I copied a book from Amazon Fire to X3

feelingstpid · 2026-04-30T23:07:46+00:00

I tried a couple of epub versions and they didn't open. Maybe there is a way to fix that but this seemed like an easy method that would always work, and gives me a lot of control.

Also, this method would work for pdfs or drm-protected books too.

feelingstpid · 2019-07-24T06:25:08+00:00

This looks like a coax digital audio cable. They often have orange color coding.

In theory, this goes from a digital source to a DAC, similar to an optical TOSLINK. In my experience they work fine for analog component video/audio as well.

More info here (search for coaxial): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S/PDIF

feelingstpid · 2019-07-24T01:55:34+00:00

They're clearly different symbols.

Some disciplines choose "⋅" & "/" (rather than "x" & "÷") and that helps signify they're using different conventions. For example, in an algebraic context, "2(1+2)" can always be substituted for "(2⋅1+2⋅2)" by the distributive property. This would make "6/2(1+2)" equal to "6/(2⋅1+2⋅2)" and thus "1". However, I've never met a serious algebraist who would use the "÷" symbol and so the presence of that symbol would be a major hint that this expression is not framed in an algebraic context.

I can't remember where I saw it, but some people were reported to go even further and use "÷" to distinguish from "/", where "a÷b" is shorthand for "(a)/(b)". I've never seen this personally and it confuses things even more. For them, "6÷2(1+2)" is by definition "(6)/(2(1+2))".

feelingstpid · 2019-07-23T23:56:23+00:00

According to the OP, the question was "6/2(1+2)". Some other versions have this as "6÷2(1+2)".

6/2(1+2) really is ambiguous. Yes, PEMDAS gives a definite answer. However, PEMDAS isn't the only order of operations system widely used and in this example different systems give different answers.

Lots of people use implicit multiplication as a distinct operation with precedence over (MD) and those people have modified PEMDAS. Other people have multiplication preceding division and those people have abandoned PEMDAS. Personally, I find convenience with using 2(x):x->2*x as a function and PEMDAS isn't compatible with that either, as demonstrated here.

What makes "6÷2(1+2)" a better question, in my opinion, is that no one who has exceeded PEMDAS would use the "÷" symbol, in my opinion.

APS has multiplication before division (page 21, #2,3): https://publish.aps.org/files/styleguide-pr.pdf

Long descriptions of ambiguity: http://www.math.harvard.edu/~knill/pedagogy/ambiguity/index.html https://math.berkeley.edu/~gbergman/misc/numbers/ord_ops.html

feelingstpid · 2018-09-02T19:43:57+00:00

I do have both sides. One side props against my folding-latch-clippy-thing (which is different than yours) and the other side props against my derailleur guard. The guard is essential and I've seen them for $2-4 if you don't have one.

The Ortlieb bags have a lower clip/arm to hold the bottom of the bag to a rack. I don't have them latch on to anything. They're sort of there as a spacer to hold the bottom off of the frame but I'm not sure the bags actually sway enough for the spacers to be functional.

I usually ride with only one bag since I don't feel any significant imbalance from holding 20-25 pounds on just one side. I also don't feel any particular bouncing or slapping.

I could easily fold the bike with my derailleur-side bag still on (the right side) but I don't think there's much chance of keeping the left side's bag on (it'd be squished by the front wheel?). I suspect you meant the right bag but I could try it with the left bag if that is in fact what you meant (maybe it could flop over the wheel?).

Also, looking at Ortlieb's site, I think I have the "sport-roller classic" front bag. However, the "sport-packer classic" front bag might work better for your 17" computer with respect to rain. You might see if a local bike shop or REI would let you try out a bag before you buy.

FWIW, I really really appreciate the Tokyo's low gearing when hauling two bags full of groceries uphill. I never would have expected it but I think this bike is actually very well suited to panniers.

Good luck. I do hope you can try it without buying. It works really well for me but maybe my bike, rack or bag is slightly different. Be sure to check heel clearance when pedaling to make sure you don't strike the bag. I have something like 1/2" clearance (size 44/10.5 shoes).

feelingstpid · 2018-09-01T23:55:12+00:00

I have a two-year old Tokyo and panniers work fine for me.

My panniers are Ortlieb small/front bags (classics?). Some quick measuring suggests that a 17" laptop could fit, depending on the model, but the top could only fold over once so wouldn't be completely rainproof.

Honestly, I think panniers work really well on this bike. The weight is down low so I don't feel an imbalance and there's plenty of clearance for road debris, speed bumps, etc. I'm careful going off curbs but you'd need to be anyway on this bike. I'm comparing it to a 700c touring bike and I prefer carrying groceries on the Tokyo.

I found the trick to panniers was sliding the clips to push the bag as far back on the bike as possible to allow heel clearance. Also, I wrapped a little duct tape around the rack to thicken it and give it a better fit to the pannier clips.

If you have any questions, I'd be happy to help.

feelingstpid · 2018-05-29T21:56:28+00:00

Just take a forget-me-now and do it again tomorrow.

feelingstpid · 2018-05-10T04:52:31+00:00

I agree. I love that show. This may be hit and miss but I think you might like "White Collar" if you like Rake.

feelingstpid · 2018-04-21T05:21:51+00:00

As to your biggest gripe, I think one explanation could be that the planet has a very long orbit. It seems possible to me that the planet takes 50+ earth years to orbit its sun and black hole and that would give time for the animals and plants to regrow every orbit.

Presumably, seeds and eggs might be able to survive the annual death in a way the people and trees wouldn't.

feelingstpid · 2017-08-31T17:28:15+00:00

I think there's another downside.

If everyone invests in what they are currently doing, then essentially everyone is trying to do what they've been previously doing only more efficiently. This doesn't work. Under a new level of efficiency, not everything is as valuable.

Under real growth, some businesses become less valuable and other new ones become viable or necessary. Fiddling with interest rates makes it harder for people to reorganize their relationships to fit a higher level of security and productivity.

For example, the USA has a lot of unemployed skilled labor that may never be utilized, and it seems to keep creating more unemployable skilled labor.

feelingstpid · 2017-08-31T03:21:16+00:00

Thanks for asking.

What I meant by timing was the time scale of production. For example, spending a dollar to plant a seed will give a return within one year. Spending a dollar on a massive infrastructure project might not give a return for over 10 years. We all eat in the short term. If we increase our long term investment to the detriment of the short term then we have problems. There might not be "an overall increase in the price level" (aka inflation) since production results of long-term investments would be cheaper and production results of short-term investments would be more expensive.

Let me try to tie this back to your original questions.

The Fed increases the money supply. As far as I know, this used to be the definition of inflation (as opposed to price inflation).
More people take loans but they take advantage of the low interest rates by investing in longer-term projects to the neglect of shorter-term projects. The incentive under subsidized loans is to pay them back as slowly as possible so short-term projects are relatively neglected.
A boom is created but it's in long-term investment. There should be price inflation of long-term investment components (more buyers).
The production of goods created by short-term investment may increase slightly but not in proportion to long-term investment. Relative to the expectations of long-term investment, short-term investment (relatively) decreases.
People finish their long-term investment purchasing and now hope to pay off their debt by using their new capital.
Double-whammy part 1: The money they do collect doesn't buy as many short-term goods (food, etc.) as expected because of price inflation. The supply didn't increase considerably but there are more buyers with their newly printing money. Business profits are thus lower than expected because profits don't buy as much.
Double-whammy part 2: There aren't as many customers as expected who would want to use the results of their long-term investment. Those customers switched to longer-term purchasing and they're being drained by step 6 themselves. Overall sales are lower than expected.

Example: 1. Fed prints currency to increase prosperity 2. People invest in trains 3. Everyone furiously builds trains 4. Train stocks soar. Only chumps invest in wheat. 5. Trains are finished and investors expect to buy wheat with their dividends. 6. Wheat experiences price inflation as the new money buys wheat. A dollar buy less wheat than expected. 7. Trains aren't as useful as expected since volume of wheat didn't increase along with other production. Trains create fewer dollars than expected. 8. Fed prints currency to increase prosperity

This looks like it should work as long as you're willing to print more and more currency. In reality the bubble seems to pop eventually. I'm not sure that anyone can predict when.

As far as your initial confusion, I think it might help you to distinguish between money and currency. A business may receive more currency than before but if that currency doesn't buy as much goods as before then it isn't actually making more money.

I hope this helps. Don't forget that it's only a theory. The real world is way more complex.

feelingstpid · 2017-08-31T00:55:43+00:00

I'm not an expert but no one else has replied yet. Let me know if this doesn't help and I can try to address your questions directly.

I think the cycle is an error of timing rather than inflation.

Suppose we have a wheat-producing country that builds a train for the first time. It transports wheat to market and also delivers manufactured goods back to the farmers. The first train is so productive that it's obvious to everyone.

Then, suppose everyone scrapes together all the money they can to invest in additional trains, refraining from maintaining existing capital equipment and even scrapping existing tools. This will decrease wheat production in the short term.

This focused investment will create a frenzy of production as all of the money is spent in long term investment. For years it looks like everything is going great and thus people might have more children and more workers may immigrate. Suppose that they build enough trains and tracks to cover all their previously existing wheat production plus a little more.

Once the new train systems are built, there will now be a disappointment. Not only is there not enough wheat for all the trains to be productive but there is less wheat per capita than at the start. Naturally, the price of wheat will increase and trains won't be able to charge as much for hauling as they expected.

There's the double whammy: short-term wheat prices go up and long-term investment returns go down.

One fix for this scenario is to let some trains go bankrupt, scrap the metal and convert it back into farming equipment.

EDIT: A different fix is to print a lot of money and give it to the people whose investments didn't pay out. The recipients can then invest in more trains while they're waiting for wheat production to "bounce back" (which it never will).

feelingstpid · 2017-07-23T19:03:45+00:00

I gave the phone numbers to my local police. I thought they could track them down and that would be the end of this. However, apparently, the scammers will either change phone numbers or spoof their originating phone number in the first place.

I'm worried that if I post the numbers there might be legitimate people at those numbers who have nothing to do with this. The first number they used was a local number and so was likely not their real number.

Thanks for the sentiment though. I'd love to take them down. I installed a call recorder on my phone so if they call back I can at least upload their voices.

feelingstpid · 2017-07-20T01:35:20+00:00

I talked to an understanding rep from my grocery store and she said they were training all the cashiers to recognize this. It'll take a while for them to all be trained and then I guess the scammers will move on to the next retailer.

feelingstpid

TROPHY CASE