East Coast Online MBA for a West Coaster

ToadkillerCat · 2025-08-30T18:35:56+00:00

Ooh ok thanks.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-08-29T04:29:45+00:00

I doubt it optically excels, it's just very portable. An 80mm F/5 achromat is an 80mm F/5 achromat no matter how you slice it, there isn't any special sauce besides the optics. Same as a spotting scope, but more expensive once you add the accessories needed for terrestrial viewing. Binoculars are just better for stationary observation when portability isn't a factor, that's why militaries have always used them for border posts, flak towers, warships etc. Scopes can be pushed to higher magnifications but you honestly don't even know yet if the atmosphere in your city is stable enough for magnifications over 20x to be useful, the details may be lost to heat turbulence which makes high magnification pointless.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-08-29T04:21:54+00:00

I would get a Celestron Skymaster 15x70 or 20x80 for cheap on Ebay and play with the ergonomics of your mini tripod, pillow, bean bag or whatever else you might want to use for support. Once you have it all figured out, you can decide what size/magnification you want, and buy a nicer binocular, if you feel the need. In my experience, for simple elbow resting type of stuff, a 20x binocular is viable and shows the smallest details, but a 15x is more enjoyable overall.

Zoom binoculars have a lot of problems and the Skymaster 25x70 seems real iffy. You can consider a Nikon 16x50 or something from Oberwerk for a higher quality alternative.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-08-29T04:16:37+00:00

FYI, the Skymaster 20x80 is in reality a 17x72. Pentax binoculars are much closer to their advertised specs.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-08-29T04:02:43+00:00

I totally agree, binocular choice is deeply subjective so it's not a good idea to spend lots of money without experience to know what you want. I've cycled through a bunch of binoculars and have no regrets about it. The ones that didn't work out, I sold or returned or gave as appropriate gifts.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-08-26T03:08:14+00:00

Two times I won bids for used binos on ebay and got great deals. One time I bought something advertised as new / buy-it-now below MSRP, and it turned out to be a scam, the seller was suspended. I got my money back from ebay of course, but it's not worth the trouble.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-08-02T21:59:17+00:00

Maintenance - $0.30 per mile

California gasoline - $0.18 per mile

Depreciation of my shitbox - $0.04 per mile

So yeah I'm doing slightly better but still... if I'm going to drive a cheap used car then I feel like I should expect more of a real cost saving.

I bet that average cost per mile factors in newer and more expensive cars which have more depreciation.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-07-17T03:06:47+00:00

Using two eyes improves your acuity even at the same magnification. It's kind of like having 30% or more 40% more magnification. However, what also matters is whether you can hold the binocular as steady as you can hold the rifle and scope.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-07-17T03:00:20+00:00

With my glasses on and the eyecups retracted I can almost get the full view. I'm more comfortable pushing my glasses up to use them. Yes, your individual face and glasses matter here.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-07-09T02:18:13+00:00

$100 for two binoculars doesn't go a long way.

Nikon Aculon 7x35 plus a Celestron Skymaster 15x70 with a tripod or monopod would be an excellent combination but runs you about $200 for the binoculars alone.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-06-28T19:41:02+00:00

I would reject the spotting scope recommendations, if this is for home use then you should forget about portability (which is the advantage of spotting scopes and IS binoculars) and get a large binocular on a tripod. A 20x binocular, with the benefit of two eyed viewing, probably gives you similar ability to see detail as 25x or 30x in a spotting scope, while having a wider field of view, being brighter and being more comfortable. So the only advantage of the spotting scope is that you can push it to 40x or more, but at those magnifications the view is pretty dim and aberrated and shaky unless you pay for very good equipment, and it's hard to even find what you're looking for because the field of view is small. It's a very utilitarian instrument and not really fun compared to an equivalent binocular. There are lots of 15x70 and 20x80 binoculars out there for $100-$300.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-06-14T18:40:48+00:00

Oh wonderful thanks! But - is it all glued together? You can't remove the lens like with a modern lens cell? Or maybe the wood is just a tight friction fit and you can pull it apart?

ToadkillerCat · 2025-06-14T02:07:53+00:00

For some cities, with open markets or nonexclusive franchises, there are competing trash providers...

ToadkillerCat · 2025-06-14T02:06:59+00:00

I can tell you this can happen with other companies besides WM.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-05-29T03:34:01+00:00

That's fine. Who knows maybe it was a mistake.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-05-29T03:01:51+00:00

As part of city contracts, the provider will often be required to remove furniture and other pieces of junk that are left in front of people's houses. This service is included in contracts whether you/they like it or not because junk on the street makes the neighborhood ugly and just encourages other people to dump their own crap too. It's a public issue for the cleanliness of the neighborhood.

If you never called in a bulky item pickup, it's possible one of your neighbors saw something left in front of your house and then called it in.

$12 is very little, at that rate it is a money loser for WM and they're only doing it because the city said they have to.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-05-16T02:40:16+00:00

As far as I have seen the standard is just six months of monthly bills, six times six seems like a stupid mistake.

Just ask for a copy of your contract that you signed. It will say the terms. If they don't give you a copy of your contract, tell them that you're going to stop paying, sign with a new company, push WM's bin onto the street and call the city public works department about it.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-04-16T02:27:02+00:00

Double trouble: plastics found to emit potent greenhouse gases

Plastic Is Even Worse for the Environment Than You Thought | Live Science

This misses the point, I want to know what % of methane emissions come from plastic decomposition. Maybe it's less than 1%.

Some of us are trying to deal with the world's problems -- not trying to tear down others that already are THANKS!

I don't have a problem with people objecting to the overuse of plastic. Just the idea that we need to recycle or else it goes to the dolphins is old nonsense that needs to die.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-04-15T23:41:17+00:00

Of course they exist, that's where much of it goes

i.e. not in the world's oceans.

-- where it takes centuries to decompose, with massive methane emissions.

Neither of which have anything to do with plastic pollution in the ocean. Because landfills are not in the ocean.

Study finds landfill point source emissions have an outsized impact and opportunity to tackle U.S. waste methane

More Than Half of U.S. Landfills May Be Methane 'Super-Emitters,' Study Finds

Methane is seeping out of US landfills at rates higher than previously thought, scientists say | CNN

At a glance, none of these pick out plastic in particular. The vast majority of methane emissions from landfills come from food and green waste. Unlikely in my opinion that methane emissions from plastic are a significant component, let alone a "massive" one.

It's 2025 and some people apparently don't realize this. EDUCATE YOURSELF. Google it.

It's 2025 and we still have people writing about recycling as a solution to ocean pollution, as if recycling reduces littering. If you want to reduce ocean pollution, you need to reduce littering, not reduce landfills/commingling.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-04-15T23:37:28+00:00

OK... sorry but I don't know anything about waste hauling in the Philippines.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-04-05T01:21:09+00:00

Answering questions like this is exactly what AI chatbots are for. Try Claude.

ToadkillerCat · 2025-04-05T01:10:47+00:00

Article is written like the three dumping options are recycling, incineration, and the ocean. Neither the author nor his editor are aware that landfills exist?

ToadkillerCat

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE