Map
Moldavia's languid progress is now throwing in fresh difficulties. The power of our food exports to generate profits has waned a little from its peak five years ago, but we still have massive surpluses that are creating problems for the population.
We now pay no subsidies to farmers, so if they can't sell, they make no money - or else hedge their bets by converting raw food into luxury products to fuel Moldavia's bourgeoning urban populations. However, a lot of Farmers are complaining that they are being left behind by a modernising economy, and thousands of units of surplus are going to waste.
Moldavia must ensure the production of other items can follow this glut, or else risk a dangerously destabilising economy. For President Borjian, whose tenure is predicated on conservatism and continuity, this are testing times.

Hi all,
I haven’t found many posts online in general comparing Toro’s electric product line to Milwaukees.
As a new homeowner, I’m considering the Toro 60v Super Recycler mower, along with a hedge trimmer and string trimmer.
But at the same time, I’m also considering the Milwaukee hedge and string trimmers. My thought there is when I expand my indoor tools, it would make more sense to go Milwaukee as a platform.
Having said that though, I don’t currently have any Milwaukee tools, so I’m not sure which way to go. Any feedback is appreciated!

I sold my gas-powered lawn equipment last year and moved to the 80V mower, string trimmer and blower. I’m wanting to expand and add the 40V hedge trimmer, pole hedge trimmer, pole saw, and a chainsaw. Would the 40V chainsaw suffice for around the house chores such as trimming the odd tree limb, cutting up firewood, and felling a small tree here and there? Or do I buy-once-cry-once and just get the 80V chainsaw?
I’ve been very happy with the 80V lawn equipment I already have. Just don’t want buyer’s remorse if I get the 40V chainsaw.
Thanks.

Humans are Weird – Cold Shock

Original Post: http://www.authorbettyadams.com/bettys-blog/humans-are-weird-cold-shock
Brilliant blue light seared down through the atmosphere, bounced through the leafless branches, and fell, piercing the leg-thick ice beneath them. Around the edge of the small ice field mounds of the dry, fluffy snow formed a perimeter where the clearing process had pushed what had once covered the pond.
First Aunt felt her antenna twitching against the flexible covering that protected them from the Ultraviolet rays. She was mostly certain that the symptom was psychosomatic. She angled her head to take another subtle look at First Sister. The eldest daughter of the tenuous new hive was but half grown. The sturdy green thermal insulation that swathed her from her toes to her antenna tips gave her a comical appearance and from the bulge around her neck her frill kept trying to extend against the material. Her neck tube was nearly slipping out of her lower harness and First Aunt strung a mental line to reset the insulating layers. However First Sister’s antenna were quite still as she stared down in fascination at the ice beneath their feet, suggesting that the bright and cheerful youngster was not feeling the maddening itching.
While First Aunt mulled over this First Sister rotated her body and waved her arm vigorously over her head. First Aunt examined the direction she was waving in and felt a flicker of annoyance as she spotted the local Ranger stomping across the hill just outside the perimeter of their hive. The human, a Seventh Brother, from a hive that had produced no females at all, was notoriously unsociable by not only human but Shatar standards. Neither Mother nor Father had been able to establish social relations with him despite the fact that his last fellow Ranger had departed weeks ago and the Corps had failed to send another. Even their adopted Grandfather had not been able to establish more than a practical trading relationship with the human. The elders of the tribe had tacitly decided to leave any further social interactions to Grandfather. It seemed that the line had not stretched down to the newest generation.
“First Sister!” First Aunt clicked out. “What is the reading on the resivore ice depth there?”
The young one scrambled a bit as she readjusted the probe in her hands. She quickly tapped the ice beneath her and it made an odd report. First Aunt’s antenna twitched hard though she wasn’t quite sure why. The probe made many sounds in response to its sounding. True she had never heard that particular combination of tink, crack, and hiss before, but she was uncertain why it filled her with such unease. Much later, she would explain to Grandfather that it was just a bad noise.
“Two millimeters!” First Sister chirped out.
“That can’t be correct,” First Aunt stated, feeling a surge of irritation. “Take it again-”
Her voice froze as still as the crystallized water around her as the anomalous reading and the strange sound coiled around her antennas.
“Stop!” She snapped out. “Come to me First Sister!”
However it was too late. First Sister had already raised the probe at First Aunt’s order and she could not have redirected the mass if she tried. It struck the ice between her forefeet and once again it made the same strange pattern. There was the tink of the metal tip striking the ice, then the crack came, long and spreading and now clearly from the ice below instead of the probe. However the last sound, the hiss of escaping air turned into a gurgle as the green water of the algal reservoir.
First Aunt scrambled towards her precious little niece, but the bulky thermal insulation slowed her, and the friction pads that kept her legs safe from sliding slowed her more. She watched in horror as First Sister’s fore-legs fell into the broken ice and First Sister chittered in agony. Almost slowly First Sister’s body tipped into the water and disappeared from view in the murky green of the algae and the ice. Despite the insulation something froze in First Aunt’s lungs. She staggered to a stop as it struck her like a blow. There was nothing she could do.
Her fingers picked almost absently at the comm device attached to her external harness. She had to tell First Mother, but what if First Father was there? What if he heard that First Sister was gone? Her fingers found her comm and she activated it, the speaker hummed to life.
“Fourth Cousin….I mean First Aunt!” Third Mother called out, ending with an unprofessional chitter of amusement at her mistake. “What is your status?”
First Aunt opened her mandible to answer but something she had been vaguely aware of suddenly forced itself into her cone of focus. The human ranger had suddenly cut his trail at nearly ninety degrees and had begun sprinting down towards them with long loping strides that lifted his feet cleanly over the snow. He had cleared the perimeter hedge by simply vaulting over it and had begun running over the pond towards the spreading green cracks, speeding up with every stried. He now began to shed the massive insulating layers he wore, dropping them on the ice in a colorful trail. By the time he reached the hole where First Sister had disappeared he was wearing nothing but the thinnest of wicking layers. He never paused as he reached the hole, instead he leapt in feat first.
“First Aunt!” Third Mother was demanding in frantic clicks. “What is going on? Why did you-”
“First Sister fell through the ice!” First Aunt was suddenly able to move and speak again.
A hissing chitter of horror came over the comm. First Aunt was scrambling towards the hole in the ice now as a faint sprout of hope bloomed in her frill.
“Human Seventh Brother has gone after her!” First Aunt explained quickly.
A chatter of frantic voices came over the line.
“I can’t understand you!” First Aunt snapped out. “Please have Fifth Cousin, I mean Second Aunt come out with the heavy mass transporter and all able bodied Cousins, Aunts, who can fully insulate themselves!”
There was an abrupt silence from the other end of the comms and then Grandfather’s soothing old voice came on.
“The orders have been given,” he stated. “Now can you tell me-”
But First Aunt cut him off with a frantic chitter. First Sister, at least her body, suddenly burst out of the water, held aloft in the massive hand of the human. With a mighty heave he tossed her out of the greenish water and onto the hard surface of the ice where she lay curled as tightly as if she had been hours dead instead of moving freely and joyously only moments before. First Aunt ran up to her and gently rotated the small body.
“First Sister is out of the water,” she said into the comms. “She is cold and stiff-”
“What about Seventh Brother?” Grandfather cut in.
Recalling the human First Aunt tilted her head back to get a focus on him. For a moment he dipped down into the water, then he surged upwards and flung his hands onto the ice. His entire body writhed as he trunk-like legs thrashed and slowly but surely came out of the green water to lay flat on the ice.
“He is out of the water too,” First Aunt stated.
“The mass transporter is in the far storage caves and will take some time to reach you, but it is on its way,” Grandfather said, his voice smoothing with relief. “How is First Sister?”
“She isn’t breathing!” First Aunt exclaimed, resting her hand on the young one’s abdomen.
Frantic chitters overwhelmed the comm for a moment, but First Aunt was distracted by the human writhing towards her across the ice. Instead of resuming his usual bipedal stance he was scrambling like an Undulates across the surface.
“Put her on my back!” He snapped out. “Got to get her dry!”
It took a moment for First Aunt to translate the human language. It was never her strongest achievement, but when she did she obeyed instantly, rolling the uninteresting form up onto the broad flat surface of the human’s back.
“Hold her there!” The human ordered as he immediately set off for the nearest edge of the pond.
First Aunt obeyed. She was uncertain how the human planned on drying off First Sister, but the concept was sound and the whole point of letting Rangers on a new hive-world was to let them help you in strange situations. Her comm was squawking out demands for information in several different voices but she ignored it and focused on balancing First Sister against the human’s writhing movements. They reached the edge of the algae pond and the human surged up and flung himself into the burm of powdery snow. He dislodged First Sister and rolled over in the stuff a few times leaving a green algal smear behind him. Then he grabbed two great handfuls of the snow and vigorously rubbed it through his hair.
First Aunt felt a glimmer of understanding. The dry, frozen snow instantly absorbed and froze the thin layer of water on his skin. She hesitantly reached down and pressed a handful of the glittering mass against First Sister. However the human had lunged to his feet and now lumbered up to her.
“Take off the insulation!” He snapped. “It’s all wet inside and we need to get her dry. I don’t know how.”
First Aunt saw the logic in that and gave a few quick tugs at the release points. It was difficult with First Sister so stiff and unyielding but they were soon loose.
“Let me!” he snapped. “Go back. Get that orange bag and bring it here quick.”
First Aunt felt a snap of irritation, but trimmed it quickly. This was why they had Rangers after all. She moved as quickly as she could across the ice while keeping an antenna curled at the human. He quickly but carefully divested First Sister of the insulating gear she was wearing and spread it flat on the snow. He had the sense not to abrade First Sister’s membrane with the ice crystals at least. His hands flew as he snatched up masses of it and would press each new handful once, quickly to her membrane before discarding the old snow for new. First Aunt found the small orange bad and was surprised and relieved to find it light weight. She hurried back to the human, whose skin had gone from brilliant red to white and was beginning to turn blue.
“Pull the tab,” he ordered.
She did, and the thing jumped out of her hands and rolled to a flat section of snow. There it rapidly expanded into a domed enclosure with a clear band that allowed light in and out. The human heaved his body up and though the markings that indicated the entrance, pulling First Sister after him. He arranged his body so his folded legs provided a fairly large surface and he set First Sister’s body on this. He reached up and squeezed a cylinder that extended from the top of the emergency shelter and it dropped down. First Aunt recognized it as a portable heater. The human hunched his thick torso around First Sister and spread his arms. First Aunt realized he was focusing all the heat on the little body. She watched in fascination and trepidation as the human’s skin turned from blue, back to white, and then to pink once again. Finally he lifted his head and blinked at her.
“Hey,” he said. “If its safe can you go get my clothes?”
“Of course!” She stated as she turned and scampered back across the refreezing ice to retrieve them.
The the human “clothes” were heavy and cumbersome with their complex layers of moisture wicking and solar and thermal radiation needed to preserve the complex human membrane and it took her some time to drag them back to the emergency shelter.
“When hers are dry shake them out and hang em on that bush,” the human ordered next.
First Aunt had to stare at him for several long moments before she understood that he meant First Sister’s thermal insulation. Again, it was a sound idea. The dry snow had indeed removed all the moisture from the layers and First Aunt found it easy to shake the excess snow off of them.
By this time she could seen the mass transporter floating towards them over the snow with the towering form of Second Aunt perched in the main seat and several others clustered behind her.
“Hey!” The human suddenly shouted, a completely different tone in his voice. “She’s twitching!”
Sure enough First Sister’s antenna were beginning to moved and her body was uncurling from the tight, deathlike shape it had been in and First Aunt felt her lung expand for what felt like the first time in hours.

Humans are Weird ​Book Series

Amazon (Kindle, Paperback, Audiobook)

Barnes & Nobel (Nook, Paperback, Audiobook)

Kobo by Rakuten (ebook and Audiobook)

Google Play Books (ebook and Audiobook)

Please Leave Reviews on the Newest Book!

Hi everyone! I just recently picked up a contax g1 on eBay for dirt cheap because it had a focusing issue. I have repaired my fair share of cameras in the past, so I was pretty confident I could fix this guy. I adjusted the trimmer on the bottom of the camera and now the focusing is pretty quick and works well. The only problem is that on the closer settings (2m and closer) it makes a weird mechanical noise for a couple of seconds before taking the picture. Once the lens resets to infinity, there's a grinding noise as well. I was assuming that the problem had to do with the focusing gearbox, but I wanted to see if anyone had any advice or ideas before I take the camera apart. I'll attach a video of the sound (the video I took was a particularly bad sounding one. Usually it's not that bad). The sound happens a lot more in manual focusing than AF. I'm also totally down for any type of repair, regardless of how hard it might be. I'm not really interested in taking it to a repair shop. Thanks!

I've got a gift card burning a hole in my pocket and a quik-lok that wants to take over hedge trimming duties, this year.

Facebook 

WSJ Membership Benefits Customer Center Cancel My Subscription Legal Policies Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information Limit the Use of My Sensitive Personal Information Google Play 

I am looking for any good condition Dewalt 40v tools, specifically the string trimmer.

Buckle up, Buckaroos, Mr Fusion and I are going to take this baby to 88mph and show you around a prospective timeline. This potential DD is my first. It’s also my first post in an account I’ve put together so I could start contributing to the community. An old reddit account of mine, which I’d posted purple circles under needed to be ditched as it was too readily doxable. I’ve over 10Xed my hodlings since then, and am willing to (though at the time of writing haven’t due to needing to write this to request mod approval to post) verified I’m an X,XXX hodler with the mod team. I’m so regarded it’s literally my life savings.
Though, even if you’re skeptical of that, by the time you’ve read and understood the logical implications of it, you’ll see there’s no way that household investors understanding this is good for brokers, market makers, hedge funds, or prime brokers. I encourage you to weigh every DD on its merits.
For 84 years, I’ve read almost every post in new, and what’s in here builds upon the wealth of knowledge DD writers have contributed. Without them I would not be walking knowingly and protected into another global financial crisis. The last one put me back to zero and I haven’t forgotten or forgiven. Thank you DD writers, you’ve enable me to protect myself, my family, and my friends.
I’m going to be tying together various concepts from prior DD along with addressing hypothetical situations we commonly see shilled. Then I’ll show you how the rules of the financial system’s sandbox enable us to reject their spare change, and instead define the change we want.
Yes, I could have written this all earlier, it’s been on my mind for a while, but I felt this should be released at a time when the information would be most valuable for individuals looking to make their own informed investment decisions. Nothing in here is investment or legal advice. Do your own research, thinking, and make your own decisions.
I would like to see a society where systemic wealth inequality has been eradicated. I have a plan for that, but that’s for another time. When that time comes, I’ll need any of you willing to join me in structuring society in a way that prevents the accumulation of power and wealth that enabled the current socioeconomic landscape to form in the first place. Where we are today isn’t a freak occurrence, it’s an inevitability with the current societal structure. We can, and we should, change that.
Every time you hear that’s not how the world works, they’re effectively agreeing with you while trying to discourage you and make you feel childish and naive. It may not be how the world works, but that’s exactly the problem.
Burning Pinnochio
While the media, every broker, and our uninformed friends and family calls your investments shares or stocks, they’re actually just security entitlements. An odd choice of name given they’re neither secure, nor are you by default entitled to the underlying. They’re more akin to Pinocchio, except rather than being alive, Pinocchio sings and dances at the financial puppeteers’ (such as market makers’, hedge funds’, and brokers’) whims.
Let’s go through some of the relevant laws about what a security entitlement is, what it entitles you to, and what the conditions under which your broker, a securities intermediary, conducts business are. You can find the relevant laws at https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/part_5
8-501 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-501) is about acquiring securities entitlements. Section (a) defines what an account is and says brokers are allowed to have agreements with you for how the account operates. A broker could, for example, use this agreement to say they’re allowed to sell your security entitlements if they’re in danger, or the sky is blue, or they ran out of fingers and toes to count their layers of rehypothetication on.
Section (b) says under what conditions you’ve acquired a securities entitlement. Those are:

• if your broker puts it in a ledger entry in your account
• if you transfer a financial asset to them or get them to acquire one for you. A financial asset is defined at https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-102#Financialasset; shares and security entitlements both fall under that.
• And if they’re legally obligated to credit you by some other law, rule, or regulation.

Section (c) is pretty damn important. It says if a condition of section (b) is met, then you have acquired a security entitlement, even though your broker doesn’t hold the financial asset. Which we know they don’t even when the underlying is acquired, as it’s in street name. At its core this says if your broker indicates to you that you own a security entitlement, then you do.
The next relevant section to us is the very sparse section (e) “Issuance of a security is not establishment of a security entitlement.” To understand that, you need to look at the definition of security (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-102#Security). For our purposes, a security is a real share. So this is just saying a company issuing a share does not cause the creation of a security entitlement. That is, a real share is not a security entitlement. Those who DRS know this, that’s why they DRS.
8-503 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-503) is all about the entitlement part of your security entitlement. Section (a) says that your broker holds interest in the financial asset for you, but that it’s not their property. Interestingly, it doesn’t say whose property it is... It also additionally specifies that you don’t always have priority on that security entitlement and 8-511 covers when you do and don’t https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-511#8-511. For example, in the case where your broker has a creditor who has interest in the same financial asset (such as the same stock) and the broker doesn’t have sufficient financial assets to cover you both, well, the creditors are first in line. Too bad if you’re a household investor because that’ll never be you.
8-503(b) is really getting into the meat of what your security entitlement with your broker actually entitles you to. A key aspect is that this is per financial asset - that is company A’s stock and company B’s stock are not interchangeable; we’re purely looking at what they have of the particular financial asset associated with the security entitlement.
What you have is a pro rata interest in all interest your broker has in that particular asset. Pro rata just means your interest in a security is a percentage relative to everyone else at your broker’s interest in that same security. So, if your broker issues 100 security entitlements to a financial asset and you have 10 of them, then you are entitled to 10% of your broker’s interest in the underlying.
However, your broker’s interest is also not real shares because those are kept in Cede and Co’s name and your broker has a pro rata interest in that. This means that your broker is in the same position in relation to the DTCC as you are in relation to your broker. So you’ve got property interest in a fraction of their fraction of the actual shares. Mathematically, this means the only way your security entitlement is worth a share is if the underly was acquired for every broker for every security entitlement they issued. In other words, if any broker is even partially naked, all brokers are partially naked.
8-503(c) says the only way you can get your rights as an entitlement holder is through exercising your rights defined in 8-505 through 8-508. That is, those sections are the only means by which you can have your rights. So we’re obviously going to look at those, but before we do let’s spend a moment to look at one of the obligations a broker takes on when they sell a security entitlement. That’s what’s in 8-504 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-504)
8-504(a) is one that we might need to spend extra time explaining to Wall Street professionals. It says they need to buy everything they sell. Specifically, it requires it be the same financial asset they sold, that it be 1:1 with every security entitlement they sold, and that they have to keep it. Revolutionary concept there, so might take a while for them to understand. Fortunately, adherence to this increases systemic stability and decreases systemic risk, so it’s almost certainly precisely tracked, publicly available, and very strongly enforced by regulatory agencies... surely... though I’ve somehow been unable to find anything to prove that beyond all doubt. An audit of the DTCC would surely demonstrate it to be true, though.
8-504(b) says they can’t rehypothecate your assets they absolutely positively definitely acquired for you as 8-504(a) required them to. Well, unless otherwise agreed to by the securities entitlement holder. That is, they have to unless they’ve written terms and conditions that say they don’t have to. Maybe we should just put unless you don’t wanna at the end of every law?
8-504(c) says that whatever they did is totes lawful so long as they put some fine print that nobody bothered to read somewhere or, if they didn’t bother writing that, then 8-504(c)-2 says so long as most financial companies are hosing their entitlement holders the same way, just kidding, it’s way more rigorous than that, they must exercise due care in accordance with reasonable commercial standards. See? Way better defined with absolutely no room for fuckery or legal whataboutism.
Now, let’s get in to the only ways your rights can be exercised. First up, 8-505 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-505) which says they have to ensure any dividends the company issuing the stock provides are provided to you, with again the unless they wrote terms and conditions that said otherwise or, if those don’t exist, reasonable commercial standards. We’ve all seen the SEC’s TV commercial - so we know how high their commercial standards are...
8-506 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-506) says any rights that the underlying financial asset provides you (for instance, voting rights) must be exercised on your behalf by your broker if you tell them to. Just so that doesn’t get glossed over too lightly - they are only obligated to exercise those rights on your behalf if you direct them to do so. This section also contains the unless terms and conditions or reasonable commercial standards get of obligations free card.
Now, we’re on to one very special entitlement. It’s one you all know and love, it’s https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-507. Though you know of it by another name, DRS. I know what you’re thinking, yeah, yeah, we all know about this, why are you repeating it? Well, because when you say those magical words, Pinocchio can no longer be burnt like the pile of sticks he was; even if your broker wishes to, even if their terms and conditions would have allowed it before your DRS instruction.
Why? Because the moment you’ve made this request, he’s a god damn real boy and setting him on fire is now criminal, more specifically a violation of Uniform Commercial Code 8-507, which is a law; meaning your broker has to commit crime to deny you your shares. There is no option for terms and conditions to remove this right, nor can there be without leaving no potential to claim a security entitlement represents ownership in a financial asset; doing so would make the market seem like a sham.
Though you don’t need to worry about them failing to comply with your entitlement order because the only way they’d be unable to fulfill that obligation would be if there weren’t adequate shares; Which, due to section 8-504, is impossible because they have to promptly purchase and maintain the underlying. Obviously they wouldn’t have broken that law, so there’s never going to be the situation where they’d even need to break 8-507...
8-507(a) contains a few key terms we should cover. The first is entitlement order (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-102#Entitlementorder). “Entitlement order means a notification communicated to a securities intermediary directing transfer or redemption of a financial asset to which the entitlement holder has a security entitlement”. The entitlement order is the act of DRSing. If you’re fancy, you may even wish to tell your broker than you are exercising your rights under Uniform Commercial Code 8-507 and filing an entitlement order for them to direct register your shares with the issuer’s transfer agent. For extra effect, wear a monocle while you do.
You likely saw that an entitlement order must be communicated, the definition of which is also included. It is either a signed writing, or an additional (but not alternate) mechanism agreed to between you and your broker; these are likely specified in your brokers’ terms and conditions.
What’s a signed writing? According to https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/signed-writing it does not include the body of an email or electronic document, though specifically states that the signed writing can be attached. Though that attachment would be an electronic document, so... documentception?
I would love to see legal experts comment on the best way to send a signed writing with instructions to DRS to brokers. This should include what’s needed by 8-507(a) such that the order must be originated by an appropriate person (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-107#Appropriateperson). In our case, filing an entitlement order, means the entitlement holder (8-107(a)-3). For your safety, the communication should also be verifiable for the time the instruction was sent and, ideally, received, such as a signed delivery with tracking; you may need to demonstrate that you directed them to do so prior to any liquidation of your assets if they accidentally engage in violation of 8-507. For any household investors we’ve lost along the way, their successors (8-107(a)-4) are also classified as appropriate persons.
Why an entitlement holder may choose to file an entitlement order close to or during MOASS will be discussed in a bit, but let’s for a moment talk about what’s not in there. The only section remaining in those rights you can exercise is 8-508 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/8/8-508) which states you can change the form of the security or transfer to another broker.
What’s not in UCC 8-5 is any mention of the obligations being dependent on or subject to the amount of real shares available. There is no exemption for them should they have failed to secure the underlying as they were required to in UCC 8-504. The risks a broker takes when they sell naked is that they must acquire the underlying should the holder of that naked security entitlement exercise their rights under UCC 8-507 and they might get cause for failing to meet their legal obligations under UCC 8-504. A naked synthetic share (held via a security entitlement for which the underlying was never acquired) is only synthetic so long as the holder never exercises those rights, after that, it’s an obligation to deliver. In a moment, I’ll cover what 8-507 says should they fail to do so.
Let’s look at how things could play out for the type of household investor who keeps some shares in their broker to sell after MOASS begins. They could liquidate their position getting something around the current market value, assuming their broker hasn’t already liquidated them as was probably allowed in their terms and conditions. Though to do this, the investor would need to be picking a number smaller than that at which their broker would liquidate them. This will likely be a smaller number than they wish. They would be making their investment decisions not based on the fundamentals of the underlying, but their guess as to their broker’s risk management tolerance balanced against their broker’s reputational risk. The lower brokers liquidate customers’ positions, the bigger the hit to anyone’s willingness to invest with them in future.
Alternatively, an investor who is not yet DRSed, could decide the moment they feel MOASS is beginning or, perhaps just prior for safety, to instead request that their broker (via some method you can later provide evidence of and that meets the requirements under 8-507(a) as we discussed) directly register their shares as is their right under UCC 8-507. Once this occurred, they would then need to sell from ComputerShare and so would be subject to their trading fees, but, despite these fees, they would almost certainly be better off financially.
How could that be, you ask? Well, if, as the DD has demonstrated is very possible, there are many naked shares out there, in order for brokers to fulfill their obligations under 8-507, they need to go to market and purchase shares for any entitlement orders which are unbacked in order to deliver them to the security entitlement holders. This creates buying pressure, which increases the price. Damn good chance, particularly under MOASS conditions, that’s going to be more price action than the ComputerShare fees that would be incurred for the investor once they choose to sell. That price movement doesn’t just apply to their shares, it applies to every single share out there, the ones already in their accounts, the ones in their moms’ accounts, the whole damn lot.
If brokers fail to provide those, then, as mentioned, that would be breaking UCC 8-507, and there’s no terms and conditions around that; in fact, if you took a look at 8-507 you would have seen it’s explicit about what position that puts the entitlement holder (investor) and securities intermediary (broker) in “If the securities intermediary does not reestablish a security entitlement, the securities intermediary is liable to the entitlement holder for damages.” What would the damages be? Well, that would be the shares. You know, the real ones because an entitlement order is for the underlying financial asset, the share. Not the fiscal equivalent at the time of the entitlement order, not a sorry there’s no more, not a the terms and conditions allow us to liquidate; You’ve already exercised that right by communicating your entitlement order. The terms and conditions ship has already left the safe harbor.
And if that happened to be occurring all over the place, well, all that other buying pressure is just going to be pushing the underlying security’s price up and up. By an investor taking that extra step of DRSing before they sell, they’ve created additional buying pressure that could otherwise be absorbed and never hit the exchange. Brokers don’t get to put a cap on liability by liquidating your positions at that moment in time because you’ve already secured under 8-507 your rights to the underlying.
I’d hate to be a broker, hedge fund, or market maker reading this right now. Realizing that household investors are now aware that when things get spicy, their interests are best protected by requesting DRS regardless of how many shares are available and that it is also in their interest to do so as quickly as possible in order to avoid being force liquidated as allowed in their brokers’ terms and conditions. Household investors have the power to magically turn every synthetic real, whether there’s more obligations than shares in existence or not. Want to upgrade that infinity pool? This is how it gets bigger.
Now the financial puppeteers have read this, they know they need to liquidate everyone as fast as possible, before household investors get to place entitlement orders, before the price even moves to a point at which the brokers can justify that liquidation, they need to act so soon that it’ll be next to impossible to justify their actions as anything but bad faith to avoid their obligations under UCC 8-507. They have to be fast because security entitlement holders don’t need to wait for that price, they can request the underlying so long as they have a security entitlement.
Household investors have withstood huge amounts of psyops, nay sayers, and fear, uncertainty, and doubt to get here; they played the long game, but the long game just gives them spare change. Dollar Endgame ensures that. You’ll get paid out with an empty fiat promise, as many have raised concern about. Sure, you could wait for whatever currency the markets and society run on next, but what happens if that’s one you don’t want? Such as a hypothetical CBDC that the same people who’ve stolen from everyone you’ve ever known your entire life would control not just the issuance of, but your spending of.
In the next sections, my fellow regards, is where you realize that household investors still have options (no, not that kind), one of those options is what I’m calling the long long game. But to fully appreciate what that is, one first needs to think about how the various components of a financial system function, interact with each other, and what they need to do so.
What’s in a market?
What’s at the core of ensuring a functioning market? Trust. Don’t take my word for it, though. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in their 2019 Business and Finance Outlook (https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/4d7c9b81-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/4d7c9b81-en) stated “public trust in markets is vital to its role to effectively and efficiently convert savings into productive economic growth, and in turn to reward capital providers with long-term returns commensurate with risks.”
They go on in the next paragraph to state “Thus, sound oversight and regulation of markets and market participants, and of the stability of the financial system, are key factors in maintaining trust in markets, because they help ensure an appropriate balance of risk and returns for efficient functioning and sustainable flows between investors and consumers of capital. In addition, the transparency and integrity of markets is important to ensure fairness across myriad participants. As such, shocks that expose macrofinancial imbalances, excesses in risk taking, malfunctioning of financial innovations, and ineffective oversight often contribute to a sharp deterioration of trust in the financial system.”
Clearly fairness and transparency are key, but how does trust impact a market? Laura Bottazzi, Marco Da Rin, and Thomas Hellman published a paper on exactly this within the venture capital space. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=997934 Amongst their findings was “the probability that investors makes an investment is positively related to their level of trust”. In other words, trust increases investment. Logically, this means distrust decreases investment. As a side note, interestingly, they found that as trust increased returns decreased.
Understanding this, we can think about what that means for the suggestion some have made that they’ll just change the rules in order to avoid paying out. Clearly, there are already plenty of potential outs for non-DRSed shares unless an entitlement holder places an entitlement order. This makes the obvious place for a rule change to be removal of the right to place an entitlement order for the underlying.
It’s somewhat disingenuous that the US stock market is even considered to be a stock market given that security entitlements are all your broker provides. No doubt there’s some legal wording somewhere that claims it as a stock, despite the laws we read regarding security entitlements clearly stating it is a pro rata interest in the financial asset. Pro rata by definition means that interest is most likely less than 1:1.
If you read through Investopedia’s definitions within their Financial Markets page (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/financial-market.asp), you’ll see a stock market “are venues where companies list their shares and they are bought and sold by traders and investors.” and derivatives are defined as “a contract between two or more parties whose value is based on an agreed-upon underlying financial asset” that difference of being able to claim the underlying is likely the basis upon which security entitlements are treated as stocks, but I’ve been unable to establish the reason conclusively.
The removal of the ability to place an entitlement order to obtain the underlying would mean you’re no longer trading anything of even partial value. It would make the security entitlement effectively a derivative. What does the Financial Markets Investopedia page have to say about derivatives? “In and of itself a derivative is worthless.” You’ll all be familiar with this as counterparty risk. The derivate is only worth your counterparty’s ability to meet their obligations. If they can’t, that just means you made a bad bet with a degenerate gambler.
Taking away the right to the underlying, takes away the value.
Having the market trade security entitlements results in the possibility of synthetics, which are functionally derivatives; the ability to file entitlement orders provides the ability to act like there’s value without their needing to guarantee it. If a market were trading actual financial assets, then it removes the possibility for any failures under 8-504 or 8-507. This raises the question of why not just structure the markets like that? Perhaps you have some ideas what advantages this system provides over that and to whom it provides them...
If people were certain there was no way to claim the underlying, that would severely harm trust in the markets. After all, do you want to pay to pretend you have something or do you want to pay to actually own it? Investments would reduce, including foreign investments. No investment, the market ceases to function. So, yes, a rule change that removes one of the few, potentially the only, means by which you can claim any real value is being transacted within the marketplace is effectively dismantling that marketplace. The same issue with allowing brokers to sell without having an enforceable obligation to deliver in the event of limited supply. Sure, a rule change could screw security entitlement holders over and avoid paying out, but it costs them the system.
Seizure in the morning, seizure all through the night
Asset seizure, such as when FDR seized citizen’s gold through Executive Order 6102 (https://mises.org/library/great-gold-robbery-1933) is another possibility you’ve no doubt seen raised by some. Should that occur with financial assets, domestically that would destroy trust, not to mention the political backlash of doing so at a time with record high credit card debt.
Even so, this wouldn’t restore all the shares, as many are held by entities outside of the United States. Attempts to do so would clearly cause an international incident and elevate tensions in an environment where there are already efforts underway to reduce the world’s dependency on the USD. (As mentioned in https://cyber.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/What_Happens_If_The_U.S._Dollar_Is_No_Longer_The_World%27s_Reserve_Currency)
The resulting reduction in trust would not be limited to the USD, but to any potential currency backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. This would significantly hamper any efforts to establish a new US currency in the event of USD hyperinflation.
Yet again, this path amounts to dismantling the trust upon which the system is built. It would just be those in power removing their ability to wield power. So, even if they were able to, which likely can’t be done domestically at a sufficiently impactful scale, it would remove the facade of fairness and value that created the trust under which the markets operate.
Inflation by any other name
Inflation has this interesting mathematical property, it allows you to increase numbers for everyone while having particular groups end up with a reduced share overall and others with an increased overall share. Now you know how wealth inequality was able to grow this vast right under most people’s noses. Everyone saw their numbers getting bigger, and thought they were getting ahead.
While fiat currencies are commonly thought of as being unbacked, they’re very similar to a loan. Just that loan is against the capability of those contributing to the gross domestic product (GDP) of the group issuing the currency. That capacity at any moment in time is finite and the measurement of it is part of the issue. GDP is commonly defined in a currency which derives its value from that same gross domestic product. A chicken and egg problem which helps obscure both what backs it and therefore the true value.
Why do central banks typically aim for positive inflation numbers? Generally, it’s argued that having no inflation reducing economic activity, you’ll find more details around that here (https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/13272/inflation/is-zero-inflation-a-good-thing/). After all, if you know your money will have the same purchasing power in retirement as it does today, why then you could actually budget for retirement. The idea of having inflation is generally phrased as to incentivize spending, though could, at least equally so, be viewed as punishing saving.
If you have a fixed supply of currency, then as the value you’re able to produce increases, you would still have the same amount of currency to represent that. This would be deflationary, which, obviously, becomes an issue once the price of things drops so low as to have some items being beneath the smallest unit of your currency. This means that in numerical terms, your assets will become worth smaller and smaller amounts, and so it would then heavily reward saving, which would further reduce currency supply and reduce economic activity.
It’s for these reasons that you’re unlikely to see any government aim for anything but inflationary monetary policy. Though, they have a competing need for currency stability. Why? Because if your currency isn’t stable and you’re trying to measure the changing value of something with it, how can you know whether the currency is increasing or decreasing in value, or the asset? Even if it’s still, they could both just be moving in tandem. It also makes it unusable as a store of value (the whole purpose of a currency) because you cannot be certain it will maintain sufficient value to be worth owning.
Uncertainty also reduces trust, resulting in decreased economic activity. You’re way less motivated to work if you don’t know what you’ll get from that work. If you can’t forecast the value of the currency you’re paid with, you don’t have any idea how much actual value you’ll ever see for your work.
I’d like to posit a concept for you all to think about as you imagine the world you’d like to see. The capacity of a people to produce is what supports fiat currency. Asset backed currencies may be more stable because there’s a greater chance that the effort required to obtain that item is better tied to their population’s capacity than a central bank making up numbers to spin their printer. Though, it’s also dependent upon the availability (either directly or the ability to obtain it) and utility of the asset which backs the currency; therefor it is not necessarily tied to the people’s productivity.
Once you’re dealing at population scale and over lifetimes, you can amortize the collective capacity of a people to produce value. That is an average person in an average year can create a particular amount of value. Therefore, your population is your best measure of potential economic output. Tying the amount of issued currency to be a fixed factor relative to the population contributing to that currency’s economic value (if you change the factor everything breaks down and you’re back to manipulatable fiat policy). This would then mean, items whose actual value (in terms of use) doesn’t change would also have no change in price. Any gains in efficiency (the ability to produce an item with less effort) would be reflected in reduced prices (assuming competition is fair and you’re not setting rules which suppress price discovery). Just some food for thought as you ponder the future you’d like to see.
Why does this all matter you ask, well, now we’re finally getting to the long, long game.
The Long Long Game
Let’s say you have a massively over-leveraged financial system and you wish to effectively disappear those debts. You need two things. First, you need that debt denominated in something you control the supply of, say a currency. Second, you need assets which you can exchange for that hypothetical currency.
If the currency value of your debts is currently the same as the currency value of, let’s say, a crate of mayonnaise, and you really love mayonnaise, you won’t want to hand over all your whole crate just to get rid of that debt. Instead, you spin up the money printer, and ensure all that money hits the real economy. Along with the prices of everything else, mayonnaise prices go way up. Eventually, you only need to sell a single spoonful to get enough cash to wipe out your debts.
A household investor, might notice this as its going on and reach a position where they only need to sell a very small amount of their assets to close out any debts they have in that currency. Though, as they see what’s occurring, they realize that there is no sense in having any further amounts of that currency because its losing its purchasing power fast, like hyperdrive fast.
With the currency now inflating out of control, the marketplace can’t reasonably function on that currency. Nobody wants to sell an asset for the same reason our hypothetical household investor didn’t want to do more than remove all their debts. In order to reestablish economic activity, there must be a new currency used for the markets. The markets move to that currency as the standard, with the goal of reestablishing trust in the markets.
Nobody with assets wanted to throw away the markets entirely though, because that was how they owned many of their assets; some of those included IOUs, and those who were owed still want what’s owed. But if the market were to selectively remove some types of assets, that would kill trust in the market and it would be unable to reestablish itself. The IOUs and derivatives, such as short positions, have to be kept.
If there were some groups of asset holders who didn’t like the medium of exchange (for example, currency) offered, they might choose not to sell those assets for the currency they find undesirable. Unfortunately for those with short positions, they still have to pay to keep those short positions open. This would necessarily be done in the new currency, the previous one is either worthless and undesirable or, should they attempt to force the market to use it, that requirement would create demand for the old currency and prevent the devaluation of debts denominated in that currency. The market must move to the new currency.
Those damn costs to keep the short positions open, though. That’s creating a need for more of the new currency. But if supply is increased, then it devalues the new currency and destabilizes the market. Damn, those untenable positions when trading on the old currency remain as a threat to the new currency.
So long as you have a short position with infinite risk, that risk threatens whichever currency your market trades in. It’s almost like the risk those positions presented was systemic, not just a threat to the old currency.
And destroying those obligations to save the new currency would also destroy trust in the financial system, meaning nobody will be interested in trading on the market regardless of the currency. What a conundrum.
This brings us to one of pieces of FUD you’ve seen around when someone says you can’t sell for assets for whatever you like. The answer to that really depends what they mean. Do they mean the current market doesn’t provide a facility through which you can select what you would like to exchange your asset for? Then sure, that’s completely correct. Though it doesn’t matter, because a market cannot be established without people willing to trade on it.
If a household investor happens to be in possession of either an idiosyncratic stock, or an idiosyncratic security entitlement which they’ve filed an entitlement order for, a market can only ever function stably if it provides trading in a manner which that household investor wishes to engage in, offering assets that household investor wishes to own. That system must either change to the will of those household investors or destroy itself by eroding all trust. Either choice results in systemic change.
And with that, my dearest regards, I leave you with one final thought.
Change is a long long game.
TLDR;

• Brokers sell you security entitlements, not the underlying shares, which is why you DRS. Their obligations regarding security entitlements are covered by the laws under Uniform Commercial Code 8-5.
• UCC 8-507 states that if you place an entitlement order (DRS) they must comply with it, and should they fail to, they owe you damages (your shares). This is irrespective of the total shares available. If you place an entitlement order prior to liquidation, your broker is breaking the law by liquidating your position and, as mentioned, the law states they owe you your shares. Their terms and conditions cannot remove this obligation, so be sure to do so before they liquidate you.
• Markets depend upon trust, so removing ownership (which getting rid of your rights under UCC 8-507) would mean the markets are no longer selling anything of value and investment would cease.
• In the event of moving to a new currency, the obligations under the market must remain for the market to be trusted. The infinite risk of a short position applies regardless of the currency financial assets are traded with.
• That infinite risk means unless holders are willing to sell for the currency offered, maintaining short positions will require inflating any currency used to trade. Therefore, idiosyncratic stock holders can determine whether a currency will succeed simply by refusing to sell for any currency they do not want.

Hi all,
I’ve seen a few posts dating back 6 months to a year talking about Toro’s 60v lineup but I haven’t found many posts online in general comparing Toro’s electric product line to Milwaukees.
As a new homeowner, I’m considering the Toro 60v Super Recycler, along with a hedge trimmer and string trimmer.
But at the same time, I’m also considering the Milwaukee hedge and string trimmers. My thought there is if I ever expand my indoor tools, it would make more sense to go Milwaukee as a platform.
Having said that though, I don’t currently have any Milwaukee tools, so I’m not sure which way to go.

Vanguard Portfolio - The Future of Property Investment with Crypto
Introduction
The world of investing has been revolutionized in recent years with the introduction of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology. Now, investors can enjoy greater transparency, security, and control over their investments with the added benefits of cryptocurrency. Vanguard Portfolio is one such platform that is using blockchain technology to revolutionize the real estate market. The company is now accepting crypto investments for its property portfolio, offering a unique opportunity for investors to be part of the future of the real estate.
Investing in Property with Cryptocurrency
Investing in property with cryptocurrency is an exciting new opportunity for investors to diversify their portfolios and capitalize on the growth potential of both the crypto and real estate markets. With the use of blockchain technology and smart contracts, investors can enjoy greater transparency, security, and control over their investments.
One of the key benefits of investing with Vanguard Portfolio is the use of smart contracts attached to NFTs that show ownership and the percentage of property owned. This guarantees that every investor has access to transparency and a clear understanding of their investment, along with the option to trade their share on a secondary market if desired.
Given the recent surge in the property market and the increasing mainstream acceptance of cryptocurrency, merging the two seems like a logical step. Vanguard Portfolio is capitalizing on this trend by providing investors with the chance to utilize cryptocurrency for property market investments.
Tokenomics
Vanguard Portfolio's token, VANU, has a total supply of 150,000,000,000 tokens and is built on the Binance Smart Chain BEP20 network.
The sales tax for the token is 11%, 5% going toward liquidity 2% towards marketing 4% toward the property fund
The buy tax is 9%, 3% towards liquidity 2% towards marketing 4% towards the property fund
Why you should invest

1. Investing in property with crypto offers the potential for high returns.
2. Smart contracts attached to NFTs make investing in property with crypto transparent and secure.
3. Vanguard Portfolio offers a streamlined platform for pooling funds to buy property with crypto.
4. Dubai is a prime location for investing in property with crypto due to its growing real estate market.
5. Investing in property with crypto eliminates the need for intermediaries, reducing transaction costs and increasing efficiency.
6. Tokenization of property allows for fractional ownership, enabling smaller investors to access the real estate market.
7. Rent revenue from property purchased with crypto can provide a stable passive income stream.
8. Blockchain technology offers greater transparency and accountability in property investment.
9. Investing in property with crypto can diversify your portfolio and hedge against inflation.

Community-Driven Approach
One of the things that set Vanguard Portfolio apart is its community-driven approach. Investors can access bigger and potentially more lucrative investment possibilities by combining their funds, compared to what they could achieve independently. Investors will also be able to keep up to date with allocations of funds via our online spreadsheets. These will also be verified by certified accountants, giving out investors full transparency.
Our Promise to our investors
Full transparency will always be given. If we don't have 100% trust then a project will not hit its full potential. Please join our fresh chats groups.
Telegram: t.me/vanguardportfolio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/vanguardvanu
Reddit: https://reddit.com/vanguardportfolio
Whitepaper: https://vanguardportfolio.com/whitepape

Vanguard Portfolio - The Future of Property Investment with Crypto
Introduction
The world of investing has been revolutionized in recent years with the introduction of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology. Now, investors can enjoy greater transparency, security, and control over their investments with the added benefits of cryptocurrency. Vanguard Portfolio is one such platform that is using blockchain technology to revolutionize the real estate market. The company is now accepting crypto investments for its property portfolio, offering a unique opportunity for investors to be part of the future of the real estate.
Investing in Property with Cryptocurrency
Investing in property with cryptocurrency is an exciting new opportunity for investors to diversify their portfolios and capitalize on the growth potential of both the crypto and real estate markets. With the use of blockchain technology and smart contracts, investors can enjoy greater transparency, security, and control over their investments.
One of the key benefits of investing with Vanguard Portfolio is the use of smart contracts attached to NFTs that show ownership and the percentage of property owned. This guarantees that every investor has access to transparency and a clear understanding of their investment, along with the option to trade their share on a secondary market if desired.
Given the recent surge in the property market and the increasing mainstream acceptance of cryptocurrency, merging the two seems like a logical step. Vanguard Portfolio is capitalizing on this trend by providing investors with the chance to utilize cryptocurrency for property market investments.
Tokenomics
Vanguard Portfolio's token, VANU, has a total supply of 150,000,000,000 tokens and is built on the Binance Smart Chain BEP20 network.
The sales tax for the token is 11%, 5% going toward liquidity 2% towards marketing 4% toward the property fund
The buy tax is 9%, 3% towards liquidity 2% towards marketing 4% towards the property fund
Why you should invest

1. Investing in property with crypto offers the potential for high returns.
2. Smart contracts attached to NFTs make investing in property with crypto transparent and secure.
3. Vanguard Portfolio offers a streamlined platform for pooling funds to buy property with crypto.
4. Dubai is a prime location for investing in property with crypto due to its growing real estate market.
5. Investing in property with crypto eliminates the need for intermediaries, reducing transaction costs and increasing efficiency.
6. Tokenization of property allows for fractional ownership, enabling smaller investors to access the real estate market.
7. Rent revenue from property purchased with crypto can provide a stable passive income stream.
8. Blockchain technology offers greater transparency and accountability in property investment.
9. Investing in property with crypto can diversify your portfolio and hedge against inflation.

Community-Driven Approach
One of the things that set Vanguard Portfolio apart is its community-driven approach. Investors can access bigger and potentially more lucrative investment possibilities by combining their funds, compared to what they could achieve independently. Investors will also be able to keep up to date with allocations of funds via our online spreadsheets. These will also be verified by certified accountants, giving out investors full transparency.
Our Promise to our investors
Full transparency will always be given. If we don't have 100% trust then a project will not hit its full potential. Please join our fresh chats groups.

In a couple of years I hope to acquire enough space to create a homestead for myself.
I plan to keep (my current) chickens and ducks and add rabbits and miniature livestock (Nigerian Dwarf goats, miniature donkeys, Kunekune pigs, maybe some sheep and very maybe some miniature cows - Jersey and Beltie - depending on the size of the farm).
I have always kept dogs, mostly rescue animals ranging from the size of German Shepherd to Shiba Inu size. They also range from stocky fur to sleek hair with tufts. I also foster rescue dogs so know how to train them and work with behavioral issues.
Now, for my homestead I'd think I'd rather also have some dogs from breeders and I have always wanted to raise another puppy (last puppy was about fifteen years ago).
My favourite breeds are:

• Northern Inuit dog, I feel they'll be too large and require more handling considering I also have the other animals to care for.
• Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, they have been my number 1 breed for ages. If trained properly, would they thrive in a homestead environment considering they are sporting dogs bred for hunting fowl?
• Old German Shepherd, I think they are especially great as guard and family dogs.

I generally always keep around 4 dogs, so I'd go for a total of 3 max on a homestead. Are any of the above mentioned breeds a good choice in a mini farm or any other breeds to consider?
Questionnaire;
**Introduction**
1) Will this be your first dog? If not, what experience do you have owning/training dogs?
No, as a child I was always surrounded by dogs. As an adult I have kept mainly rescue dogs of varying size and looks.
2) Do you have a preference for rescuing a dog vs. going through a (reputable breeder)
I typically go for rescue dogs that are mixed breeds, but this time around I'd like a puppy from a reputable breeder.
3) Describe your ideal dog.
An dog that can be quite active and is trainable.
4) What breeds or types of dogs are you interested in and why?
Northern Inuit Dog, but mainly I believe because of their looks. I feel I wouldn't be able to provide them with the right enivornment.
Old German Shepherd, because they make good guard and family dogs, are intelligent and can be trained.
NS Duck Tolling Retriever, because they are a sporty, active breed that makes for a great family pet if raised properly.
5) What sorts of things would you like to train your dog to do?
It would depend on the breed, with a Toller I'd definitely want to try out agility. With all my dogs I train them in the basic commands for trail ettiquette (sit, heel, lie down, stay, recall, ignore, focus...)
6) Do you want to compete with your dog in a sport (e.g. agility, obedience, rally) or use your dog for a form of work (e.g. hunting, herding, livestock guarding)? If so, how much experience do you have with this work/sport?
I have no interest in actually competing in a sport. If I were to do agility it would be on my own for the dog's pleasure. I'd keep at least one dog for guard duties and do not have experience with the work as I never lived on an active farm before.
**Care Commitments**
7) How long do you want to devote to training, playing with, or otherwise interacting with your dog each day?
I am busy with my dogs for at least four hours a day. Either by letting them roam in a garden (sensory garden I created with obstacles, dog friendly plants, small pond, digging place...) while I'm there, taking walks (2 short walks of around 15-30 minutes and one long walk of at least 1 hour), training (depending on age and ability it can take from a few minutes of exercises to 1 hour)
8) How long can you exercise your dog each day, on average? What sorts of exercise are you planning to give your dog regularly and does that include using a dog park?
I give my dogs at least 2 hours of walks, most of the time when the weather's fine they are also outside in their sensory garden (they come in every evening to sleep and some days they prefer to spend inside). Dog parks are not in my planning because there aren't any closeby where I live.
9) How much regular brushing are you willing to do? Are you open to trimming hair, cleaning ears, or doing other grooming at home? If not, would you be willing to pay a professional to do it regularly?
I do most of the grooming at home. I have experience with stocky haired breeds and finer haired breeds. Both short and half long fur. With one dog who has very dark nails I go to a professional trimmer to get it done there.
**Personal Preferences**
10) What size dog are you looking for?
Medium to large
11) How much shedding, barking, and slobber can you handle?
I can handle shedding and barking, lower tolerance for slobber.
12) How important is being able to let your dog off-leash in an unfenced area?
It isn't. If it's a dog that can be trained to have excellent recall that is fine. If not I am more than happy to keep it on a long leash so they can still roam.
**Dog Personality and Behavior**
13) Do you want a snuggly dog or one that prefers some personal space?
Either is fine. My current dogs are a mix. One prefers to be on their own but will sometimes come for pets, others are attached to my hip all the time.
14) Would you prefer a dog that wants to do its own thing or one that’s more eager-to-please?
For what I have in mind I'd need both kinds of dogs.
15) How would you prefer your dog to respond to someone knocking on the door or entering your yard? How would you prefer your dog to greet strangers or visitors?
Friendly but wary.
16) Are you willing to manage a dog that is aggressive to other dogs?
I currently have foster dog that is quite agressive to other dogs and it requires some managing and training. Sometimes it can get better, other times it's just a point of managing the behaviour. I'd prefer a dog that is not overly aggressive to other dogs.
17) Are there any other behaviors you can’t deal with or want to avoid?
Chewing furniture and nipping at heels. The former is often a behaviour issue that is dependent on training, the latter can be a breed characteristic (often herding breeds)
**Lifestyle**
18) How often and how long will the dog be left alone?
I work mostly from home (2 days max in the office and office is dog friendly). I do my work outs at home and shopping for groceries takes 3 hours at most once a week.
19) What are the dog-related preferences of other people in the house and what will be their involvement in caring for the dog?
I live alone.
20) Do you have other pets or are you planning on having other pets? What breed or type of animal are they?
I currently also have cats, ducks and chickens. I plan on eventually getting a homestead with Nigerian Dwarf goats, Kunekune pigs, maybe some miniature cows and sheep.
21) Will the dog be interacting with children regularly?
No
22) Do you rent or plan to rent in the future? If applicable, what breed or weight restrictions are on your current lease?
I currently rent and owner is dog friendly. I plan on buying in the future.
23) What city or country do you live in and are you aware of any laws banning certain breeds?
I live in Belgium and there are currently no restrictions on domestic dog breeds.
24) What is the average temperature of a typical summer and winter day where you live?
The temperature typically varies from 34°F to 74°F and is rarely below 22°F or above 85°F
​

I occasionally see requests for BIFL hair clippers here. The answer is Oster Classic 76. Built like a tank, and sounds like an electric hedge trimmer. I’ve had mine for at least 10 years, and they perform like new (non-professional use).
Fully repairable, with readily available parts. I found this video when searching for routine maintenance instructions. If this guy can’t convince you, nobody can.
Oster Classic 76 Maintenance Video

My finished basement needs some work done, which requires a 20x10 foot section of ceiling to be removed. It's plaster over plasterboard, and heavy. I want to drop it with the least amount of mess. I'm thinking about rigging up a circular saw (like the dewalt 4" saw) with a diamond blade, and encase it in a plastic tub somehow attached to a vacuum, and just cut 2x2 squares out. I'm wondering if there's some trick or technique people use that maybe I've never heard of.

Thr only thing I can see is the gap between the blade being 25mm and 19mm respectively.

My mom was complaining that her starlink service went down two days ago so I came over to look at her situation and I found that there was some damage on it her starlink dish. I’ll attach pictures below, but my question is with a small hole in the dish possibly from a string trimmer, cause the service to go out? We just got a big rain a couple days ago and was thinking the water might have gotten inside the dish and messed something up. Thanks
https://imgur.com/a/od4xzqF

I recently moved into a new home that has roughly 20K square feet of lawn. I'm toying with the idea of purchasing a riding mower from Greenworks but I'm generally pretty novice when it comes to lawn care.
I see that currently both the Z-Turn and Tractor 60V models are the same price. I'm drawn to the Tractor model because it has a steering wheel and traditional style but it seems Z-Turn is the preferred design by most lawn pros and enthusiasts? Are there any advantages to the tractor style over the Z-Turn?
Ideally I'd also like to use this mower to pull a trailer (for various things like crushed stone, mulch, etc..). Maybe even tow the kids around on halloween?
I was also wondering if there were Snow Plow attachments for Greenworks mowers? I see that Ryobi has this. Does Greenworks?
I'm also concerned about investing a ton of money into the greenworks 60v system. Is this going to become outdated as time goes on? Is Greenworks focusing on 80V now?
I'm pretty new to all of this. Any help is appreciated.