Inquiries Here for anyone that has answers?

Only place I could find the styrofoam liner is a round 8 quart styrofoam bait container at Gander Mtn does anyone else know where we can get a round Styrofoam liner, that wouldn't have to be modified to fit the 5 gallon bucket?

Also where does a person find that 12" ?? size Model Fan?

And the Solar Panel?

I was checking into a 16" 3 Speed with a Quiet motor to use in a bedroom but that might be too big for the 5 gallon bucket

I sure could be wrong, but it seems like the frozen plastic Milk container works best since even though it could/would add a bit of humidity, it's not going to be very much due to the Insulation properties of the Styrofoam liner.

Thank you to anyone that can answer these questions please?

..as Justin laughs all the way to the bank/and or an early grave. Congratulations, sports fans-

Poor kid-Got too big too-fast-and the pressures' devouring him

The monthly updates on YT, the ones you introduced me to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMXfBm0IPd0

I completely forgot about the podcast, so cheers for the reminder. Is there any "proper" download link for the podcasts? I've been picking the dropbox url from TruthDig's source code by hand, there's got to be an easier way...

As for Taibbi:
The Vampire Squid Strikes Again: The Mega Banks' Most Devious Scam Yet

It's about how the too-big-to-fail/jail banks became a cartell in the physical commodities market. The story itself was reported on before, primarily the aluminium shenanigans of Goldman Sachs.

Too big. Huge surface area to keep it clean. Is this a hoax or a joke cause it sounds like one?

I don't trust horses... teeth are too big and they have those evil eyes.

Like @Grimm said, these fellas did not just profit from a flaw in the system. They spent vast amounts of time and money lobbying for changes to the system, changes which made these exploits possible in the first place. Exploits that in most cases are still in violation of the law over here, but the oversight was starved out to a point of non-existence or simply handed over to entities they should be monitoring in the first place.

As a result, the City of London in particular accumulated enough economical leverage to hold the entire country hostage, knowing full well how a sweep of the City would lead to catastrophic ripples not only through the UK and Europe, but the entire bloody world. So now they can do whatever they please without fear of repercussions as seen in the case of HSBC.

This selective application of the law breeds contempt for the law, particularly if compared to the poor who get hammered for the slightest inconsistency in their paperwork. Too big to fail undermines the free market, but too big to jail undermines the basic rule of law.

Even in the very few cases that were prosecuted, only the institution was penalised, never any high level individual. Some of those responsible need to be held accountable, otherwise the riots in Tottenham will look like child's play compared to what will happen the next time these idiots drive the entire economy to the brink of collapse.

By the way, I'm still waiting for someone to end up in jail for the rigging of Libor or ISDAfix.

i dont pay taxes.
i refused ten years ago and have stuck with that path.
and its been sunshine and rainbows ever since....
ok..not really.my income is severely crippled due to me not paying taxes BUT goddamn does it make me feel good!

i do not pay taxes not to be a cheap ass but rather to protest a system that is so obviously rigged against me.(and you).

as for american libertarianism.
i will say they have the civil rights down.
i totally agree with their philosophy of personal liberty and right to do whatever you want as long as you aint stepping on another blokes shoes.

but when they start with the "free market" sermons i start to look at them as wide-eyed and innocent children.
do they not SEE whats going on?
free market?
what is this free market you speak of?
america is NOT a free market.
it is corporate socialism.
or welfare if you want to troll a bit.

go ahead and de-regulate corporate america.
see what happens.
better yet,just look at some african nations,or former soviet states.
guilded estates with private armies for the uber-wealthy and elite while the majority of the population live in either indentured servitude or total squalor.

i am noticing a disturbing trend here in america.its like they are preparing.
we have a government bought and paid for by corporate america,which does the corporations bidding.
the co-opting of the tea party and the crushing of occupy.
a massive surveillance operation.
militarized police forces across the country.
civil liberties made into mere "suggestions" and no longer inalienable.
executions of american citizens with no due process (bye bye habeas corpus).
a standing army that has been in place for over 60 years and a war on terror that will never end.

it is madness.

so i cannot blame my libertarian friends for calling for smaller government.
because the government has become TOO big and no longer is "for the people,by the people".
it serves its corporate masters.
which is why the "de-regulate" argument truly baffles me.

just as my liberal friends who wish to use the system to correct these imbalances.
what?
the system is utterly BROKEN.
we no longer have a functioning democracy!
why would you even suggest to use a system that threw us all overboard to lick the boots of their masters 30 yrs ago?
the mind..it boggles.

every political philosophy has its flaws.none are perfect.
libertarianism has some very good points while others are a bit...naive in my opinion.

for me the end result is this:
i do not trust power nor authority because i find them to be illegitimate until they prove themselves otherwise.
so i am suspicious when someone tries to force their authority on me based on arbitrary and subjective parameters.(like a cop,or judge or some rich dude).

i am a humanist by nature so my political philosophy flows from that birthplace.
i will never step on you to further my career nor take food out of your mouth.
corporate america has spread a propaganda campaign that is insidious.

capitalism is good.
greed is good.
dog eat dog world out there.
here,buy this,it will make you feel better.
wear that and you will be sexy.
you are lone wolf,against the world,drive this car you lone wolf and be a rebel.

its all bullshit.
human beings feel better when they are co-operating.
when they feel their life has purpose and that they are needed.
not by living in a perpetual 7 yr olds wet dream.

oh
my
god.
you fuckers got me ranting!
i hate you both......
/drops mic

I started to argue with you, it was a good one too. All about relevance and irrelevance and civil disobedience. But then I realized that my point was, nobody cares. And then I realized that I don't care.

I realized that having political opinions bears little difference to having religious ones. There's so much faith, too many assumptions, too much arrogance, side picking, divisiveness, manipulation and social control involved in both. So I'm agnostic. Both politically as well religiously. The issues are too big, too convoluted, and too interconnected for me to actually know or understand whats going on... and it sounds like arrogance to me now when someone talks politics. Particularly when it comes down to the silliness of assigning traits and personalities and connotations to words like republican or democrat. It's an arrogant, binary way to look at something. And it reeks of brain washing.

So my point again, fuck it. Imma read some books and go to bed.

Sure, there is no need to speak in terms of civil war. Unless you're one of these guntoting, armed to the teeth nutjobs who think it would be a good idea. You know, the kind of people who buy an *assault rifle* for self defense.
However, no matter how well trained your riot police is, their less than lethal tactics are only useful up to a certain amount of people, they can become rather useless if the crowds get too big to contain or simply too violent themselves. That's when it gets interesting, that is when protest can turn into riots.
When the cops face huge, somewhat peacful crowds, they might enter Tiananmen Square. At what point would american cops or military personnel start thinking that it's unwise or inhuman to start firing into the crowd? Before the first shot? After the second magazine? On day three?
It's not the 1960s anymore but the sixties are not forgotten. Not by those who faced police officers willing to fire into the crowd. You know, black people. The kind of people whose parents and grandparents are still alive to tell them about their fight against oppression. This is still alive in the american concious, it shaped your country and it won't go away soon. Just ask Barak about his birth certificate.
Civil unrest is part of your recent history, the seed is there. Even under a President Stalin all you'd need go from isolated, contained riots to complete and irreversible shitstorm is a Martyr, a Neda Agha Soltan or a Treyvon Martin. No matter what ethnicity (although african american would be nice), that would present a tipping point.
Your police can bring out the tanks on Times Square if they want but if half of NY shows up, these guys inside the tanks might want to get out ASAP.
The Erich Honecker regime of the German Democratic Republic was basically brought down by somewhat peaceful demonstrations of people shouting "I'm mad as hell and I won't take it anymore" in east german accents.
The StaSi, the Ministry of State Security, who was efficient enough to make *every* citizen a potential informant in the eyes of their opposition, ran from the protesters like little girls. They used to imprison and torture people who spoke up.
The east german border used to be the most secure in the entire world. It was protected by minefields and guards who shot and killed anyone who tried to cross it. Before David Hasselhoff even had a chance to put on his illuminated leather jacket the government caved and just fucking opened it. People just strolled through Checkpoint Charlie and bought Bananas as if it was Christmas.
This was the beginning of the end for the Soviet Union. You know, the guys who lost over 20 Million people in WW2 and still kicked the Nazis in the nuts.
Nobody brought a gun. All the east germans had was shitty cars and lots of anger. They tore down not just a dictatorship, they tore down the iron curtain.
And they didn't even have a Nelson Mandela. Or Lech Walesa.
I still stand by my point: strength in numbers, not caliber.

Between wars of aggression (Iraq, Afghanistan) and the violation of national sovereignty (Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Jemen, Somalia), the running of gulags (Gitmo, Baghram) and torture facilities (airport in Mogadishu), the NDAA and the war on whistleblowers on the one hand and the entire corporate corruption (too big to fail/jail in particular) on the other hand, there's plenty of reason to take a good look at what the latest administrations have been responsible for.

But hey, Benghazi and the IRS are the real scandals, right?

Not Thomas Drake, John Kiriakou and Bradley Manning or Anwar al-Awlaki, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Certainly not HSBC or Gitmo. And neither nightly JSOC raids nor cruise missile attacks, much less torture and kidnapping.

helping criminals and known terrorists groups are ok. but dealing with pot money.... just need to become too big to fail.

I knew someone who didn't know would say something about that

http://cannabis.wikia.com/wiki/Cola

It is that thing that circles for the camera near the end. 5:45- 6:36

Generally it is the central bud-sites, in the center of main branches. Gotta watch out when they get too big because air doesn't get around easily and mold can happen. Boo to mold. I had some Donkey Dick that did that and it pissed me the fuck off. Moldy weed is bad I think I actually did tear up when I found it.

Yes! That is exactly what I mean! Meaning of course that my balls are too big and need to be smaller. "Laughs out Loud"

It's an interesting video, and honestly, I'm not sure whether I agree with it or not.

I suppose I'd segregate it into art and engineering

On the one hand, having a single creative vision can result in some great art.

On the other hand, almost all modern engineering of any kind is a collaborative effort. Systems are simply too big and complex for one person to exercise an auteur-like control over.

The problem to me is not collaboration. The problem is getting the right kind of collaboration. The "design by committee" argument is a result of bike shedding.

Henry Ford famously said “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."

Pretty good argument for single creative vision, right? Clearly the "people" didn't understand the paradigm shift.

But no great invention occurs in a vacuum, and no great invention was ever perfect on the first iteration. It's an incredibly hard problem. Feedback from users is undeniably important, but a good engineer must be able to differentiate between useful feedback and people who don't understand the problem domain.

Personally, I work collaboratively 90% of the time. The 10% is the interesting bit though

@renatojj may i ask a question?
why is it every time someone disagrees with your position or offers a counter-proposal you take it personally?

re-read many of the posts here concerning your comment.
they are actually agreeing with you in many ways but they diverge when it comes to how they may go about rectifying the situation.

this is basic "politics 101".all politics is..to break it down to its most base definition is "what should we do".
thats all...thats it.

your solution is to limit government and ( i assume) give more powers back on a state and local level.
others have proposed a different approach.
i say let it all build to a head and implode under its own hubris while i sit on my lawn chair and watch it all burn.

who is right?
which is the best path that will benefit all?
well of course you think you are right,otherwise you would not think and perceive things the way you do.

but you appear to be allergic to any contrary ideologies to your ways of perceiving and that my friend is absolutist thinking and it is dangerous.

@aaronfr pointed out (quite correctly) your basic misunderstanding of socialism and i would add that you are using the title of "libertarian" in the bastardized and twisted media-induced definition that has propagated like a disease in america.

i tell people i am a conservative libertarian socialist just to watch their heads explode,and the funny thing is....you most certainly CAN be a conservative-libertarian-socialist.
but if you are weaned on american corporate opnion/commentray news that terminology would make absolutely no sense.which @cosmovitelli alluded to.

you can have a socialist democracy.
you can even have a communist democracy.
because one is a system of government and the other is financial.
here in america we have been bludgeoned into believing that capitalism and democracy go together like peas and carrots.

marx is a GREAT read,as is adam smith,and BOTH have been bastardized here in america because BOTH warned of the perils of communism and capitalism.

here in america we have a supposedly laissez faire approach but in reality america is a corporate socialist state.
where corporations take the risk to gain huuuuuge profits and dump the loss on the general public.
and that my friend is basic socialism.
to big to fail and too big to jail.

and here we come to my main point:
i dont think anyone here is disagreeing with you.
it appears they all see the broken system which favors the wealthy and powerful and are angered that money=free speech.
they just have a different approach on how to fix it,this does not make them stupid nor naive,just different.

i actually agree with you that trying to fix the broken system by using the very system that is broken seems counter-intuitive.
you suggest limiting government.
i suggest letting it burn.
others suggest enforcing the rule of law.
while others may deem it fit to vote a whole new legislature into office.

all different approaches to the same problem.

engage with those that disagree with you because it forces you to re-evaluate and defend your position often and sometimes you may find while in those discussions a new piece of information,a new way of looking at a problem that exposes the weakness in your argument.
the intelligent person will immediately dump the former to adhere to the newer and more succinct paradigm.
the fundamentalist will not and will continue to bang the gong for a defunct ideology.

so dont take it personally when someone disagrees with you.
nobody is here to dehumanize you nor dismiss you.
they may make assumptions based on your commentary but you can clear that up quite easily.

on a side note :@dag is one of the smartest and open minded people i know from the internet.dont judge him too quickly.