, it needs to be certified.

However, the question becomes, if you take your car off highway, can it be de-certified. The EPA actually doesn�t particularly comment on this, but they�ve stated that they are primarily concerned with whether a vehicle is used on the highway or used exclusively for competition. In my opinion, that signals that the EPA isn�t going to go after your racecar.

Of course then, the question becomes why did McDonald say the EPA confirmed that you can�t convert certified vehicles into racecars. In my opinion, this comes down to wording. If he had asked whether certified vehicles that are used solely as racecars are exempt, the EPA would have likely told him no. My question would be, did he ask if it was possible to de-certify cars and it doesn�t appear from his statements that he did. Anyway, I�d like to see a transcript of the conversation.

Finally: As stated in the article, �Vehicles used on the street and track are restricted by environmental regulations,� McDonald. �We contend that if you convert a vehicle into a race car, and it only gets tracked, that is excluded.� But the EPA claims it�s always been this way, and the agency is simply clarifying the rule. If the EPA actually stated that it�s always been that converting a vehicle into a track only race car is excluded and that they�re not changing the regulations, but merely clarifying it, then they are on record for saying so. If that�s the case, then it�s a further point in favor of the interpretation that you can still have your track only race cars.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2016 04:55

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

I noticed my hair was thinning a few years back and promptly bought some clippers and buzzed it. It's the best decision, anything else reeks of desperation and everybody knows. There's nothing more pitiful and unattractive than a man trying to hide a bald spot.

# ¿ Feb 18, 2016 22:19

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

Tide posted:

You are the milk man's kid.

(I think hair genes come from your mother's side)

That's an Alabama myth. I believed it until I started going bald, cause my mom's side of the family has hair until they die.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2016 03:50

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

some texas redneck posted:

Holy mother of god, Quickbooks "support" is loving terrible.

They keep emailing me saying they're going to close my ticket because they haven't heard from me and because their "backend support" hasn't followed up. Which always results in the same reply from me - "are you loving kidding?". They keep saying that the error I'm encountering is "user actionable" and entirely my fault.

I've been trying to link a bank account for 6 weeks. Their product doesn't even ask for all of the details required by said bank to login to the account, but their product does give the correct URL to the bank's online banking. It'd be one thing if they just shrugged and said they don't support that bank's online banking, but they keep trying to close my ticket over "user error" while claiming they do support that bank.

They alternate between promising that they're working "fervently" to resolve my issue (the only time I've ever seen that word used has been in bad eastern European porns) and "you're not entering the correct login info, too bad".

So you're telling me that Quickbooks still exists. Weird.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2016 12:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:02

wallaka: Jun 8, 2010; Least it wasn't a fucking red shell

KozmoNaut posted:

Whoo boy, that's a big one.

War, corporate greed, the environment being systematically hosed over, corruption, poverty, hatred, racism, the list goes on and on.

Closest to home, we currently have our farming minister who has supplied falsified measurement data on the environmental impact of farming and fertilizers etc. to the government, and is known to be deeply involved in various farming lobby organizations, but the prime minister has just re-affirmed his unwavering 100% trust in her ability to be completely objective. The whole government is composed of corrupt corporate pawns and racist bordeline nazi scumbags.

And they got voted in, not in spite these facts, but because of them, as they have successfully convinced large parts of the population that brown people are inherently evil and are coming to take ARE JERBS and ARE WHITE WIMMEN.

It's depressing as gently caress.

You fell for it.

# ¿ Feb 25, 2016 09:53

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > February chat thread: Leap years make it longer, if you know what i mean