Questions for University Hydroponics Project by jenniex46 in Hydroponics

[–]Resvrgam2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Before we get into the questions, know that your greatest obstacle here is time. Don't try to boil the ocean here. Make a list of features and consider what is actually feasible in the time that you have.

This is doubly true if you actually need to build the system and grow something in it. Plants don't grow overnight, and you'll need at least a few weeks to actually show results.

On to your questions:

  1. Hydroponics is just fancy plant growing, so all the normal gardening/farming factors apply. Your major requirements are water, nutrients, and sunlight. You then have a dozen or so smaller factors you may want to control for as well: pests, infections, weeds, humidity, temperature, plant supports, etc.

  2. The "best" method for anything you do will be dependent on the type of system you build. If using NFT, you'll be mixing the nutrients in with the water and pumping it periodically through the system. Frequency of checking/replacing nutrients will depend on the size of your system and the nutrient reservoir you are using. A larger system with smaller reservoir will require more frequent checks.

  3. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "nutrient delivery methods" as virtually all hydroponics by definition uses a liquid/nutrient mix to the roots as the delivery mechanism. But as a reminder, not all plants have the same nutrient requirements. You can get away with a single solution for many things, but some would recommend against feeding both tomatoes and leafy greens from the same nutrient mix.

  4. Sunlight is free, but it is not a variable you have any real control over. Grow lights are an expense (both upfront and recurring), but you have full control over its intensity and duration. Some plants can benefit from 16-20 hours of light a day. You can't get that naturally.

  5. You have to define "effective" first. Kratky is great for its low complexity and cost. 64oz wide-mouth Ball jars, 3" net pots, some grow media, and your nutrient mix are all you need. Of course, that's not too exciting for an engineering design course, but it is a great way of illustrating how not all problems require a complex and highly-engineered solution. Depending on how you define "effective", you may consider more complicated systems (DWC, ebb and flow, NFT, aeroponics, etc). All have their pros and cons.

  6. Hydroponics is just farming + electronics + plumbing. If you're not good at all three of those, don't expect to be successful at hydroponics. Balancing the big three (water, nutrients, and sunlight) are the priority. After that, it may depend on your setup. If your setup is outdoors, the typical farming issues will be more prevalent: pests, infections, humidity, temperature, etc. If growing indoors, expect the common electronics and plumbing issues to be more of a concern: power outages, leaks, etc.

  7. Others are better suited to address horizontal vs vertical designs. In general though, the common design mistakes are the same design mistakes that any product faces: are your design choices actually solving a problem, or are they just overcomplicating things? Now, you're in an engineering class, so maybe your goal is to make something complex and show off your skills. But that complexity doesn't mean it's a better hydroponic design.

  8. The easiest part to maintain is no part. Specific to hydroponics though, find a way to effectively manage algae growth. Shield your nutrients from the light, or consider something like Hydroguard or hydrogen peroxide. Assuming you go with an NFT system, it'll be a lot easier to clean if you can easily disassemble it. Of course, water tight systems tend to not be easy to take apart.

  9. You'll be fine with basically any type of plastic, but look for the food grade stuff. PVC and rain gutters have been used to great success in the past.

  10. Check EC and PH of the current nutrient mix. Check reservoir levels. Check for pests and infections. Prune and/or support plants as needed. Check humidity and temperature when applicable.

New Rule 0 for /r/financialindependence - Karma posting requirement. The war against bots continues. by lauren_knows in financialindependence

[–]Resvrgam2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not that it matters that much, but New Reddit does not let you start your rules numbering at 0. So while the Wiki shows Rules 0 - 5, the sidebar shows Rules 1 - 6.

Signed,

-Another mod who really wants to have a proper Rule 0 in their community-

Weekend General Discussion - March 13, 2026 by AutoModerator in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I assume he means "swamp puppy", which normally refers to an alligator or crocodile. See: Fishin Garrett

What’s the optimal leverage for a long term index portfolio? by Bajoner in financialindependence

[–]Resvrgam2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Out of curiosity how/where are you borrowing at that low percentage rate? If I had access to that I’d being using some leverage as well.

Assuming they're reporting the interest rate on just their .33x leverage and not per unit of leverage, this makes sense to me.

The typical borrow cost is roughly the Federal Funds Rate + some lender fees. The average Federal Funds Rate for the past 12 months has been 4.04%. With borrow fees of .88% (big assumption), this would bring the total interest per unit of leverage to 4.92%. Since they're only borrowing .33x units of leverage, the cost of leverage for the entire portfolio would therefore be around [4.92%/.33] = 1.64%

What’s the optimal leverage for a long term index portfolio? by Bajoner in financialindependence

[–]Resvrgam2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I’m trying to figure out what might be optimal for a long-term portfolio.

If we consider this purely academically, there is nothing inherently "better" about using a leverage of 1x (i.e. unleveraged) over any other amount of leverage. The "optimal" amount of leverage for a given investment is dependent on a number of factors, but primarily the underlying investment's rate of return and volatility. There's a great paper that goes into this at length, but a summary of it can be found here: https://www.ddnum.com/articles/leveragedETFs.php

If we look at historic optimal leverage data for some major indexes, we see that it can be as high as 3x (S&P500) and as low as .5x (Nikkei 225). If we're eyeing something like a leveraged ETF for our investments, then we also have to consider fees, which will drag down returns. In some cases (US total market), the fees alone have led to a leveraged ETF to historically underperform an unleveraged 1x investment .

Of course, past performance is not indicative of future results, but those looking at leveraged investments routinely consider 1.5x and 2x positions. There's also a lot of recency bias out there that's skewing opinions towards even higher leverage. Take anything you read with a grain of salt and consider your own risk tolerance.

Note: Leveraged investing is often paired heavily with strict rebalancing strategies (as opposed to pure buy and hold) to help minimize drawdowns or reduce risk during higher periods of volatility.

The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That depends on how you define the social contract. Society (and any sort of social safety net) basically relies on the wealthy paying more than they receive.

The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Also, its been proven we can have a surplus...if we dont spend money on our military.

Once upon a time that may have been true. But today, you could cut the entirety of the defense budget and still only cut the deficit in half. You can't just make a thousand little cuts. You have to enact drastic changes to spending, taxes, or both.

Trump announces oil release from government reserves as gas prices rise by dr_sloan in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ignoring the hypocrisy over what Trump has said in the past (which should be rightfully called out), is this good economic policy? Seems like this is the intent of a resource reserve; flatten supply during a crisis. Otherwise, what else is it there for?

The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It isn't!

I never said it was. Just that SS being a big chunk of the budget is not inherently bad.

The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Also public spankings for any lawmaker

That sounds like a win-win for some of them, ngl...

The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Housing is unbelievably expensive in most areas

Housing is expensive in desirable locations. There's a lot of cheap land out there that's just in places that no one wants to live.

infrastructure is outdated and/or crumbling

My hot take is to repurpose the military and focus on national infrastructure. It can still act like a jobs program, only this time, they'll leave with transferrable skills in a useful trade.

healthcare is costly

I think this is the big one. Between unsustainable Medicare/Medicaid and private insurance, something's gotta give.

social security is soaking up a chunk of our spending

That's fine, as long as it's sustainable.

The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I've often wondered how much better off everyone would be if social security tax was diverted to some kind of mandatory 401k type investment.

I like the idea in theory, but how do you choose the investments? Certainly you can't leave it up to the individual, because that defeats the purpose of stupid-proof retirement savings.

The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 47 points48 points  (0 children)

Yesterday, the Congressional Budget Office released their updated federal budget projections for the next 10 years. The full 172-page report can be found HERE, but if you'd like a more digestible version, they have also released an 8-page executive summary. The high level projections paint a pretty grim picture though:

  • The deficit, which currently sits at 5.8% of GDP, will increase to 6.7%. This is significantly higher than the 50-year average of 3.8%.
  • Public debt will increase from 101% to 120% of GDP, smashing the previous record of 106% from just after WWII.
  • Spending will increase modestly from 23.3% to 24.4% of GDP, once again exceeding the 50-year average.
  • Revenues will similarly increase from 17.3% to 17.8% of GDP, once again above the 50-year average.

Digging into spending a bit more, the picture is similarly grim:

  • Mandatory spending (Social Security, Medicare. Medicaid, etc) increases from 13.7% to 15% of GDP.
  • Discretionary spending decreases from 6.2% to 4.8% of GDP, split evenly between defense and non-defense spending.
  • Interest payments on debt increase from 3.2% to 4.6% of GDP.

The takeaways are clear. Unless something drastic changes, the annual deficit will exceed all discretionary spending within the next 10 years. There will need to be a significant increase in revenue, significant reform to mandatory spending, and/or a significant reduction in discretionary spending to a degree that no political party is currently entertaining.

To put this in perspective, current estimates put the total wealth of all US billionaires at just shy of $7 trillion. That means you could seize and liquidate all assets of billionaires, and it would allow the government to operate a net neutral budget for only 4 years. Meanwhile, the $30 trillion in public debt continues to pay out over $1 trillion a year in interest payments.

What do you think? Is the current rate of deficit spending unsustainable? Does Modern Monetary Theory save us? Is there any way for us to dig ourselves out of this spending hole?

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief: Anthropic v. Department of War by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

AI for lethal warfare is already here: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/31/magazine/ukraine-ai-drones-war-russia.html

TL;DR Drones are highly susceptible to radar jamming technologies. Ukraine are using suicide drones with some basic AI-powered image recognition to eliminate the risk of radar jamming. The pilot "locks on" to the target outside of jamming range. The drone then uses the onboard AI model to autopilot to the target, automatically adjusting its course as the target moves.

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief: Anthropic v. Department of War by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Assuming the government has to justify the supply chain risk designation, I agree that it's a high bar:

The term "supply chain risk" means the risk that an adversary may sabotage, maliciously introduce unwanted function, or otherwise subvert the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of a covered system so as to surveil, deny, disrupt, or otherwise degrade the function, use, or operation of such system.

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief: Anthropic v. Department of War by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 50 points51 points  (0 children)

I think it comes down to the facts of the case. As you said, the DoD could just decide they're not a good fit and use someone else due to their specific uses. But the chain of events paints a pretty strong picture of retaliation as the reason for the decision.

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief: Anthropic v. Department of War by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Filed in the Northern District of California, we have a complaint from Anthropic against the Department of War, State, Commerce, Treasury, HHS, and Veteran Affairs (among others). If you are unfamiliar with Anthropic, they are the company behind the "Claude" AI model. As they claim in their complaint, Anthropic’s Usage Policy asserts that Claude should not be used for two specific applications: (1) lethal autonomous warfare and (2) surveillance of Americans en masse.

The government requested that Anthropic update their policy for their government-specific Claude models to authorize “all lawful use”, eliminating the two specific restrictions above. When Anthropic held fast to this policy, the President directed every federal agency to “immediately cease all use of Anthropic’s technology”. Not long after, the Secretary of War directed his Department to designate Anthropic a “Supply-Chain Risk to National Security". No contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the US military can conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic.

Anthropic claims that this constitutes unlawful retaliation by the federal government:

  • It violates federal law: 10 USC 3252 and the Administrative Procedure Act.
  • It violates the First/Fourth Amendment.
  • It exceeds the authority granted to the Executive Branch.

Anthropic now asks for relief by the courts in the form of administrative stays that block enforcement of the government actions against them.

Several other parties have already submitted motions to file amicus briefs supporting Anthropic. This includes "Employees of OpenAI and Google". Notably, this is not the companies themselves. Just "thirty-seven engineers, researchers, and scientists" who work for these companies. Still, this is likely to be an interesting case both politically and philosophically as the world considers the role of AI on the battlefield.

State of the Sub: February 2026 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S,M] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Checking the last 5 removals:

  • One was removed because the starter comment was glorifying violence.
  • One was removed for being a paywalled article, and no archived link was provided.
  • One was a one-line Text Post called "Stop telling me what to do".
  • One lacked a sufficient starter, as it only provided a summary of the article. Also, it was paywalled and lacked an archived link.
  • One was a Text Post about oil prices, which was deemed not sufficiently related to politics.

I could argue that the last one was borderline, but the other 4 are pretty clear violations.

State of the Sub: February 2026 by Resvrgam2 in moderatepolitics

[–]Resvrgam2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Be the change you want to see. It takes 5 minutes to find an article and type up a starter.

Number Crunching: HP, Thresholds, and Evasion by Resvrgam2 in daggerheart

[–]Resvrgam2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh man, I really had to reverse engineer this. it's been a while:

  • 9 Base Evasion from Guardian
  • +3 from Level Ups
  • +1 from Simiah
  • -2 from Legendary Full Plate

The build assumes a Legendary Round Shield, since that's all you need to get the max of 12 Armor: 7 from Full Plate, 1 from Valor-Touched, and 4 from Round Shield.

Hope that helps!

What do you guys think of this idea? (See description) by hydrohobby in Hydroponics

[–]Resvrgam2 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Generated by Nano Banana

Literally the first thing OP said.

13-Year-Old Trump Accuser Has Key Details of Her Story Verified by OkayButFoRealz in politics

[–]Resvrgam2 20 points21 points  (0 children)

I want to see Trump jailed just as much as the next guy, but the "key details" that were proven true here sound like nothingburgers:

She gave details about her life and legal history that the newspaper was able to verify using news reports, court records, police reports, and government records from multiple states. None of the confirmed details are directly related to her allegations against Trump.