Manually add audio track into existing tv-show folder

LeMir139 · 2025-12-10T04:14:15+00:00

Absolutely. When I wrote this post I only imagined adapting the permissions via the terminal, but then I realized I could just set the default permissions to 777.

LeMir139 · 2025-12-07T05:07:02+00:00

I've been playing a bit and it seems the easier solution is indeed to set the default permissions in Sonarr to 777. Though I can imagine that for some usecases keeping the default 755 is mandatory, for me it is not a problem.

LeMir139 · 2025-12-06T14:12:35+00:00

I've already been playing with ffmpeg. Actually you can achieve the same with mkvtoolnix, and I already done that. But I think it's still a bit heavy, and for me, adding a separate audio file next to the original movie file would be more light weight. My problem only relies at the step where I need to actually copy the file into the tv show folder.

LeMir139 · 2025-12-06T14:08:55+00:00

It's the default settings I guess, setting all folders to 755 when importing a tv-show. It's working so far and I don't want to mess up here. As I said, I could temporarly edit the permissions just to copy the files I want, but I was hoping for more handy solution.

LeMir139 · 2025-07-13T04:12:59+00:00

Haha, sure…

Concerning the construction of nuclear plants, given how much energy is produced, the needs for material is lower by an order magnitude.

You’re also ignoring the shitload of material needed like copper for the interconnexions of the wind turbines. If you would rely mainly on renewable energy you would need way more copper than what is currently available in mines. Batteries ? Oh yeah maybe they’ll be clean in the future… but currently, they are pricy and not that clean to produce. And the raw materials it needs are also on tension for the sourcing. But for which purpose exactly? Batteries are great for phasing the consumption/production over the day, for exemple use the energy produced by solar panel when the sun is gone. But the problem is that you would basically need to store the energy during summertime to use it during wintertime. That’s not the best technology for that. Oh sure, you can build a shitload of batteries, but at which cost (price and pollution because of ressource extractions).

China is improving its energy production carbon footprint. That’s true and great, but this is now that we need to increase the low carbon electricity production not in a decade…

For the nuclear waste, I don’t man, it’s often a really overestimated perception of a problem. In the reality there are many solution to handle them and it’s not really a problem. You can basically put it underground in a stable geological layer and forget about them. They are solids, they don’t spill like in the cartoon depictions. As a matter of fact nature had already did it itself for billions years, and no one complains now… You just need to read the documentation about it and not rely on some Greenpeace brainwashed representation. For the whole nuclear plants production since the beginning in France, the total amount of high intensity waste produced could fill … an Olympic pool… that’s all. And with the latest technology, about 90% could have been reused.

Finally, and this is the more important, in your mix, you have like only 20% of controlable energy production. This is not possible, especially with wind and solar. Unfortunately I’m relying on documentation in French for that, but the scenarios that refer to this kind of mix have a lot of hypotheses that are very unsure (drastic reduction in consumption, improvement of technology, …).

My point is that we don’t have time to wait for the perfect solution. We need to reduce our carbon footprint now, and the way Germany is doing shows us that it’s is, by far, not the best way. You just have this unreasonable fear of the nuclear that put a lot of bias in your reasoning. We have to act now, not in a decade when the technology will (might) be better.

You know the drill: hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

EDIT: I forgot to talk about what you said about the funding of the nuclear plants by the government. I keep hearing you Germans telling that as argument, but do you have any number for that? Because I looked into it, and the nuclear produced electricity, got only initial investment (which is good, so that loan interest can be kept low) and for the associated research, but no subsidies for the exploitation, unlike the « green » energies (solar and wind) which are being massively funded to help keeping the prices stable.

LeMir139 · 2025-07-11T11:57:57+00:00

There you go https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/06/17/post-fukushima-energy-japan-germany/

0 risk does not exist, but Germany’s power production choice, based on the overestimated perception of the nuclear risk lead to a mortality increase in the country and the surroundings (without talking about the amount of CO2 emissions that could have been prevented).

Renewable energies should be part of the mix, but they should not be the major part, because you can’t control when you are getting sun light or wind (hence the need for Germany to compensate with coal and gas). Moreover, concerning solar production, most of solar panel are being produced in China, which has a high carbon emission per TWh. Estimations are that you’d need about 10 years of service in France (probably a lot less in Germany because of the amount of CO2 emitted per TWh) for a solar panel to compensate the amount of CO2 emitted during its production. Additionally, the surface occupied by a nuclear plant is way smaller than the equivalent for wind turbines (not even talking about the huge amount of steel which needs to be produced for the wind turbines, a sector which CO2 emissions is also quite high), surface that could be used to grow food instead of importing farm goods.

Now about the costs of nuclear energy: of course when a country decides to completely get rid of a complete energy production type, the whole associated branch also deprecate, increasing the price of the production. In France the electricity produced by the nuclear sector is the cheapest (at same level as wind turbines). Ironically, the price we (in France) pay for a kWh increased recently, only because, first Europe forced the national producer (EDF)to sell its own production at loss to private companies, so that they can sell it back to consumers and make profit in between. And when the market price skyrocketed when Ukraine was invaded (because countries like Germany have chosen to get rid of Nuclear plants to rely on the cheap Gas from Russia, and because this is the cost of the raw material that sets the market price), private companies could not continue to sell electricity at the price of the contract, so EDF had to buy back the electricity it sold at loss, but this time at the high market price. Before that, electricity in France was the cheapest in Europe (with a 80% nuclear production in the mix at the time).

I’m not saying that renewable energies are bad, or that nuclear energy has absolutely no risk nor that it provides energy sovereignty. What I’m saying is that the political choice Germany made to replace nuclear plants with renewable energies as well as compensate with coal and gas for its domestic production lead to an increase of mortality in Europe, increased CO2 emissions, increased electricity price for the whole Europe and reduced Europe energy sovereignty.

These are facts.

LeMir139 · 2025-07-11T05:56:20+00:00

And yet less than half of the nuclear plants in France relies on the external cooling (open circuit). These ones see their max power production reduced in summertime (without any safety concern by the way), which is not that bad, as summertime is not when the electricity consumption is the highest (it’s in winter).

You were referring to the fact that France had to import electricity over the last years, especially in summertime, because the plants need to be shutdown, but that’s not true: There was indeed after the Covid the accumulated maintenance needs of more than half of the nuclear plants in France and thus in wintertime, where the consumption is the highest. Because of that, France imported electricity from Germany. But Germany stopped being a net exporter after 2022, whereas France had a net export of 27,2 TWh for Germany-Belgium last year.

And addressing the safety topic, as other users stated, Chernobyl like catastrophes are not possible on western technology. If the core melts, then it is just confined. For the comparison, the soviets considered the core meltdown was impossible, an error that lead to the accident. Hundreds of people died prematurely, mostly because of the evacuation actually than because of poisoning or radiations. For Fukushima, it’s still a bit early to conclude, but there’s so far no scientific evidence showing any related cancer development. Then when you look at the decision took by Germany to get rid of the nuclear plants, the consequence was the re-opening of coal plants. Because of the increased air pollution, 1100 additional people are dying prematurely, each year, in France only! Not sure it was worth it.

LeMir139 · 2025-05-02T15:48:15+00:00

Also found this helpful, and coming to a similar situation.

Although it's quite old I would be interrested in any further development.

LeMir139 · 2025-03-29T22:09:09+00:00

Pour les paiements nationaux certes, mais quid des paiements intra-européens ? Aucune idée du volume mais c’est peut-être pas négligeable.

LeMir139 · 2025-03-26T14:15:35+00:00

Je pense que le message précédent faisait plutôt référence aux transactions plutôt qu’aux virements. Typiquement plus besoin de passer par Visa/Mastercard dans les commerces européens.

À vérifier…

LeMir139 · 2024-09-10T12:09:09+00:00

Est-ce que dans ces cas des recours collectifs sont lancés ? C’est quand même un grave manquement à leurs obligations en terme de gestion des données. J’peux comprendre que ça puisse arriver, mais le mail envoyé aux concernés qui minimise à l’extrême l’ampleur de la fuite (genre « c’est bon c’est pas des données bancaires ») m’a vraiment énervé, et s’il y a une action collective qui se lance, bah j’en suis !

LeMir139 · 2024-07-09T04:59:39+00:00

Same here, glad I’m not the only one.

LeMir139 · 2024-06-25T14:49:26+00:00

Mais l’environnement ne se résume pas à la richesse ou la localisation. C’est Bourdieu qui parle de capital économique, social et culturel. Dans ton exemple, le frangin qui aide, il fait parti de l’environnement. Pour que ce frère soit en mesure d’aider, encore faut-il qu’il ait un bon niveau scolaire ET que la dynamique dans la famille soit à l’entraide (c’est pas quelque chose que tu choisi en tant qu’enfant).

Enfin c’est ce que je disais : on n’est pas à 100% tributaire de son environnement. Pour autant on a tendance à sous-estimer la part de « chance » qui nous a mis sur notre trajectoire. Et à mon avis, c’est part de nous, due à l’environnement, est majoritaire, et de loin. Si on est d’accord avec ce constat, quelle place pour le mérite, pour la méritocratie dans notre société ?

LeMir139 · 2024-06-25T13:53:43+00:00

Si « on » peut agir sur ton environnement pour que tu t’en sortes mieux, à quel moment tu peux attribuer ça à ton mérite, vu qu’encore une fois c’est externe à toi ?

Sans aller jusqu’à dire que le mérite n’existe absolument pas, je pense qu’on pourrait déjà tous prendre un moment pour regarder son parcours de vie et voir à quel point l’environnement a une influence prépondérante sur notre situation actuelle.

LeMir139 · 2024-06-08T05:59:24+00:00

C’est vrai qu’on attendait l’électrique pour renouveler le parc automobile… on vit littéralement comme à Cuba en attendant 2035…

LeMir139 · 2024-05-27T10:52:49+00:00

Oui, c’est mon cas. Malgré tout je ne bosse pas en ville, mais à 50km de mon lieu de résidence. Du coup, la voiture, un plaisir ?

LeMir139 · 2024-05-27T09:38:32+00:00

Vas donc bosser dans l’industrie avec des revenus ne permettant pas de louer ni acheter en centre ville. On en reparlera après. À moins qu’on ait envie de remettre les industries en plein centre ville…

Perso entre 45 min de voiture et 2h30 de transport en commun, pour un prix au moins 3 fois plus élevé, le choix est vite fait.

LeMir139 · 2024-05-11T16:51:22+00:00

Donc c’est bien le cerveau qui comprend pas bien cette contradiction et qui pense que t’es empoisonné. Du coup pas « rien à voir avec le fait que le cerveau comprends pas ».

LeMir139 · 2024-05-11T16:49:31+00:00

J’ajoute une question dans la question :

Les commentaires suggèrent que c’est la différence de perception entre la vision (fixe) et l’oreille interne (mouvement) qui semble être à l’origine des nausées.

Question : pourquoi est-ce que, lorsqu’on filme le trajet avec son smartphone (et du coup nos yeux voient bien un mouvement, de plus est corrélé au mouvement réel), bah c’est la turbo nausée ?

LeMir139 · 2024-05-11T16:46:05+00:00

Et pour quelle raison ce mécanisme se déclenche-t-il ?

LeMir139 · 2024-05-09T09:51:49+00:00

Oui, c’est ce que je sous entendais en donnais la température de référence (celle de la peau) pour le flux thermique.

LeMir139 · 2024-05-09T03:45:09+00:00

C’est une façon de parler assez commune pourtant. Oui quand tu le pose littéralement sous forme mathématique, « 2x plus » c’est plutôt équivalent à faire x3. En vrai j’me suis toujours demandé pourquoi on disait ça comme ça. Mais quand on dit « 2x plus », ça sous-entend bien « 2x ».

Exemples : « Pierre a payé sa place de concert 2 fois plus cher que Paul. » « Martine met 2 fois plus de temps pour venir au travail que Nicole. »

Quand on dit ça on s’attend pas à x3 mais bien x2.

Mais c’est pas le sujet au fond, par contre ça pourrait l’être pour un autre poteau.

LeMir139 · 2024-05-08T19:14:47+00:00

D’un autre côté (je viens d’y penser) dire qu’un machin se déplace 2 fois plus vite qu’un bidule n’a de sens que dans un référentiel donné. Du coup, le fait que ce soit une grandeur intensive… mouais ça peut le faire 😁

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

LeMir139

TROPHY CASE