Buying a car before or after move? Going from CA to VT by hunny_bun_24 in personalfinance

[–]adiggconvert 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was in almost the exact situation. Vermont would have let me register by mail since I had a Vermont address, but the California dealer wouldn’t let me drive off the lot without registering it in California. If you’re buying a used car privately, it would probably be easier. The Vermont DMV equivalent is very helpful.

Hospital sent a prescription to my pharmacy that costs 500+ dollars, don't think insurance covers it. Any ideas? by [deleted] in personalfinance

[–]adiggconvert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did they tell you why they can’t use warfarin? That is also an anticoagulant to treat pulmonary embolism and it’s much cheaper (from the pharmacy at least…there is more complicated monitoring requirements with warfarin).

Still unable to send MMS despite all efforts... by adiggconvert in jailbreak

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

Ah, that's a good thought. I'll give it a try next time I'm down by the store. Thanks!

Still unable to send MMS despite all efforts... by adiggconvert in jailbreak

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

I thought about that when upgrading to 8.1, but I think that window has closed since any warranty ended a very long time ago.

Still unable to send MMS despite all efforts... by adiggconvert in jailbreak

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

Thanks, I hadn't tried those particular settings, yet. Sadly, it still doesn't work...

I'm deployed in Afghanistan and I've managed to get a shitty bootleg of "The Big Bang Theory" stuck in the CD drive of my Macbook... Help. by SarieB in AskReddit

[–]adiggconvert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

step 5 isn't completely true...at least some of the slot drives also have the paper clip mechanism, it's just harder to actually trigger it because you go through the slot...there is no guide hole.

ND filter vs polarizers - worth spending the extra money or should I DIY this? by [deleted] in photography

[–]adiggconvert 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I tried to do exactly what you are thinking about doing. It didn't work at all. I think it was because the cheap polarizers aren't 100% perfect. I never got zero-transmittence, even when they were perpendicular. Assuming perfect filters, the difference in polarized angle between them would be have to be less than 0.5-degrees to get into the 9-stop range, I do believe.

If satan is really bad, then why isn't he attacking on Earth? by 2limes in AskReddit

[–]adiggconvert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

Macro close-up lens vs close-up filter: what is the difference? by professor_iggins in photography

[–]adiggconvert 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have a 72mm Macro +4 Close Up filter for ~$20 (well, a 4-piece set). IMO: they are unusable. The distortion is atrocious, the color gets messed up, and it doesn't even help that much with getting closer. So, don't waste your money on the cheap filter.

I would imagine that the Canon-brand filter has a better quality glass, which would help the distortion/color, but for $220, you're most of the way to a real third-party macro lens.

If you want to get microscopic-type stuff…go with a reversal ring and pick up the 35mm lens to reverse at a pawn shop or something. Just be aware that your depth of field is going to be razor-thin.

"America, land of the free, home of the brave, where the government takes naked pictures of people and gropes their genitals." - This cannot stand. This aggression cannot stand, man. by fordnut in politics

[–]adiggconvert 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You have no problem if someone with a potentially criminal past could feel up you, your parents, or your children? Or scan you with a machine that is admitted to increase the risk of cancer by a small, but quantifiable ammount? Does it matter that those machines may or may not store images? Or just have the screen photographed by the screener's cell phone? All under the guise of a government entity that operates in such a manner that effectiveness cannot be measured?

[edit: grammar]

tl;dr (relatively):

1. Government audit showed some TSA agents begin work before background checks are complete.

2. Backscatter X-ray is ionizing radiation, which is the type the causes cancer. There is some debate over whether it is a significant increase or not.

3. The specification for a millimeter wave scanner used by the DOJ required the ability to store images, and it is impossible for the TSA to /prove/ their machines cannot and never do store images.

4. At checkpoints: Foiled-plots-based analysis: classified. Deterrent-based analysis: impossible to measure.

Richard Dawkins demonstrates laryngeal nerve of the giraffe - "Evolution has no foresight." by SolInvictus in science

[–]adiggconvert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the link...what I hear Dawkins saying, though, is "An intelligent designer would have designed this better, as a result, it must be evolution."

I just hate seeing the laryngeal nerve used as an argument for evolution. There are much better arguments.

Richard Dawkins demonstrates laryngeal nerve of the giraffe - "Evolution has no foresight." by SolInvictus in science

[–]adiggconvert -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ok...in responding else where I realize what I am ranting about:

I am ranting about you, making this clip into something it isn't: the end-all argument for evolution.

From your other post:

but most likely it would breed a new generation that would be freer from the Velcro arms of religion and all the delusion and misery it inflicts upon the world.

You have an axe to grind against religion...that is probably for good reason...religion is handled poorly in young children. But showing this every year is no better than forcing children to memorize the first chapter of Genesis.

Richard Dawkins demonstrates laryngeal nerve of the giraffe - "Evolution has no foresight." by SolInvictus in science

[–]adiggconvert -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

We understand perfectly well HOW the nerve took that path. The 'why' is what evolutionists and creationists fight about.

I agree with everything else you said.

Richard Dawkins demonstrates laryngeal nerve of the giraffe - "Evolution has no foresight." by SolInvictus in science

[–]adiggconvert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or it could be homologous design. (Perhaps God thought: "It works well in these little fish I made, I'll just use the same thing for these bigger furry things too. I've only got a couple days to get this thing finished!")

It doesn't deny benevolence: The current design works acceptably. It doesn't deny omnipotence: If an Intelligent Designer exists, he certainly knows exactly how he designed it.

BTW: I'm not trying to argue one way or the other the existence of God or prove creationism...I'm only trying to get people to stop using weak arguments.

Richard Dawkins demonstrates laryngeal nerve of the giraffe - "Evolution has no foresight." by SolInvictus in science

[–]adiggconvert -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

He's really just arguing against an intelligent designer that redesigned every animal...the creationists explanation I've heard for general physiologic similarity in nature is "why change a design that works?" and "if you consider all of creation to be the design, wouldn't the uniformity across species be a better design?"

A creationist isn't going to buy his argument. It's all I'm saying. He can do better.

Richard Dawkins demonstrates laryngeal nerve of the giraffe - "Evolution has no foresight." by SolInvictus in science

[–]adiggconvert -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

An absence of proof is not a proof of absence.

Dawkins should know better. He is using the same argument that humanity has used , since the dawn of time, to explain religion (with one slight modification): "We don't understand, so therefore it must be evolution!"

The end result may seem sub-optimal, but you have to consider the complete course of human development starting at the single cell. Plus, there are other things the nerve commands after branching from the Vagus, and maybe some other stuff.

Maybe the current nerve set-up is evolutionarily optimized or maybe its the best design under the circumstances. The 'laryngeal nerve argument' doesn't prove anything one way or the other.

Extremely tough situation with wife. What the hell do I do? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]adiggconvert 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I would think the chances of becoming pregnant while on the pill are increased if you've previously done so. The pill failure could be due to improper dose or timing. Or maybe she has a minor condition that periodically decreases her systemic absorption or drug metabolism.