"God knows the right wing wants nothing to do with the actual Jesus."

Um, a direct quote from you.

It's not that you make no sense, but, well, actually that's all it is.

Waiting to see the subdomain trump.slashdot.org. You will revel in that.

Or be upset that your employer considers attendance, or presence, to be a measure of your availability, commitment, or attention...

An unbearable manager compels you to move on. You play manager bingo. You win. They get left behind.

unbearable /n-bâr-bl/
adjective
So unpleasant, distasteful, or painful as to be intolerable.
"unbearable heat."
So unpleasant or painful as to be unendurable.
Incapable of being put up with.

unendurable
adjective
Not to be endured; intolerable.
Incapable of being put up with.

adjective
Impossible to tolerate or endure; unbearable.
"intolerable agony."
Not tolerable; not capable of being borne or endured; not proper or right to be allowed; insufferable; insupportable; unbearable.
"intolerable pain; intolerable heat or cold; an intolerable burden."

Not susceptible to action or treatment.
"a unique feat, incapable of duplication."

Unbearable. The use of the adjective 'unbearable' to describe unpleasant or distasteful situations is not, itself, unbearable.

So you got my point, at least that one.

Contention for Wi-Fi channels is already happening. Higher power might introduce more competitors, but it all still can work.

The worst thing people do is try ty manage their W-Fi channel assignment. You are not that smart. You aren't either, you were just lucky.

How unfortunate that your local Wi-Fi environment is so over populated that you cannot actually use yours.

let me know, somehow, and I'll sport you over some Starbucks points so you can drink powerful coffee while you rant on and on and on...

Oh, wait, like my neighborhood, this is actually NOT A PROBLEM. Putz. It just looks annoying to you. Consider rewiring your house for Ethernet, or, try Powerline, Moca, or implement RFC2549, and get off our lawns.

(You could beg a neighbor for their W-Fi password)

A point - for lower headlight mounting, the angle is never such that it illuminates drivers ahead of the vehicle... Angles or whatever, another Prius never has its headlights at or above my line of sight.

OTOH, Many pickup trucks, and apparently (based on direct observation), lifted or not, the headlights are already at or above the drivers' line of sight... They will indeed shine directly into my rearview mirror, causing me significant glare and posing a safety risk. This is whether the mirror is dimmed or not - they are too bright for that.

Further, as was repeated last night, oncoming pickup trucks lifted or not, pose the same threat, only directly into my eyes.

And some trucks do not apparently have headlights that are compliant, for they cause such overwhelming glare even further away, and more than 3 lanes to the left in oncoming lanes. Some trucks, and this is not uncommon here in Arizona, have the standard headlights, clear white foglights/daytime running lights, and high beams, all on at the same time. Glare x2, the DRL glare being significant despite being lower on the frame. Lifted enough the DRL are actually at or above regular low beam height.

Despite the geometry lesson, both the apparently noncompliant lamps and actual height above the road lead to this glare, and it's dangerous. And it will not be addressed, the NHTSA is nonresponsive to such complaints until there is a threshold of deaths reported.

Nope. China is too big to fail.

And we have not yet learned that lesson.

Height. As in pickup trucks and their cousins, full sized SUVs, and the upper headlights being nearly exactly at the height of the eyes of drivers in smaller coupes and sedans.

And lifted trucks, with headlights aimed directly into the rear windows of those smaller vehicles. As they must be, after all, being higher they need to be pointed down more profoundly to actually illuminate roadway in a useful fashion.

When do we get some regulation preventing this direct illumination of other drivers, to their distraction and dangerously so...?

And all this afflicts oncoming drivers as well.

C'mon, man, deal with real dangers as well...

And that would be the difference between an insurance payout and disaster relief. Flood insurance I would be receiving an insurance payout. I'm paying the premiums. I don't know what my hazard insurance would pay, generally they won't avoid everything when it comes to flood damage. But it wouldn't be public money, I'm paying premiums.

Trump's Epstein distraction strategy is indeed most excellent. It worked on you...

Winning!

I call BS. Job openings that get two applications are not real. As in nonexistent.

So they won't make you an editor. For God's sake, let it go.

A retaining wall/dam around my slab would prevent access to the garages, and is not a practical solution. It is an attached garage. And it would need to be 360 degrees, and the back part of the lot would make for interesting problems.

I'm going to offend you here. You've seen one post about a retaining wall/dam and thought it would work. And, it retains all rainfall inside, unless I were to add gated drains, which could fail. Not to mention, while my property is 6 inches below flood level as assessed, how tall should it be? And how deep? You know much about Arizona soil?

The best solution would be to lift the house, re-pour (with demo of the original and full utilities replacement) at least 12 inches higher, and never get there because it is unlikely to be accepted by the HOA, nor the town. The engineering would be interesting, and unlikely to satisfy the regulatory agencies.

It's not fixable. Appreciate the effort. Have a moment and consider I am fortunate to not have been built on expansive soil.

If you had read my comments more carefully, you would know I live in Gilbert, Arizona. I do not live on oceanfront, I do not have pure foundation, I am on a slab. I am 6 in below the 100-year flood plain risk as assessed by FEMA. Gilbert is in the desert, what we think of is the valley but is truly a basin. The flooding would be caused by a failure or inadequate drainage and an exceptional monsoon/ thunderstorm, probably several in rapid succession., they have standards, they've done their engineering. Not alone, a great deal of my neighborhood is also in this 100-year floodplain risk. We've been grandfathered in so for the first few years premiums were not horrible, but of course we are paying full price now. It is more expensive than my hazard insurance. And of course, it includes some subsidy towards the flood benefits that would be paid to those who do not have insurance and yet have serious need. If I were to have a loss due to flood, this would be a payout, because I'm paying premiums. If you understand insurance, you know what that means. FEMA is better known for their relief, this is money which is paid to people who are in need, who probably did not pay any money into any fund or any insurance that would have covered the loss that they suffered. Let me try this one more time just so that you get it. This was determined by FEMA due to a survey that they conducted about 10 years ago, and a change in their standards, probably due to the unexpected losses that they suffered around that time. I don't live on the ocean. I don't live on the shore. I don't live near your River or a lake or a stream. A flood for me would be rainwater and inadequate drainage to handle the amount that would come, perhaps in 100 years. For what it's worth, there's no history of such rainfall in this area for more than 100 years, but who can predict the future. Please forgive my typos, I'm dictating this to my phone. If you're unsure about the details of my situation that I'm describing, go back and reread my first comment about this. And remember that we started out talking about people in coastal zones who have a clear and present risk of flooding on a regular basis. Perhaps as often as several times a year. And FEMA somehow can take care of them. Sometimes with delay. What they're doing in West Virginia? I have no idea, but from what I've seen of reports even as recent as last month, not very much. And in New York. It happens.