Potentially; but the more the side filters fill/clog up, the more resistance they’ll create, causing more air to be drawn from the other less-resistant filters. (As long as there’s actually a gap between the fan and side filters ofc)

I tried this with a single filter on a standard box fan a month ago, but it didn’t have enough pressure to draw much air through a single filter; prefering to pull air through the fan itself, around the edges of the fan blades in the gap between its rotor and box frame.

A carpet blower like what op used would have much less issue with that.

Nice! Put in a dozen or so edits in my area, but wasn’t sure when they’d go live.

What’s the usual schedule like, monthly?

Pihole FTW

This looks like hell…

It’s only one lane of traffic either way and you’ve got to merge in and out of two separate traffic flows in a short distance just to go ‘straight’ through to the other side.

Excuse me while I go block that whole domain in my network…

I don’t think that’s true, just because I’m pretty sure even users that aren’t explicitly subscribed still see the downvotes. I could be wrong 🤷🏻

Either way, the data is still there and is passed around to those that choose to see it. Disabling downvotes doesn’t actually prevent items being downvoted, it just hides them from those that don’t want to see it.

When downvotes are disabled on an instance; they’re just not displayed to that instances users. Nor is the downvote button displayed (so those users can’t downvote).

The instance will still receive and track downvotes from outside instances; showing the data to other instances that don’t hide it. The data is still there, it’s just that the instance admins chose to not display them to their own users.

Not sure what’s up with the downvotes, that’s a legitimate concern any time you’ve got a male plug supplying power… It literally IS a solar wallsocket generator with what’s essentially a suicide cord permanently attached.

I’m sure they’ve put some protection in place; but still.

I wonder how fast that shut off is. Will it prevent a shock if you unplug and touch the male plug?

Apparently American units are coming with an outlet you install in place of a standard outlet which does monitor the combined power

This doesn’t sound right: measuring at one outlet doesn’t grantee you’re measuring the full circuit load unless you can be absolutely sure it’s the very first outlet in a branch circuit specifically. A ring circuit throws that idea out entirely. To measure reliably, you’d have to measure at the breaker itself as well as the solar inverter.

Maybe a replacement breaker, that measures and comunicates with the imverter?

You run into compatibility issues with the different electrical panel manufacturers though…

Idk, I’ll have to get my hands on one of these kits when available and look closer.

I picked 600w for nice round amperage numbers in the above math; even just a few hundred watts presents the same issues though. You could fit a decent size set on the balcony, covering the outside of the balcony railing.

I wouldn’t be so sure on the second point. I live in a 3bed apartment with 2 main outlet circuits. 1 supplying the livingroom and half of one bedroom. Another supplying the other two bedrooms + the other half of the 3rd bedroom.

Between the main entertainment/lighting electronics in the livingroom, the portable ac in the adjoining bedroom, the watercooler/heater, and recently a set of ebike battery chargers; that circuits base load sits around 6.5a during a charge cycle, with peaks right around 15a when the ac runs+the water cooler, occasionally peaking right up to 16.5a. I’ve tripped the breaker a few times running the vacuum at the wrong time ontop of those.

The other bedrooom circuit is similarly loaded with a couple computers, device chargers, and another ac (cooling is crap in this place plus our unit faces the sun all day); though not quite as heavily as the other circuit.

The living room circuit is where a solar system would be installed (it’s where the outdoor outlet is connected) and the main appeal of a system like that is not having to modify wiring since we’re not allowed to touch that as tennants (the corporate landlord is rather unlikely to allow modifications even from a licensed electrician either).

Supposedly the solar inverter would shut off during a mains power outage, but is it fast enough to prevent shock if the plug was disconnect and touched?

IDK, interesting systems, just curious about them. I’ll have to look closer when they’re actually available.

I am kind of curious how over-current protection is achieved with these systems.

Don’t get me wrong; I think the concept is good.

But the circuit breaker is sized to protect the wiring between it and the outlets/devices it supplies. If you’re already close to the max current the breaker can supppy, then you add on a second current source (the panels inverter), you could feasibly supply+draw more current through that circuit than it was originally designed to carry.

For example: a regular 15a circuit + 5a worth of panels (600w); you could now draw 20a through wiring that’s only designed/sized for 15a, before the breaker trips. More current creates more heat, this is a potential fire hazard.

On top of that; switching the breaker off/locking it out doesn’t necessarily switch off all power being supplied to that circuit. If you’re not aware of the solar system that’s also supplying that circuit from another point (very unexpected under current norms) This could cause you to work on wiring that you expect to be unpowered when it’s actually live (you should always check with a volt meter anyway, but still, unexpected hazards).

I would imagine much of this has been thought about; but I’m curious about the solutions (or about the reasoning why it’s not considered an issue)

The title put an image in my head of this guy slamming into a bus, getting up, dusting himself off, and going ‘you know what, maybe I should take the bus’ before climbing aboard.

Seems to work (see my test comment on your other post)

Far more of us than you realise, have never touched that shit to begin with. I have exactly 0 subscription services and the only apps I’ve ever paid for was to directly support independent developers (some of that’s been facilitated by google play, but even that’s been less and less over the years).

That was before we collectively said ‘fuck America’ and started actively seeking non-american solutions.

Instead of addressing the horn sound itself, I’ve addressed the underlying need/desire for it.

Addding a sorry button wouldn’t make things safer or chill tempers, it’d just empower more people to make dangerous moves; playing it off as fine because ‘I pressed the sorry button, people should be ok with me endangering them’

The rules of the road exist for good reason. When people don’t follow them, it effects more than just themselves and has cost many people their lives through no fault of their own.

Be a better driver; don’t make others pay for your poor planning and judgement.

Even OP appears to agree with this, given their reply and upvote on my comment.

A good example of why humanity is doomed: people are shackled to their reflexive need to jerk off their egos at any and every opportunity they see rather than focus on thinking.

An interesting double-standard you have there.

Implying I’m somehow a bad person for pointing out and discussing the consequences of these choices instead of just patting OP on the back and agreeing with their desire - without actually providing any meaningful counter argument to what I’ve said.

Disgusting.

https://balleralert.com/appeals-court-ai-generated-child-abuse-images-first-amendment-ruling/

The legal reasoning runs through two Supreme Court decisions, both of which predate generative AI by decades. The first is Stanley v. Georgia in 1969, which held that a person has a constitutional right to possess obscene material in the privacy of their own home, even when the state can ban selling or distributing it. The second is Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition in 2002, which held that virtual child sexual abuse material, meaning depictions that do not involve any real child, is not child pornography under the law and cannot be banned on the same basis. Actual child sexual abuse material remains illegal to possess anywhere under Osborne v. Ohio.

What the appeal covered is the part getting lost as this circulates. The Seventh Circuit ruled only on the home possession charge. The charges against Anderegg for producing and distributing the material are still pending. So is the separate charge for allegedly sending similar AI-generated sexual images to a 15-year-old boy over Instagram.

The court did not rule that making this material is legal, did not rule that sharing it is legal, and did not dismiss the case against him.

They have decided just the possession part is legal under current case law/precedent, however they have not yet decided on the legal merits of the creation or distribution that material.

The scope is narrower than the headline suggests. Riana Pfefferkorn, a policy fellow at Stanford, pointed out that the ruling does not protect downloading images from a third-party website, and does not protect carrying a phone or laptop containing the images outside the house. That distinction has already been tested. In a January 2026 case, U.S. v. Yener, a court followed the Anderegg reasoning but reached a different result because the defendant’s phone containing the material was found on him at a diner and in a storage unit rather than at his residence.

“A bad driver never misses their exit”

Sometimes you make a mistake and miss your exit or end up in the wrong lane. That’s on you. Re-route, follow the lane you’re in, take the next safe turn/exit/lane change to get back on track; you don’t just cut in line, forcing others to correct for your own mistakes. That’s a great way to create unsafe conditions, end up in accidents, and hurt people. It’s not just about peoples ego/anger, it’s genuinely dangerous.

Your father doesn’t need a ‘sorry’ button, he needs to correct his poor driving behaviour and not endanger himself, you, or others on the road.

I guess you’ll just have to put unsweetened bawls in your mouth then.

Hmm. I could see this going either way depending on the judge.

Kelver said she then crossed the intersection toward the man because she wanted to better understand what was happening.

This is going to be a problem for the defence. Someones aggressively yelling at you, and you close the distance putting yourself within reach and in harms way.

That’s not to say she should have been assaulted or that it’s ok in anyway; but that advance could be interpreted as aggravating the situation. Stand your ground means you’re not required to retreat, but it doesn’t mean you can/should advance into danger until you are actually harmed either.

I don’t think she should be charged, but I’m not too sure the court will agree.