What should be the MTU Size for Windows Servers on the same Network

Question: I have two windows servers on the same network, communicating to each other. What would be the best way to come up with the MTU setting?
Answer: In my experience, the default MTU in Windows doesn't need adjusting. Why do you think you need to modifiy the MTU? Does your network infrastucture (switches) support MTU sizes other than the standard Ethernet MTU of 1500? (I'm assuming we're talking Ethernet here).
Answer: An easy way to determine your best MTU value, which should make your tinkering a lot less complicated: Start by opening a dos prompt, then enter this following command:
ping -f -l [trial MTU number] [other server IP]
Start with 1400 and go up or down depending on the message (if it tells you that the packets are being fragmented, you need to go down - you want the highest setting that doesn't cause packet fragmentation). To derive your MTU from the ping data, add 28 to the highest number that worked (packet size+28).
For example: Ping -f -l 548 10.0.0.3
If this does not cause packet fragmentation, use 576 for MTU because 548+28=576


1st-person POV vs. 1st-person narration

Question: I always thought there was a distinction between POV and narration.  You can have 1st-person POV with either 1st-person narration or 3rd-person narration.  So I think the discussions here (http://fictionwriting.about.com/od/glossary/g/firstperson.htm) and here (First person pov with more than one main chars) are conflating two separate issues.  Am I confusing terms?
Comment: "Perspective" is a synonym for "point of view", @dmm. "Point of veiw" is the technical term in the context of narrative writing, "perspective" is the technical term in the context of visual arts. Both mean the same: the direction from which the recipient (viewer or reader) perceives the events or objects described in the work of art. 1st or 3rd person is the *mode* of narration.
Comment: And what about "perspective"?  Is that the same as POV, the same as narrator, or something else?  It seems like not everyone is using the same terms for stuff, which makes it hard to have a discussion.
Answer: These are tightly connected.
POV (Point of View) tells about the person, "through whose eyes we look". "Perspective" is the name for that style of view. An autobiography will be written from the author's POV, in 1st person perspective - or from POV of some protagonist. A guide will be written in 2nd person, from the reader's POV. 3rd person will be just 3rd person POV - or it may be a book which is technically 1st person, but practically 3rd person, a relation of a witness. In this case you're not stretching the truth saying it's 3rd person from given witness' POV.
Now, for the narrator: this is the person, who tells the reader everything that is not said by the characters. Traditionally, and usually this is the person, whose POV is used, although not always.
For example, in theatre dramas, there is often an explicit narrator, a person who walks onto the scene to deliver a passage, e.g. connecting two acts. This is still a 3rd person experience, as we look at the scene without participating, but it's not us who are the narrators. Another example: there are two narrators, in two nested stories - a story tells about a person who tells a story. That person becomes the narrator, but they could still tell any perspective story, e.g. from some virtual protagonist's POV.
There's also a finer distinction between types of narrators, reaching beyond point of view. You can talk about unreliable narrator, omniscient narrator, partially omniscient narrator, and so on. This tells more about the style of narration than just "who says it, and is it us?"
Comment: Not entirely; Perspective is the class name, POV is the instance name ;)
Comment: So, perspective and POV are basically the same thing.  And POV and narration are different things, although they often line up.  That's what I thought.  Anyone disagree?
Comment: LOL, we are such nerds!  You made the joke, and I get it.
Answer: I strongly disagree with SF's answer.
1) There is fictional 2nd person narrative. It's rare, but it exists. An example is given on the Wikipedia page to 2nd person narrative:

You are not the kind of guy who would be at a place like this at this time of the morning. But here you are, and you cannot say that the terrain is entirely unfamiliar, although the details are fuzzy. ~ Opening lines of Jay McInerney's Bright Lights, Big City (1984)

2) There are different theories of narrative perspective or point of view. The most common differentiates between:

auctorial narrator: a narrator who knows everything
personal narrator: the story is told from the perspective of a person who experiences the events
neutral narrator: like an observer, this narrator does not take part in the events, but he does not know everything (like the auctorial narrator) either

3) All narrative perspectives can be told in any grammatical person! This is called the narrative mode.
Comment: I never claimed 2nd person can't be narrative. It's rare but not unseen. Conversely though, it's fairly common in guides and manuals, so I gave that as a representative example.

1st-person POV vs. 1st-person narration


Should I get a financial advisor?

Question: I am 21 years old and graduated from college and I obtained a decent job. I have read a lot about managing money, and I believe I could manage my own money by myself. I am interested in maybe going a different route and getting a financial advisor. Is getting a financial advisor a good thing? I am not too familiar with how they work, but I have heard about them.
Answer: Some of the best advice I heard is that people have two jobs:  The first is their chosen career, the second is to manage their own money.
An important part of managing your own money is decide upon goals.  Do you want to do the standard work for 25-40 years and retire?  Build wealth through real estate?  Build wealth to later invest in a business?  Live for today and spend as much money as possible for as long as possible?  Have a family?  If you do want children are you interested in leaving a legacy?
This leads to an important question:  have you obtained a job that like with sufficient growth opportunity?
Those are a lot of questions for someone so young so it is best, at this point, to decide upon some fuzzy long term goals, but more specific short term goals.  Some great short term goals, at this point in your life, would be to get out of debt.  Have enough money saved for your next car.  Have an emergency fund.  Contribute x% of your income to your company 401k, and increase it by 1% every year.  Those are just some examples.
So you may in fact want and need a financial adviser, but I doubt you need one now.  They have a vested interest in steering you to products from which they make money.  One of those could be life insurance.  You probably don't have a need for much life insurance at this point.
So I would hold off, read some books, set some goals and see if you like investing on your own.  I would also ask some trusted older adults on the steps one should take.
I would read three financial books, all available from the library, or used for cheap from Amazon:
The Millionaire Next Door
The Total Money Makeover
The Little Book of Common Sense Investing
Comment: Perhaps the point that I implied  was not stated clearly.  Take advantage of the free meeting(s) with the bank's financial adviser to improve one's learning curve and then DIY at a much lower cost.
Comment: +1 This  answer offers good advice.  I'd add that in the US, major banks provide a free consultations with a financial adviser.  Take advantage of the offer.  It may help your learning curve.  But as Pete B. suggested, they have a vested interest in steering you to products from which they make money from, most of which can be obtained a lot lower cost.
Comment: @BobBaerker I would suggest the advice from the bank is not free.  They steer people towards woefully inadequate and expensive products.
Answer: A financial advisor that charges per hour and will assess your finances and give you advice (typically a subset of financial advisors known as financial planners) could be a good way to help you work toward your goals. A financial advisor that handles your investments for a percentage is harder to justify in general, but especially at this point in your career. I've met with an advisor that my folks use, ultimately he had nothing to tell me that I didn't already know, and if I had paid for it I would have been disappointed. However, my folks have benefited from his advice because they aren't like me, they would have overlooked things and it was helpful for them to have someone else craft a plan.
I'd argue that for someone just starting on their career there are enough good sources of information that you don't need an advisor. I know people that meet with a financial planner about every 5 years, research is time consuming, for many people having a touch-base with a professional can be a reassurance that they aren't overlooking anything significant. They'll discuss current financial situation, goals for the next 5+ years, and tweak their plan as needed. This, to me, is the most appealing option for those that don't want to spend much time doing their own research.
Answer: If you get a financial advisor, only hire a fiduciary. A fiduciary is legally obligated to work in your best interests.
Part of the decision is understanding yourself. There are lots of very smart people who do not manage their money well. You need to both learn about personal finance and be disciplined about saving. Are you actually going to read some books on personal finance, or do you need someone else to inform you? Do you save on your own, or do you need someone else to plan for you so you do? If you cannot do these on your own, financial advice can definitely be worth it. The difference between good financial choices and bad choices is far greater than some by-the-hour fees.
If you are a strong self-motivator, you don't need a financial advisor. Read up, be disciplined about saving, use tax advantaged accounts, and select investments while understanding risk and time horizons.
Answer: Unless you're juggling around several hundred thousand dollars/pounds/euros, it's overkill to "have" a financial advisor.
I daresay you would be able to find some "advisor" who will let you pay them for having a general chat about money with you a couple of times a year -- but that won't be something you need, if all you have to worry about is a general salary-earning economy, perhaps home ownership, and some pension savings.
Most adults manage fine by themselves by keeping (critical) track of free advice from papers or the internet, just relying on salespeople from banks and other companies that provide services you need, plus a bit of common sense.
If you're about to engage in something particularly large and complex -- buying a house, for example, or setting up a retirement account -- then it can be a good idea to pay for some sparing from an independent professional for that specific purpose. But that's something different from "having" a financial advisor just to have one.

Should I get a financial advisor?


How does Muslim teaching on the person of Jesus differ from that of Christian teaching?

Question: Both religions acknowledge the existence of Jesus of Nazareth.  But how do the Muslim teachings about Jesus differ from the Christian view of the same person?
Answer: Here are the points where Islam differs with (mainstream) Christianity when it comes to the person of Jesus:
1. Islam does not recognize Jesus as the son of God
In Islam, Jesus is a messenger of Allah and among the five greatest known as Ulu Al-Azm (those of great resolve). And while he is a great and righteous man gifted with many miracles, he is not divine in any way.

That is Jesus, the son of Mary - the word of truth about which they are in dispute. It is not [befitting] for Allah to take a son; exalted is He! When He decrees an affair, He only says to it, "Be," and it is.
(Maryam 19:34-35)

2. Islam does not teach that Jesus was crucified and reserructed
Muslims believe that Jesus did not die on the cross, but was in fact ascended up to the heavens where he continues to be alive. The majority view is that Jesus was ascended just before the crucifixion event and was replaced by someone else. It only appeared that Jesus was crucified, when in fact someone else had replaced him. There is no clear evidence on the identity of the person who replaced him, but many believe that it was Judas Iscariot.

And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.
(An-Nisa' 4:157)

3. The second coming of Jesus
Muslims believe that in the end of days, Jesus will descend again to help the Mahdi and the Muslims in their war against Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal (the charlatan messiah). Details differ among scholars and schools of thought. See this Hadith:

"Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until the son of Mary (Mariam) (i.e. Isa) descends amongst you as a just ruler, he will break the cross, kill the pigs, and abolish the Jizya tax. Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it (as charitable gifts)."
(Sahih Bukhari 3:43:656)
Comment: Christians believe in the 3rd one too. The only difference is they don't know about the Mahdi, but only the time after Jesus is back. And so they have been lead to see a Muslim public figure, say Mahdi, as the 'anti-christ' (Masih Dajjal as we know it).
Comment: @AhmetNoyanKızıltan - I know they do, but they differ on a great many things as to the nature of the second coming, which is why I added it as a separate point.
Comment: I confirm that the answer above is accurate from an Islamic perspective. Just in case anyone ever wonders whether the votes up are just because it is a "nice" answer, or also because it is correct and accurate.
Comment: @system down Mahdi will help eesa not other way around if you are sunni. Eesa will be caliph starting immediately after fajr prayer
Answer: In Islam, We believe Jesus is a Prophet, Messenger of Allah, Spirit of Allah, Word of Allah .

O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Do not exceed the
  limits in your religion, nor say of Allaah aught but the truth. The
  Messiah Eesaa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a
  Messenger of Allaah and His Word (through which He created him), (a
  Word) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rooh) created
  by Him. So believe in Allaah and His Messengers. Say not: "Three
  (trinity)!" Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allaah is (the only)
  God (worthy of worship), Glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above
  having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that
  is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.
  (An-Nisa 4:171)

This verse was revealed in relation to various factions of the Christians (Ya'qubiyyah, Nestoriyyah, Malikaaniyyah, Marqoosiyyah), and they had various sayings so some said, "Jesus is Allaah", others said, "He is the son of Allaah" and others said, "He is the third of three." Source: Jesus in Islam
And he is the blessed Messiah and no more than a Messenger. He was humble servant and worshipper of Allah.

The Messiah (Jesus, son of Mary) was no more than a Messenger, many
  were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother (Mary) was
  a Siddeeqah (she believed in the words of Allaah and his Books). They
  both used to eat food [as other human beings do while Allaah does not
  eat]. Look at how We make the signs clear to them, yet look at how
  they are deluded from the Truth. (5:75)

Moreover, Christians believe Jesus is dead. But, we believe that Jesus is alive and he will return upon earth at the appointed time near the approach of the Hour when he will kill al-Dajjaal (the great liar), and he will abide by and establish Islaam, and there will be none from the people of the book (Jews, Christians) except that they will affirm their faith in him and his essential message of Islam.

Then she pointed to him (the baby, Jesus). They said: 'How can we talk
  to one who is a child in the cradle?' He (Jesus) said: 'Verily I am a
  slave of God, He has given me the Scripture and made me a Prophet; And
  He has made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and has enjoined on me
  prayer, and Zakaat (charity), as long as I live.  And dutiful to my
  mother, and did not make me arrogant, unblest.  And Salaam (peace) be
  upon me the day I was born, and the day that I die, and the day I
  shall be raised alive!'" [19:29-33]

More subtle differences in belief:
Both Christians and Muslims believe that Jesus could perform miracles. But, Christians believe it was his own power but Muslims believe it was through the power given by Allah.
Comment: @Dynamic There is a lot of repetition of points, and as a programmer that bothers me :)
Comment: @Atif - DRY? lol
Comment: "Christians believe Jesus is dead." That is incorrect. Christianity exists because Christians believe that Jesus was killed then *resurrected*. Christians, therefore, believe He is alive.
Comment: @fredsbend The belief of Muslims with respect to Jesus is that he was not killed. Every person in this world will be dead and then resurrected. That doesn't mean you are not dead. You are dead with respect to this world. The point is, the belief of Christians and Muslims is different with respect to death (or killing) of Jesus (Whatever you wish to call it)
Comment: There are many differences. Maybe should we all merge our answers into one.
Comment: @Atif I agree. But don't know how to do it.
Comment: @Atif It is actually a GOOD thing that there was not one right answer. There were many.
Comment: @SystemDown exactly!
Answer: Christians believe that Jesus was crucified
Muslims do not, We believe that He ascended

وَقَوۡلِهِمۡ إِنَّا قَتَلۡنَا ٱلۡمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ٱبۡنَ مَرۡيَمَ رَسُولَ ٱللَّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـٰكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمۡ‌ۚ وَإِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ٱخۡتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِى شَكٍّ۬ مِّنۡهُ‌ۚ مَا لَهُم بِهِۦ مِنۡ عِلۡمٍ إِلَّا ٱتِّبَاعَ ٱلظَّنِّ‌ۚ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينَۢا (١٥٧) بَل رَّفَعَهُ ٱللَّهُ إِلَيۡهِ‌ۚ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمً۬ا (١٥٨)
That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";― but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not.― (157)

Surat 4 Ayah 157
Christians believe that He is the son of Allah, and sometimes Allah Himself, Auzubillah.
Muslims believe that He is a Prophet of Allah

إِذۡ قَالَتِ ٱلۡمَلَـٰٓٮِٕكَةُ يَـٰمَرۡيَمُ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُبَشِّرُكِ بِكَلِمَةٍ۬ مِّنۡهُ ٱسۡمُهُ ٱلۡمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ٱبۡنُ مَرۡيَمَ وَجِيهً۬ا فِى ٱلدُّنۡيَا وَٱلۡأَخِرَةِ وَمِنَ ٱلۡمُقَرَّبِينَ (٤٥)
Behold! the angels said "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah. (45)

Surat 3 Ayah 45

مَّا ٱلۡمَسِيحُ ٱبۡنُ مَرۡيَمَ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ۬ قَدۡ خَلَتۡ مِن قَبۡلِهِ ٱلرُّسُلُ وَأُمُّهُ ۥ صِدِّيقَةٌ۬‌ۖ ڪَانَا يَأۡڪُلَانِ ٱلطَّعَامَ‌ۗ ٱنظُرۡ ڪَيۡفَ نُبَيِّنُ لَهُمُ ٱلۡأَيَـٰتِ ثُمَّ ٱنظُرۡ أَنَّىٰ يُؤۡفَكُونَ (٧٥)
Christ the son of Mary was no more than an Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth makes His Signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth! (75)

Surat 5 Ayah 75
Answer: In the Qur'an, in a passage describing the annunciation to the Blessed Virgin Mary, Jesus ('a) is described as a Word from God: "O Mary! Verily Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him; his name is the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, eminent in this world, and in the Hereafter of those near [to God]" (3:44)
The context in which this ayah was revealed was one of inter-religious encounter. It is said that the Christians of Najran sent a delegation to the Prophet of Islam (s) at Makkah to question him about the teachings of Islam concerning Jesus ('a), and God revealed the above and other ayat of Surat Al 'Imran in response. The response is not only not a denial of Christian teachings, although the divinity of Christ is clearly rejected, but also an affirmation of much believed by Christians as well, even the designation of Christ as logos: 'O People of the Book! Do not go to extremes in your creed, and do not say of Allah but the Truth. Verily, the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, is only an apostle of Allah and His Word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a Spirit from Him (Qur'an 4:171) So in addition to being called the Word of God, Jesus ('a) is also called a Spirit of God and in some of the narrations reported in the Shi'i tradition, this title is used.
Please look at these two:
http://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/jesus.htm
http://www.al-islam.org/jesus_shiite_narrations/


Cited prior art/patent owner notifies me that my granted patent infringes his patent

Question: My previous statement may not be clear. So I rewrite my question:
I was granted my patent. I do have cited many prior art/patent in my patent application, one of the cited prior patent owner notified me that my patent infringes his one. Since the USPTO patent Examiers were supposedly reviewing all the prior patents that I cited in my application, and they granted me my patent, will I be safe if this prior patent owner sue me in the court?
Comment: I'm not sure I understand. What are they suing for?
Comment: @DonQuiKong is asking an important question. Is their patent broader than yours so that you don't have freedom to operate? We would need to know more before answering your question.
Answer: A granted patent provides a "negative" priviledge, I mean, you can block others from manufacturing or commercializing the invention, but it does not ensure you can put your own product / service in the market.
There may be times when the product or service protected by your patent requires licensing other patents, because some specific parts of the manufacturing process or characteristics of the product have been previsuly protected by others. In those cases, third parties can block you unless you get such licence.
Usually, this kind of conflict is solved by sharing licences.
Anyway, the conflict appears when the product is in the market, not because of the patent itself.
However, I think you mean that the other company wants to invalidate your patent. As the examination process is not perfect, sometimes important prior art is missed, and inventive step criterion is not fully applied.
I only know the patent cancellation procedure in European countries, I suppose that it is not so far away from the EEUU one. As far as I know, most of companies fight back by trying to cancel the patent of the initial suing company, it is a so common procedure that it has its own name in Spanish and other European languages. :-)
I agree with Eric Shain and DonQuiKong, I imagine that you get that notification after you patent was published. So, if you post the patent numbers of both patents (prior art and yours) perhaps we could help you better.


Taking apart old electronics

Question: I sometimes end up having someone's unwanted old electronics, usually faulty ones. Does it make sense to harvest components from such. Anything valuable I should be looking for?
Comment: related question: [How to find Junk yards?](http://electronics.stackexchange.com/q/87162)  Similarly, the answers discuss whether it's worth the time or not.
Comment: There used to be a significant amount of precious materials in some, like old motherboards and power supplies. Are they still present in extractable quantity?
Comment: I think quite a lot is sent to developing countries as an e-waste. Minimal labor costs and loose environmental laws.
Comment: At one point, tantalum caps were a deficit.  For me, tantalum caps were the only thing that was worth mass-scavenging out of random 3rd party electronic junk.
Comment: It might not save/bring much money, but if you don't have them, it can improve your desoldering skills.
Answer: The most valuable thing you can get from discarded electronics is understanding.  Try fixing them, or at least trace out the circuit until you can discover what is wrong.
It used to be very hard to get schematics, but now we have the Internet.  Sites like http://eserviceinfo.com and http://ko4bb.com/ have service manuals for a variety of equipment.  Even if you can't find the manufacturer's service manual, you can often find datasheets for the important components.  Many designs don't stray too far from the datasheet example circuits.
Of course, you can learn about circuits from just reading datasheets and textbooks, but having the physical circuit in front of you gives another level of understanding.
Comment: Yes! Thank you! I would also like to add that you can also learn a lot about what goes wrong with devices. As I've been learning electronics, I decided to buy "dead" desktop computer power supplies from a local computer shop. Seeing the bulging capacitors,  transistors that caught fire, and circuit boards with heat-discoloration, shows what happens when things go badly, and how things fail (and smell when they do ;-). This is another kind and level of understanding that you can only get from taking things apart. Doing this led me to discover measuring capacitor ESR towards fixing more devices.
Answer: You'll be paying youself only pennies per hour.  I wouldn't bother with basic and cheap stuff like resistors and capacitors.  ICs are often hard to identify, and old ones have little value today.
I would look for things like power transformers, speakers, heat sinks, relays, solenoids, motors, and large mechanical parts.  Those cost more and are often hard to find.  Sometimes just the box and chassis are the more valuable parts.
Comment: One good source I have found for these types of parts is old hard drives. The spindle motor is a small 3-phase brushless DC motor. The read/write arm is powered by a voice coil servo actuator. Be VERY careful with this part, as there are two neodymium rare-earth magnets that can come together [quite violently](http://www.geekologie.com/2009/02/guy-loses-finger-to-neodymium.php) during disassembly. In older drives (think 1980s), the arm is powered by a stepper motor instead of a voice coil. CD-ROM drives have a BLDC motor as well.
Comment: It really depends on what it is you're salvaging. For a [cheap novelty USB toy that shoots rockets](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_CzDwgABJAYw/S_3mDnzm6KI/AAAAAAAAEYo/W7O63GCJHF4/s1600/usb_rocket_launcher.jpg) I could get a short USB cable and a couple of batteries. You might find something that might be useful at a later date.
Comment: Excellent point. I recently bid (and won) a couple of grinding measurement instruments at an industrial auction. For about $15 I got two large steel enclosures, a couple of expensive Amphenol connectors, a few LVDT's, the LVDT signal conditioning circuitry, dozen or so large relays and lot of miscellaneous "toys." Definitely worth it.
Answer: These days, there isn't much to get from consumer products. Look for reusable sub-assemblies rather than discrete components. For instance, laser printers yield nice high voltage supplies. Printers in general can be good for a motor or two, though good luck finding any specs on them. Sometimes you can get a display suitable for re-purposing from a dead laptop, but again, specs are the problem. Figuring out how to use something from just looking at the end of a ribbon cable and a power connector can be daunting.
Of course, if you're pulling apart old electronics, that's a different story. If it has vacuum tubes in it, while you may not personally have a use for them, there are people out there who would be happy to have even used tubes. The sockets for same are getting harder to come by as well, as are step-up transformers that supplied the voltages needed. If you encounter nixie tubes, just google them before you consign them to the trash can, you'd be surprised.
The best thing I've pulled apart in the last 10 years was actually a treadmill. It yielded a whole bunch of nice 7-segment displays, a power supply for the logic board, a great big DC motor, and a speed controller for same. Also, microwave ovens sometimes give up beastly large transformers - but be exceedingly careful with those, they can easily kill a person.
Answer: I recommend harvesting components 1) in the case of custom chips that can be used to repair other devices of the same type, OR 2) if you are in a situation where you can't quickly get any parts for repair work.
Number 1 only really applies if the device is something that someone will, someday, want to repair. For instance, older arcade machines are still in demand by collectors, and we repair our equipment (because you sure can't buy it new anymore!). When the manufacturer used custom chips, then the only good solution for collectors is to save old, dead boards and strip them of custom parts to keep other boards running. I'm sure there are other classes of equipment where this would make sense.
Number 2 applies if you are located somewhere that doesn't have local suppliers of parts, and slow or excessively expensive deliveries. Islands or small towns in far northern latitudes can have stupidly high shipping costs, and low local populations that will prevent the operation of a local supplier. In this case, throw out NOTHING. You keep the broken stuff and when you can't get a part, you go scavenging in your junk pile for what you need.
Comment: Getting new parts is not a problem really here in Finland. And my missus might start to complain if I keep everything.
Answer: I like salvaging parts. It is really helpful if you are a student (or just anyone) strapped for cash.
Sometimes you also find real gems. I always keep boards with electronic components on them in a box, and enjoy looking through them to see what I can use. They teach you a lot about how circuits work as well.
Very few people have also considered the environmental benefit of recycling old components.
An essential tool for me when tearing apart electronics is a desoldering pump. If you don't have one, seriously consider getting one.
Answer: Personally, I like salvaging old parts. If you are just starting out with electronics, I would consider it a good learning activity. You might not get anything very useful, but you will probably learn something.
Take a look at this book: How to Diagnose and Fix Everything Electronic. You might find it interesting.
Comment: Yes! I was specifically going to recommend the book, "How to Diagnose and Fix Everything Electronic". For many common classifications of components, he describes what they are, how they work, and what makes them go bad, and how they fail.  Invaluable.
Answer: I'd like to spare a thought for the mighty Vacuum Tube. Not real likely you yourself will be able to use it successfully unless you know what you're doing, but AFAIK given the fascinating prices ppl will pay on old tubes on eBay (give a search, why doncha) you can easily make a buck or 10.
In fact, feel free to PM me with any vacuum tube y'all come across. That goes for everybody.
Answer: Off-hand I'd say it's not really worth it. I'm not sure you have the time/patience/energy to test all components you retrieve. Testing is necessary not only because they might be damaged in the first place, but also because they might be damaged while soldering them off (i.e. too much heat).
In any case there might be some exceptions, like more expensive components (nixie tubes are a good example - I think there is only one place in the world where they are manufactured) and/or ones that are easy to remove like transformers.
IC labels are often made unreadable by the manufacturer (scratched off, painted over) in order to prevent you from identifying them and possibly copying their designs (yep, paranoid...). Again, I feel most of them are not really made to be soldered off (especially so for BGAs or their brethren), but sometimes they are just plugged into a socket, in which case you can try gently prying them out (careful not to break off a leg).
Maybe some 'interesting' type of jack may also be useful, if you can open it without damaging it. (Most of the newer ones are not made that way - once you pop them into place, you can only remove them by braking the casing.
As I said this is a really painstaking process. Unless you are very short on money or supplies, I wouldn't really recommend it as general practice (I heard Russian hobbyists are diligently salvaging...). On the other hand, this might be something you could enjoy and you might contribute to recycling electronics. <code>:)</code> This is an unsolved problem, and even retrieving the gold from the traces and other components seems to yield so little that nobody can make a profit out of it.
Answer: About the worth, I'd have to say that it depends mostly on the ability to quickly survey the device and on the condition of electronics market in the area.
From my experience the most important thing about salvaging components is to know what you can buy in the store around the corner, what you can buy in a specialized store, what you can order from the Internet and what needs to be imported and to know what types of components to expect in a device and then to only focus on the components which would be difficult to easily obtain and ignore the rest.
The problem with this approach is that what exactly is good to keep and what isn't depends a lot on the local conditions so it's difficult to provide good advice on that and that some experience is required to actually know what to look for in the first place.
Another thing that should be obvious but I'll mention anyway is to go first for the most accessible components. For example printers, scanners and similar office devices often have lots of electrical motors and in some cases they can just need to be unplugged. Most mobile phones nowadays have vibration motors that can be very easily removed from the device, sometimes even with no tools.
Also look for whole modules what can be removed completely like transmitter/receiver PCBs in various wireless devices or power supply PCBs. It is sometimes easier to just include an off-the-shelf PCB inside of a product that uses some well-defined method of communication with the rest of the device than to design one yourself and such modules are interesting for salvage. The problem with more complicated modules is that since the device is dead, there's a chance that the module you're looking at caused the failure, but if it's rare enough and you know to check if it's working, it could be worth the bother. Another problem with this idea is that since there is a major drive to lower the cost of the device, the modules themselves may not be so independent and may expect the rest of the device to do some processing for them. Unfortunately, this can be a bit hard to detect early on.
Another thing which I should mention are custom made components. It takes some experience to find them and sometimes they may not have easily decipherable markings, but they could help a lot with the problem of rarity of come components. Examples of such devices are custom potentiometers which may have switches in interesting positions or may be powered so they can turn themselves or that may have strange resistance distribution (for example antilogarithmic potentiometers seem to be rare now), crystals, resonators and oscillators with strange values, linear voltage regulators with unusual outputs and similar. The main problem with them is as I've said detection. Unless the component is very obvious, there's a chance you won't notice it and even when you do, you can expect problems locating datasheets or facing the challenge of using a component without a datasheet.
I'd also like to write a bit about some components that often aren't worth salvaging. For example it's pretty much impossible to use the "epoxy-blob" packed integrated circuits. Some very specialized components may make sense only for a device of a single type or with same use, such as certain types of LCDs. Basically any LCDs that have any special character on them will often end up useless since it's going to be complicated to drive them. Next, some types of passive components are usually very common, very cheap (say resistors) and may deteriorate with time and use (like electrolytic capacitors, switches, push-buttons, potentiometers).  I'll also add microcontrollers to this list. Unless the microcontroller isn't one I'm familiar with and isn't used in some very easy to extract package or has exposed programming connection, I wouldn't touch it. Basically for microcontrollers, there's some setup cost needed for each family and many microcontrollers have options to prevent later flashing or may even use ROM or EPROM, so they can't be reprogrammed.
Comment: The PIC one-time-programmable (OTP) comes to mind along the lines of what you were saying. If there were the quartz window, they could be erased with ultraviolet light, but there is no quartz window, just a plastic package, so they can never be erased and reprogrammed.
Answer: One often overlooked thing that is worth grabbing are wiring harnesses.
The wired .100 headers typically used for PC front panel buttons and LEDs are great for connecting to eval boards, ISP headers, etc and save making your own.
Some of the smaller, higher density connectors used in other electronics can be very hard to source, but are worth saving for a potential match to a module you are trying to interface, or the console serial port on some consumer-market embedded Linux device, etc.
Fans and heatsinks, if easily removed, can come in handy too.
Answer: What I haven't seen mentioned here are your needs.
You shouldn't salvage a part that you know you'll never need and you can't sell.

When people mention vacuum tubes, they usually forget to mention the Socket and the high-wattage resistors.(If you can use them)
High-capacity high-voltage capacitors are useful too, but only if the circuit is not too old, because they have a high failure rate with age.
And here I would also like to add, that if you have the skill repairing it, then selling it as a whole product may be even better, as there is a lot of people looking for Valve amps for guitars, or hifi.
Answer: Old stuff like Valves and Audio output transformers can be sold easily on the internet. Sure, you will strip what you can use if it doesn't take too much time. This means that resistors won't be worth it, but high quality polypropylene capacitors will be. Electrolytic caps can be a bad second hand proposition when in SMPS or really old equipment, so most won't be saved. SMD boards have a low % of strippable parts. It may be wise to save some through-hole parts because they may get more expensive in the future and they are good for fast prototyping. Semiconductors have a rather constant failure rate so the stripped ones should be just as reliable as a new one if there isn't any heat or moisture damage. Germanium transistors and diodes are expensive new and should be saved because they don't take up much space. Remember to have a good bin system that works for you before you start desoldering. Also remember that scrap aluminum and copper are worth selling.
Answer: It depend upon what you are salvaging. Generally mechanical parts and connectors are useful as they are not usually available locally easily.

Taking apart old electronics


What are some ways to preferentially allocate network usage in my programs?

Question: For example - I want some programs (like BitTorrent clients) to use as little bandwidth as possible unless my computer is idle (but I'd still like them to run to the extent that they wouldn't interfere with the bandwidth used by other programs). There are other programs that I might want to "hog as much bandwidth as possible"
Answer: You can get a router which can run the Linux based Tomato firmware, which has QoS.  This will let you prioritise upload rates, which will then in turn affect your download rates.  The Toastman mod for Tomato has effective default QoS classes.
Answer: Tag your traffic with QoS and the bandwidth should be fairly scheduled amongst applications competing for bandwidth based on their assigned priority.


What set does this Lego S.W.A.T van go to?

Question: I found this in my wife's closet when I was trying to look for my dress shoes. I want to know if this is worth anything and what set this goes to.
Sorry if it's dusty. There is also a little gun that goes to it, can anyone tell me what it is from?
Comment: These are guaranteed to be from clone-brands. Lego does not make such militaristic content.
Comment: Do the studs have the word "Lego" on them? If not then that means they are from clone-brand. This also looks like a custom MOC of official Lego parts as well as clone-brand pats too, so I don't think we will be able to identify it (but it's worth a try maybe). Should I post this as an answer?
Comment: I cannot see if vehicle does have LEGO logo on studs, but it looks like either MOC or clone-brand set. Too dark and oddly shaped for a LEGO set.
Comment: @mindstormsboi It does say "LEGO" on the top, and that is sort of the reason why i asked this question cause its is hart to tell what this set comes from
Comment: @mindstormsboi i sent it again
Answer: That gun is actually pure Lego. It's a Tommy Gun.

Your truck, however, seems like a custom MOC made of random clone-brand parts due to the randomness and low quality of the build. I doubt that a clone-brand company would publish that truck as a set if it looked like that.
I am currently failing to identify this part on your truck, it doesn't match the color scheme. It proves that your truck is made of multiple clone-brand parts from multiple sets, and maybe even multiple companies! I can not find anything like it in the google image search:

The closest I can find is this part, and here's the site it's hosted on:

From the comments:
You have also said that it says Lego on the studs, but I'm just going to assume that only some of them do because of that clone-brand part I've pointed out. Lego does not and will not make SWAT content, and besides that, the truck is a rather low-quality build, so it's certainly not "from a set". Why randomly put a lattice tile on the roof like that anyway? Why do you need two sets of headlights? And why is there a 4x4 round plate on the roof when you can simply access from the back instead? It makes me conclude this is a MOC.
Comment: Comments are not the place for extended discussion. Previous comments have been moved to chat: https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/109594/discussion-on-answer-by-mindstormsboi-what-set-does-this-lego-s-w-a-t-van-go-to


How to activate DND automatically?

Question: I use a MacBook Pro at work which is most of the time connected to a docking station via a lightning cable at my desk.
There I usually turn off do not disturb (DND) mode and activate screensaver/screenlock after 2 minutes.
When I am at meetings it happens regularly that I want to present something but then it is annoying if notifications are displayed or the screensaver turns on after 2 minutes.
How can I automatically turn on DND mode and turn off screensaver automatically whenever my MacBook is not connected to power (docking station)?
Answer: The only way I could get this to work is by building a small Swift command-line application. It works pretty well, with two major caveats:

You cannot have Do Not Disturb scheduled to turn on and off at certain times (check System Preferences)
The menu bar item always looks as though Do Not Disturb is enabled, even though it is not

However, if these caveats aren't a huge deal, the app does everything else you need: it prevents the display from sleeping and enables Do Not Disturb when on battery, and reverses those settings when you connect to AC power. Here is the (slightly involved) process for creating this app:

Install Xcode from the Mac App Store if you have not already done so
Open Xcode and install any necessary components as prompted
From the "Welcome to Xcode" window, select Create a New Xcode Project

Select macOS at the top of the dropdown that appears, then select Command Line Tool under the Application header and click Next

Enter something for your product name—which is the name that will appear on your app (I'm going to be using BatteryDetector)—and fill in the other fields (they don't really matter); make sure the language is set to Swift!

Select somewhere on your computer to save the project (wherever you want), uncheck the box for creating a Git repository, and click Create

Once your project is created (a new window will open), select File > New > File… or press ⌘N to open the New File dialog
Select Header File as the file type and click Next

Name your file [your project name]-Bridging-Header.h, substituting your actual project name for [your-project-name]. In my example, the name would be BatteryDetector-Bridging-Header.h.
Make sure that the Group at the bottom of the dialog has a yellow folder icon next to it and says the name of your project. If it has a blue icon or something else, change it to the option that has a yellow folder icon and the name of your project. See the screenshot below for the correct configuration. When everything is correct, click Create.

Once the file is created, it should automatically be opened. Once it is, erase all of the auto-generated contents and paste in the following code. The code below should be the only code in the file:
#import <IOKit/ps/IOPowerSources.h>

Next, select the project at the top of the hierarchy in the top left of the window, then select the target under the Targets list, select Build Settings at the top of the main panel, and ensure All is selected beneath that (see screenshot below)

Use the search box in the top right of the Build Settings screen to search for objective-c bridging header. You should see a setting called Objective-C Bridging Header come to the top of the list.
Double-click to the right of the Objective-C Bridging Header label so that a text box appears, and enter [your-project-name]/[your-project-name]-Bridging-Header.h in that text box, replacing [your-project-name] with your project's actual name. In my example, I would enter BatteryDetector/BatteryDetector-Bridging-Header.h. Then press return.

Next, click on the main.swift file in the file tree on the left. Delete all of the code it contains, and paste in the code below. The following code should be the only code in main.swift:
import Cocoa

var context = 0
var proc: Process!

func enableDND() {
        CFPreferencesSetValue("doNotDisturb" as CFString, true as CFPropertyList, "com.apple.notificationcenterui" as CFString, kCFPreferencesCurrentUser, kCFPreferencesCurrentHost)
        CFPreferencesSetValue("doNotDisturbDate" as CFString, Date() as CFPropertyList, "com.apple.notificationcenterui" as CFString, kCFPreferencesCurrentUser, kCFPreferencesCurrentHost)
        commitDNDChanges()
}

func disableDND() {
        CFPreferencesSetValue("doNotDisturb" as CFString, false as CFPropertyList, "com.apple.notificationcenterui" as CFString, kCFPreferencesCurrentUser, kCFPreferencesCurrentHost)
        CFPreferencesSetValue("doNotDisturbDate" as CFString, nil, "com.apple.notificationcenterui" as CFString, kCFPreferencesCurrentUser, kCFPreferencesCurrentHost)
        commitDNDChanges()
}

func commitDNDChanges() {
        CFPreferencesSynchronize("com.apple.notificationcenterui" as CFString, kCFPreferencesCurrentUser, kCFPreferencesCurrentHost)
        DistributedNotificationCenter.default().postNotificationName(NSNotification.Name(rawValue: "com.apple.notificationcenterui.dndprefs_changed"), object: nil, userInfo: nil, deliverImmediately: true)
        NSRunningApplication.runningApplications(withBundleIdentifier: "com.apple.notificationcenterui").first?.terminate()
}

func startCaffeinate() {
        proc = Process()
        proc.launchPath = "/usr/bin/caffeinate"
        proc.arguments = ["-d", "-i"]
        proc.launch()
}

func stopCaffeinate() {
        proc.terminate()
}

let loop = IOPSNotificationCreateRunLoopSource({(context: UnsafeMutableRawPointer?) in
        let snap = IOPSCopyPowerSourcesInfo().takeRetainedValue() as CFTypeRef
        let source = IOPSGetProvidingPowerSourceType(snap).takeRetainedValue() as String
        if source == "Battery Power" {
                enableDND()
                startCaffeinate()
        } else {
                disableDND()
                stopCaffeinate()
        }
}, &context).takeRetainedValue() as CFRunLoopSource

CFRunLoopAddSource(CFRunLoopGetCurrent(), loop, .defaultMode)

RunLoop.main.run()

Next, export the application by selecting Product > Archive in the menu bar. Once the archive finishes, a window will appear with an Export button. Click Export, select Built Products, and click Next.

Select a location where you will save the exported executable on your disk, then click Export.
Now, navigate to the folder you just saved to your disk (called [your-project-name] [today's-date]) and navigate through all of the subfolders (probably usr, local, bin) until you find the executable called BatteryDetector (or whatever you named your project). You can store this executable anywhere on disk, but it should be at a stable location (i.e., a location from which you don't plan on moving it) or your computer won't be able to locate it.
Next, copy the following text and paste it into a text-editing program like TextEdit or a code editor (make sure that it won't convert quotes to "smart quotes"). Replace the text [your-executable-location] with the full path to where your executable is stored on disk (e.g., /Applications/BatteryDetector).
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">
<plist version="1.0">
  <dict>
        <key>Label</key>
        <string>com.launchagent.batterydetector</string>
        <key>Program</key>
        <string>[your-executable-location]</string>
        <key>RunAtLoad</key>
        <true/>
  </dict>
</plist>

Once you have entered the correct path, copy the newly-modified text (i.e., with your corrected path) to your clipboard.
Next, open Terminal (located at /Applications/Utilities/Terminal.app).
Type the following into Terminal, exactly as it is written here, and then press return. Do not copy and paste it—the command will only work if the text you just modified is currently on your clipboard: test -e ~/Library/LaunchAgents || mkdir ~/Library/LaunchAgents; pbpaste > ~/Library/LaunchAgents/com.launchagent.batterydetector
Finally, log out and then back in to start the app running. It will continue to run in the background, and will automatically start each time you log in. If you need to quit it for some reason, use Activity Monitor and search for the name of your executable (e.g., BatteryDetector).

Here are some sources with more information about some of the code I'm using:

Create a CFRunLoopSourceRef using IOPSNotificationCreateRunLoopSource in Swift
sindresorhus' do-not-disturb on GitHub
Comment: Wow, thanks a lot for your very detailed suggestion.
Answer: Not sure there is an easy answer to all of this; however, a few things that may help:
For the screensaver, you could activate a hot corner to disable the screensaver.
Personally I don't use the screensaver and rather have gotten into the habit of manually locking my screen when I get up at work (Ctl + Cmd + Q).
You could also set the energy saver to turn off the display at different times depending on weather you are on power or battery, also set security to require password when waking up from sleep.
Notifications are a pain (I have most of them turned off).
One possible solution though is in the Notifications Preference you can turn on a setting that will automatically turn on Do not disturb "When mirroring to TVs or Projectors" so if you are mirroring during your presentations, this would work.

How to activate DND automatically?


How can I lose a bounty?

Question: Is it possible to shake off a bounty in GTA Online?
If so, how?
Comment: Its from an NPC though lol im in an invite only room lol
Comment: Get in a [chopper](http://i.imgur.com/BOE3Bvj.png)
Answer: Bounties can be put on you by other players or sometimes by NPC's if you steal their car. If nobody kills you after one full in-game day (48 minutes real time), the bounty will expire and you receive the cash. There's even an achievement to do this.
Spending time in LS Customs does not count toward the 48 minutes. You are best off hiding in your garage or a remote location if playing in a public game. Or if you really want to shake it without the heat, just play in a private game for a while and it will go away once time is up.
Answer: "You can only place bounties on people level 10 or above.
Bounties stick to you until they're claimed or until you survive for 30 minutes, after that you get to keep the money from the bounty.
It is possible that an Npc May put a bounty on you for stealing their car or killing a friend/member of their gang. I believe all odd denominations of thousands of dollars are bounties placed by npcs, ($1000, $3000, $5000, $7000)
Bounties also transfer across lobbies until they are collected, my best advice is to have a friend or crew member so that at least someone in your circle benefits. I received a $9000 bounty and requested my friend shoot my in the head after I had one last smoke. "
That's what I found.
The link here.
Answer: I'm running from a $9000 one right now.  I suggest jumping on a train in private, seeing as NPCs are too dumb to get on one.  Also, press R1/RB to lay low.  But make sure you don't idle too long, or you'll get kicked for it.
Comment: If a NPC kills you, they do not claim the bounty (only another player can); you can die endless times by a NPC and still claim the bounty - I did it last night :-D.
Answer: If you don't want to wait out the 48 minutes, I would suggest going into a private lobby with a friend and having them shoot you. Then you guys can split the bounty 50/50.
Answer: Just hide/wait it out. The hospital bill makes the 50/50 split a non-starter for me.
Answer: I suggest just to let a crew member or friend kill you and split the bounty. If you don't have any, don't hide, but take your chances. I never saw a bounty higher than $9000 and if you have to wait 30 or 48 minutes, then it's not beneficial, because there are a lot of other ways to make even more money in the same amount of time. Even stealing a car and sell it to LS customs gives you more money and it only takes a few minutes or even less than a minute. Hiding from bounty is a waste of time. I have a bounty right now and I'm not hiding. I'm just doing missions and ignoring it and guess what? In less than 2 minutes I get the money for the bounty!
Comment: bounty is from $1,000 to $9,000
Answer: I like to take a chopper and fly around. It
Is funny watching all the people chase you. So far it works for me.

How can I lose a bounty?


SharePoint search metadata is not searchable after SP3

Question: On a single-server farm we had the SharePoint 2007 Service Pack 3 installed without our knowledge, which seems to have affected the search and managed metadata properties negatively.
We have a number of custom metadata properties that are mapped to document and list-specific columns. We have run the SharePoint Configuration Guide post-install and run a full crawl, but still the search returns NULL (blank) for the needed metadata properties.
If we go to check them in the list, the mapping is still there and it even says "More than 1000 item" in the index, so it seems to be indexing them, but the results show otherwise.
Does anyone know what could be causing this and how to fix it?
Answer: Why dont you reset the index and perform a full crawl.
Comment: We tried that, no go. It starts at "0 items" and goes up to "More than 1000 items" as before, but if I try to search for it, none of our custom metadata properties return anything.


How to extract caffeine from coffee

Question: To extract caffeine from coffee, I tried reacting it with baking soda to make tannins more soluble. I then put in salt to push caffeine out of solution. I saturated it with salt and then mixed the solids with acetone to get the caffeine out. There is also some salt in the acetone. Washes with water should remove the salt and tannin salts leaving behind the caffeine(not pure). Would this procedure work? Is there another procedure that would be more efficient and not require DCM.
Comment: What is the question? The text says nothing about DCM and doesn't actually ask a question.
Comment: There is a lot of stuff in coffee. If you try to selectively wash away the non-caffeine stuff you will probably fail. You would do better to try extracting it into a non-water-soluble solvent (DCM might work).
Comment: In the organic practical we used black tea: less contamination and higher caffeine content. It is a nightmare though. I think it was about 10 gram tea for 100 milligram caffeine.
Comment: Supercritical CO2 is used but I doubt you find it in house :)
Comment: Thank you. Are there any household solvents that are not soluble in water
Comment: Ethyl acetate is in fingernail polish remover (along with acetone).  It is not water soluble, although the presence of acetone might cosolubilize it.  Adding salt to the water should effect a partition.  Also starting fluid is diethyl ether, which is water immiscible.
Comment: Is there a method of purification for that impure solid mush.
Answer: The popular procedure to experimentally isolate caffeine is sublimation.
Slowly heat a teaspoon of coffee or tea from 150°C to 250°C. Let the sublimated caffeine precipitate at a watch glass cooled with ice. The resublimated caffeine forms white needles that can be identified under a microscope.
The sublimation temperature of caffeine is 178°C.
Comment: Sorry, are we talking liquid coffee here? How exactly are you heating it to 250C?
Comment: Solid coffee, preferably powder.
Answer: I did this in a practical lesson in chemistry. We filtered the coffee (1.2um filter paper), concentrated it 10x using distillation and then extracted the caffeine into an equal volume of chloroform in a separatory funnel. After evaporating the solvent, we were left with fairly white powder.
It was probably impure, containing lots of other alkaloids.
Comment: Do you think i could use isopropyl alcohol instead of chloroform
Comment: Not really. Although the caffeine would dissolve in it ok, you would have the problem that it would also mix well with the water, so the separatory funnel would not work. The whole idea of using one is to get two separate layers, so that you can drain off and discard the water layer, leaving the stuff you want in the chloroform. Hexane is an alternative, though.
Comment: Oh :( I was looking for a home-and-teenager-friendly alternative.

How to extract caffeine from coffee


See song's license on Soundcloud

Question: Is it possible to see what license an individual song has on Soundcloud? Some of the songs have Creative Commons but others appear to not have any license.
Answer: Artists of songs without a CC license have opted for all rights to be reserved.

So if you do not see something similar to the following (Creative Commons license icons below the genre):

Then all rights are reserved.
Comment: I also notice that any track with a longish description will get a _"show more ▾"_ link. The CC license information may be hidden under that

See song's license on Soundcloud


Implications of abolishing Fractional Reserve Banking on mortgages and interest rates

Question: Suppose for a moment that someone with legislative power decides to abolish Fractional Reserve Banking and passes a law that forces banks to only lend the money they own, that is M0.
What would be the economy-wise implications of such a change in the long run and what in the short run? In particular with such a criteria in mind as mortgages, interest rates and dispossessions.
Comment: Given that what, +90% of the money-base is created this way? Your probably looking at a world-wide depression. Side-note, in the 1800 scottish banking was not regulated, which meant that the banks could only lend out as much money as the market believed was credible. Not entirely the same, but it is an interesting read, see Checkland, S.G, 1975: Scottish Banking.
Comment: @matcheek  The effect on mortgages, interest rates, etc. depends heavily on how credit would be offered without fractional reserves.  That's why this is over-broad.  It skips directly over an intermediate question, so you have to answer the implied question and then answer the questions that arise to get to the answers that you want.  Intermediate questions:  How do you switch from a fractional reserve system to full reserves?  How do you offer credit in such a full reserve system?  Only then can you start answering questions on mortgages and interest rates.
Comment: I personally feel that this is a broad question that demands a very long answer, but maybe thats just me.
Comment: @FooBar I agree and I was almost forced to delete two such questions yesterday, not ranting but feel that it would be too broad
Comment: @FooBar I agree that this is not a Yes/No question and have edited the subject line to make it even more pronounced.
Comment: @Soccerman  If we stopped creating 90% of the money via fractional reserve banking, we could create it the way that we do the other 10%.  And we could get the seigniorage benefit from it.  When we had a gold standard, we needed fractional reserve banking to give more control over money creation.  Without a gold standard, we can create money without fractional reserves or starting a gold mine.  It's not the 1800s anymore.
Comment: See also [Monetary reform - a better monetary system for Iceland, published by Frosti Sigurjonsson, forsætisráðuneytið](http://eng.forsaetisraduneyti.is/media/Skyrslur/monetary-reform.pdf).
Answer: There is a long standing problem in most discussions of Fractional Reserve Banking (FRB), around the precise definition of money. Cash money (that is M0) is an asset on the banking system balance sheet, while deposit money (the liability) is the money that is created by lending.
Ever since the introduction of cheques specifically, and in general the ability to make direct transfers between two deposit accounts, deposit money has been the de facto form of money that is used in the economy. Cash money is maintained at a fractional reserve of deposits (it used to be a regulator of total deposits and lending, but in practice this isn´t the case anymore), and used primarily for inter-bank liquidity settlements, as transfers occur between bank accounts at different banks. Reserve requirements are now down to 2% or less in most countries.
So taken literally, the question is what happens to an economy when its money supply is reduced by 98%, and at the same time total lending shrinks by whatever proportion bank lending is of total lending in the economy (typically 1/3 or more).
In the short run, congratulations, you no longer have an economy. Nobody can pay their non-bank debts any more, because there isn´t enough money to pay them with. Bear in mind debt payments do not automatically adjust to changes in the money supply. That triggers a debt cascade causing wide-spread company failure. The accompanying impact on all prices causes massive disruption in the supply chain, because everything in the economy is now completely mis-priced relative to everything else. A 20% reduction in the liability money supply in the US in 1930-33 for example caused the price of food bought from farmers in some parts of the USA to be less than the cost of the fuel required to get the food to the market for sale. This event would clearly be far worse than that. Market based systems can and will adjust prices over time to compensate for money supply changes, but that´s the long term. It has been said that 'every civilisation is only 2 meals away from barbarism', and I´m afraid you just pushed yours over the edge.
In the long term, after a period of market exchanges being performed with cigarettes, and other money-substitutes, and those responsible for this mess being hunted down and dealt with appropriately, people will probably feel that fractional reserve banking wasn´t such a bad idea after all.  Some form of Germany Year 0 event will take place and the banking system will be restarted. Since all debt was effectively discharged during the "unfortunate event" the next few decades will probably be referred to as a golden age. By the survivors.
If instead we assume that rather than reducing the money supply (which we know is a bad idea), the banking system is instead converted so that there is no fractional reserve lending, asset cash is injected to replace debt, and maintain the current quantity of deposits. All deposits in the system are simply held constant from this point on, and you now have a constant money supply economy.
As a side note, everybody now has to pay for their bank accounts, because since banks are no longer lending institutions, they need a revenue source to fund their operations. Quite a large revenue source - ATM networks aren´t cheap.
The problems caused by a sudden drop in total lending are still present. In practice this will disrupt the economy in the short term, but hopefully not quite as badly as in the previous scenario.
The short answer though, is we simply don´t know how a constant money economy behaves in practice. There hasn´t been a constant money economy since fractional reserve banking was invented, and that´s at least 3-400 years now (depending where you put goldsmith banking in the banking continuum, and what country you´re in).
A lot of financial statistics would probably start looking very strange, since even correcting for CPI doesn´t adequately control for the impact monetary growth has on price measurements. It´s possible that the economy would settle down after a few years as everything adjusts around the constant money supply - that´s essentially the general equilibrium theory argument. It´s also entirely possible that the growth in the money supply that FRB provides over time makes it easier for adjustments to occur - a lot of arguments in favour of small positive inflation amounts essentially revolve around this - and that a bunch of issues we didn´t previously know about emerge and cause new problems.
While this is very much an open research question, it´s interesting to note that a side effect of some of the recent Basel 3 regulatory changes is that at least for the last couple of years, several countries including the UK have experienced stable money supplies. If this continues (it´s perfectly possible to regulate fractional reserve banking so that it doesn´t expand the money supply if you know what you´re doing - whether the central banks really know what they´re doing is also an open research question), then we may start to have some empirical data that can help shed light on this very interesting question.
Comment: Thank you for you in-depth answer. The challenge I am having with it is that I was not asking about shrinking money supplies. As a few suggested in comments it's fairly possible to create 100% of money supplies pretty much in the same fashion as the remaining 2% (=M0) are created as money does not have intrinsic value - goods and services have. It costs nothing to create money supplies and my question pertains to the shift in who creates them. Not the quantity of it.
Comment: I think that you are ignoring the difficulty in lending money in a full reserve banking system.  The current system allows demand accounts (checking and savings) to have their balances loaned out.  The idea is that only a small reserve fraction is required to handle excess withdrawals (over deposits).  In a full reserve system, you can't loan out that money.  So where do you get money to loan?  Would all loans be securitized?  We can see how well that turned out last time.  That's why I'm thinking that this question is missing two prerequisite questions.
Comment: That´s an equally good question. Constant money - we simply don´t know. Were you to simply match the current monetary expansion rate of the country you´re in (they´re all different), then the simple monetary expansion effects should be the same. However the new money will probably end up somewhere different - at the moment it´s essentially channelled into that part of the economy which requires bank lending for financing - and that will be very noticeable. House prices will probably go down...
Comment: @Brythan - you're quite right, although that's not exactly how it works. Banks don't in practice lend out 'money' that they have on deposit. Rather, they create a quantity of deposits that exactly matches the quantity they are lending (minus cash). So yes, in a full reserve system (although if you read Fisher et. al., this isn't exactly what they meant by full reserve), a large amount of lending has effectively been removed from the economy. In my opinion, this would be disastrous - and I share your views on the ongoing problems with securitization -  but that paper is in preparation :)
Comment: @Brythan I strongly suspect that banks would allow people to easily transfer their money to a form of investment account where it could be loaned out, the only difference is it would be labeled "investments" instead of "savings" and probably have higher withdrawal fees.
Answer: Some clarifications...
M0 is different than MB. M0 is just cash and I assume you meant MB.
If a bank can only lend what it has, what definitions of money and lending do you include?  A bank operates by mismatching short term debt (much of which is deposits) with long term assets.  An untenable situation regardless of the type of assets (deposits vs non-deposits).
If we stop say banks from mismatching say 0 second maturity deposits to long term assets, do we then stop 1 second debt?  1 day? 10 days? 100 days?
The other clarification to ask if if the open market would still function?
So say yes the open market would function, but banks must now back M1 demand deposits 100% with MB.
What would banks do?  They would no longer offer free checking.  Instead they would relabel their service to avoid the new requirements.  They could call them "power deposits".  They might yield .000000001% and maybe withdrawels might be limited to say one day after deposits.  Little would change under such a system.  The core concept of maturity mismatching is still creating problems for the economy and the Fed is still bailing the system out through the open market.
What would be a more practical solution?  Offer the public an alternative to private bank deposits.  Allow for public bank deposits (aka deposits directly at the Fed).  The Fed allows private banks to hold debt-free deposits with them...why not the public?  It would be a simple matter to let the Fed issue debit cards and checks for these accounts.
What about broad money?  Banks could be released from constant Fed bailouts because public deposits are no longer at risk...only investors are now.  Individuals who wanted to foolishly lend to banks without the backing of the Fed could do so if they REALLY wanted to, but few would as the banking system would burn up in a liquidity fire without Fed support to prop up maturity mismatching by constantly providing artificial levels of short term debt to the banking system.
What about outstanding debt?  The Fed could in the meantime introduce more MB into the economy to compensate for the collapse of higher monetary aggregates (by buying assets).
What are the long term implications? Imagine if the government let people counterfeit money...but ONLY if they bought couches.  What would be the result?  Couch prices would be higher than normal.  Well banks pretty much are only allowed to buy fixed income securities so interest rates are artificially low now, but without FRB interest rates would go up.  Not a bad thing though.  It would reward honest, non-bubble creating investment/savings.  There would be less inflation.  And there would be less need of borrowing to pay back all the FRB loans.
The national depository solution is IMO the only practical solution to fractional banking.  It would also allow for more gradual transition from FRB to non-debt backed deposits.  Here is an article on how it may work: http://wfhummel.cnchost.com/nationaldepositorysystem.html
Answer: Here's a hypothetical society.
The currency is gold coins. These can't be created virtually or counterfeited. There's a limited number of them in our society.
I happen to have 1000 myself, and because I own them, I create a bank and I can lend them out.
If people deposit their coins into my bank, I can't lend those coins out. Therefore I have no reason to look after them for them, unless I start charging 'safe keeping' fees.
Because I only have 1000 coins to lend, but lots of people to lend to, I lend my coins to who's paying the highest <code>(interest rate * chance of paying the loan back)</code>.
I can't make a new loan until the old one is paid back.
This means that it's much much much harder for anybody to borrow money. They can either borrow money now and pay exorbitant interest, or they must save money before they spend it.
Somebody that has a great business idea, but needs the capital to fund it, needs to wait five years while saving money for it, or else he sells shares in his business.
I guess he's allowed to borrow the supplies he needs directly from the suppliers. But this means that the suppliers assume all the risk in the case that business fails.
Suppliers would subscribe to 'risk assessment' services who match ideal borrowers to the suppliers, since it's now the supplier holding the risk.
When someone purchases something with gold coins, the gold coins then sit the seller's vault doing nothing, as the seller doesn't need to spend the coins right now but may need to use them tomorrow, so he can't lend them out, unless he's doing some 'day to day' lending scheme, which would be hard for the borrower in this case to payback unless they had some surefire way to pay the loan back each day.
Comment: Interesting approach but introducing gold standard slightly overshadows the main point - the only change we hypothetically make is abolishing FRB . Just that single change. Yes of course it would be much harder to borrow money but at the same time money would become a lot safer asset. No risk that amount of m1+ money in circulation will increase drastically.
Answer: Although there's a lot of important points in the other answers, there is something important missing:
Prohibiting FRB means that you cannot borrow to invest. Effectively, it means that you can't create debt contracts because in a debt contract you take somebody's money and promise to repay it, but you don't keep the money, instead, you use it for some type of investment. If borrowing is forbidden, other social mechanisms for intermediation would take its place, like issuance of shares. You would buy shares in the bank rather than open up a deposit account, much like investment banking used to be when i-banks were not levered.
Answer: I am by no means a financial expert, I do however believe such a system would collapse totally. I cannot prove it though.
Some figures:
American population: 350 million
Average american saving account: <10'000$
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/11/how-much-money-americans-have-in-their-savings-accounts-at-every-age.html
That would give a possible total loan of 3.5 trillion
Fortune 1000 companies alone would require roughly 1.5 trillion. (6% of total market cap, 25% of market cap estimated as revenue, 25% of revenue estimated as required loan to get the company going)
There are over 30 million companies in US! https://www.bizjournals.com/albany/news/2019/04/11/number-of-businesses-in-the-united-states.html
I wonder how those 32 million (minus 1000 of the Fortune 1000) will continue to operate. After all even the bakery needs an oven to bake bread. But where will they get the money from? It's all gone, at least after we subtract some more money for property
That would leave 2 trillion for property
Average mortgage 100'000, that'll give us 20 million houses
Currently over 200 million people own property: https://www.statista.com/statistics/184902/homeownership-rate-in-the-us-since-2003/
So 90% of those would live where exactly? Cause also houses for rent would not exist, as the money has gone!
New roads? I beg you pardon, from which money?
Hospitals? Are you kidding?
Schools? Teach your kids yourself!
Food? Well 20 million people have their own garden, the rest will start a war to fight for what's left
Firearmy? Please, one does not play with fire, or "help yourself"
Police? I hope you have enough money to buy a gun and defend yourself
Cars? c'mon.. climate change is upon us... walk!
Stock market? uh? what's that? we don't have money for something like that
Comment: Interesting approach indeed.Challenges with your approach? There are a few. 1) There is no intrinsic value in money, i.e., nobody wants money for money. No. People want goods and services, not money. Because of fractional reserve and ever decreasing purchasing power, money is like a hot potato - nobody wants to hold it. You only keep as low as you have to and immediately exchange the rest for either goods or services.
And 2) issuing money is bearing hardly any cost - anybody can issue money at near zero cost. US government can issue their own currency without any debt if they wanted.
Comment: With so many negative traits of fractional reserve like delegation of responsibility on taxpayers due to lack of insurance; practical dispossession of the whole classes of people that are not participating in the fractional reserve scheme by not having any debts, there are a few positives regarding resources management, that is  better management, higher risk taking and thus better utilisation of resources.
Comment: Totally agree. Yet without it we'd still be living in the Stone Age. And as a matter of fact I enjoy having a life expectancy of over 70 years.

But I agree that maybe it's time for a change.


LEGO stormtrooper variation

Question: I found several LEGO stormtroopers on a toy box.   They each have a plain yellow head and the words "LEGO 2002" in big letters in their backs.  Did they come from a set?
Answer: These are promotional items. Not from a set. They can be related to a store-opening, a give-away, other special events, etc. Looking through the Bricklink catalog I found one listing with a stormtrooper torso that you might be referring to: http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=973pskac01
If you can add a picture we can probably identify them more precisely. Hope this helps some...(c;

LEGO stormtrooper variation


Why do standard modern pianos have 88 keys?

Question: I know that the piano contains 7 octaves plus a 4th. I also know that it accommodates the full circle of fifths (from C and back to C). But since a fifth contains 7 semitones, it only
"needs"  7X12 = 84 keys for the circle. So why the "extra" 4 keys?
Comment: `since a fifth contains 7 semitones, it only "needs" 7X12 = 84 keys for the circle.` Thanks for that. Before this, I would've guessed that **8 octaves** is more perfect or fitting. But you only need 7 for the circle of fifths. 8 octaves would be 96 keys, and possibly add one more A so the highest scale could be completed, making 97 keys.
Answer:
Well, the piano started out with only about 60 keys, same as the harpsichord – in fact it WAS a harpsichord, except that the harpsichord maker Bartolomeo Cristofori (try saying that 10 times fast!) got the bright idea of putting hammers on one (to HIT the strings) instead of plectra (to PLUCK the strings).
So the piano was invented – this was around 1700, or maybe a little before that. Anyway, as composers began to use the new instrument they started writing more and more complicated and brilliant music for it. Pretty soon, the keyboard had to expand in both directions.  By the middle of the 19th century, it had 85 notes – up to A – then finally they added the last three at the top. There's even a piano made today – the Bösendorfer Imperial Concert Grand – which has 97 keys; the bass notes go all the way down to C.  It's nine-and-a-half feet long and weighs almost a ton.
— Piano Education - FAQ
Comment: This answer is interesting, but doesn't seem to answer the actual question of *why* they added the extra four keys
Comment: Is that site a reputable source?
Comment: @Tom: The Bösendorfer Imperial has 97 keys. It has been praised by many artists of the 19th century. The added strings, weight of table, and resonance may have pleased them. There is a cache and these 9 more keys are of a different color so that they do not disturb the player too much.
Comment: @billynomates: Written by John M. Zeigler, **Ph.D**. and William Leland, D.M.A., R.P.T.; Rio Rancho, NM USA.
Comment: This site seems to be correct. Certainly, when Bartolomeo Cristofori invented the piano (fortepiano specifically) in ~1699, it had the standard 60 keys of a harpsichord.
Comment: @ogerard: Heh, indeed, corrected. Probably a typo by the author?
Comment: @BlueRaja: Indeed, "Why do standard modern pianos have 88 keys?" is the question I'm answering. The reason for adding the four keys is subjective, as @MatthewRead mentioned indirectly. I bet there is no real fact listed anywhere, but we're all waiting for one to show up...
Answer: I'm no expert but the obvious answer is so to have the full seven octaves for both A minor and C major.  The first key of a piano is an A and the last is a C.  The importance of A minor and C major is they are the only two keys made up entirely of white keys.
And to be precise, one extra pitch is added to the top of the final octave to complete it.  So a full chromatic scale is 13 pitches, 12+1.  Two chromatic scales are 25 pitches, (12x2)+1, etc.
So in total there are (12x7)+1+3 = 88 keys on a piano.
Answer: An observation about 88 notes on the piano...

You can play through the entire major key circle of fifths on the piano starting on the lowest C to the highest C; AND
You can play through the entire minor key circle of fifths on the piano starting on the lowest A to the highest A.

Interesting how this worked out perfectly!
Answer: There are a lot of explanations for this, such as "The extra 4 keys allow the piano to cover the entire range of a 'standard' orchestra."  However, it's probably just tradition.  The human ear can't really distinguish notes higher or lower very well, but it provides more functionality than 4- or 5-octave pianos.
Answer: The keyboard grew beyond five octaves as piano makers essentially said "Ours is better because it has more notes."
There is no particular reason why it didn't stop at 85 or keep going to 90. It could have done either.  Eventually the market required that all pianos have the same number, and it just happened to stabilize at 88.
Comment: Do you have some article links to back up these statements?


Power supply affecting sensor readings ESP8266 and JSN-SR04T-2.0

Question: I have an ESP8266 Wemos D1R2 Board with a JSN-SR04T-2.0 ultrasonic range finder and everything works perfectly when I have the device connected to my computer USB or via a 12V battery into the onboard regulator via the external power jack. However when I use a 240V AC to 12V DC transformer to power the setup my readings become quite erratic. I have checked the voltage coming out of the power supply (12.48v) and the voltage going to the sensor (3.28V,  I have it coming off the 3.3V pin) and it is the same on each type of power supply so the onboard regulator is working. Can anyone advise what might cause this? The transformer provides 1A which is more than enough as I have measured the peak usage at <100ma
Comment: In what sense are your readings "erratic"?  You need to explain.
Comment: In the working config I get consistent values for the distance that when converted from the echo time match the tape measure I have between the sensor and the test object. In the erratic version the measurements vary considerably, e.g. for an object 150cm an erratic sample would be 107, 58, 86, 107, 36cm
Comment: So the power supply is a switching supply and my sensor is housed in a small aluminium case as it needs to live outdoors and I found that if I connected the case to earth on the same circuit the readings are consistent and correct, I assume this may be something to do with RF from the switching supply don't understand why and could have that totally wrong
Answer: The JSN-SR04T-2.0 ultrasonic range finder is rated to 5Volts. giving it 3.3 volts may not be enough. from my limited knowledge it should work if you give it a separate power supply and not depend on the 3.3 volts of the ESP.
Comment: According to the datasheet here: https://www.jahankitshop.com/getattach.aspx?id=4635&Type=Product it is rated 3-5V. Note that once I pulled the device out of the aluminium case it has been working fine


Can I use my paid-for home as collateral for a consolidation loan to pay off outstanding bills?

Question: I'm needing to find out if I can use my home and its feed as collateral for a 3000-5000 dollar loan to pay off my outstanding bills and just have one payment.
Comment: What is the question?
Comment: If you're in the US then you can probably do it. If you're in Somalia then you probably can't. Since you've not told us where you are, no one can give you any informed advice.
Comment: There are generally a number of ways to consolidate your debts of this size and have a single payment that do not involve converting your unsecured bills into something that could easily result in you losing your house if you can't make the payments. The interest rate may be higher, but you won't be signing a piece of paper that says they're allowed to take away your house. That's worth an awful lot.
Comment: "Can I offer parties of questionable honesty a chance to scam me out of my house as a way to get a piddly amount of cash fast?"
Answer: Plus one to Alexandre for pointing out this is possible.  It is also possible to run with scissors, and I would recommend neither.
Your money problems are very small and doing something so dramatic to solve them will probably put you in a worse financial decision.  Why would you put your home, at risk, to pay off such a small amount (less than 5K)?  The "one payment" or consolidation mantra, for a person like you, will often lead a person into reoccurring the same debt and having the consolidation loan.  You don't need one payment you need no payments.
First off stop borrowing.
Second increase your income by working more or selling stuff.  You might want to clean some houses, baby sit, or mow some lawns instead of the traditional job.
Third decrease your spending.  Let your loved ones know it will be a lean Christmas this year.  Cut cable as you won't have time to watch TV anyway.
If you do all that could you find $1000 per month?    I bet you could find more.  Doing all that and you will be done in 5 months and still own your home outright.
You are a great candidate to pay off your bills by the snowball method, or smallest to largest.  While it may not be, on paper, the most mathematically efficient it helps people with motivation and hope.  It sounds like you could use that.  List your bills smallest to largest and pay off the smallest first while paying minimums on the rest.
You can do it!
Comment: I agree. It's hard to imagine that it's worth the pain of a HELOC for just $5,000.
Comment: Agreed it's not best practice, wanted to answer the question as directly as possible.
Comment: You did @AlexandreP.Levasseur which is why you got an upvote from me.  I just happen to not be as well mannered.
Answer: Yes this is possible. The most likely tool to use in this case would be a Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC). This is a line of credit for which the full amount is backed by home equity (difference between market and book prices). Most likely your financial institution will apply a factor to this collateral to account for various risks which will reduce the maximum amount that can be taken as a line of credit.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_equity_line_of_credit
Answer: Others have covered the usual vehicles for getting money out of a property.
There's another category of home loan called a hard money loan. It would take a lot of inquiries to find a hard money loan given your needs, but chances are its doable. The terms can be onerous, and hard money lenders don't mess around when it comes to foreclosing after a few missed payments. It's an off-the-radar industry and the private lenders and specialized trustees operate together with strike-force precision. Trustees normally should be trust-able by borrower and lender, but in the case I describe below, one man owned the small company that lent, and the small company that acted as trustee. Borrower beware. Yet, if your credit score and income are dismal, but your home equity is great, hard money is the only way to borrow against your home.
In making hard money loans, lenders don't consider your credit score or income, just how much equity is in the property. I daresay they hope you'll default. They don't always hang onto the loans. If you look like a payer instead of someone they can foreclose on, they might sell the loan to someone who wants a stable monthly income. You don't know a thing about that person.
A Cautionary Tale:
*Check out HankandHelen.blogspot.com for a currently-unfolding saga, in which an elderly couple's grandson convinced them to let him take title to their house, borrow against it, invest the proceeds, and share the profits. It didn't work that way. He went through hard-money lenders. He borrowed $360,000 and then $65,000. Those were mysteriously paid off (total mystery at this point), and he borrowed $47,000.
About a year later, he lost the house by defaulting the $47,000 loan. He was only about $2000 behind in payments when the trustee issued a notice of default, followed by a notice of sale. The trustee put the place up for auction, which didn't require a court order: that's the way it is in California and many western states, and a few others. The hard money lender bought the loan at auction for $83,000, and a home worth about $800,000 no longer belonged to the grandson.
A fundraiser brought in about $120,000 and the couple bought a mobile home in a mobile home park. The acre of land and swimming pool they used to own will be for sale soon, or possibly demolished for a mansion to be built. (House in the area go for about $2.5M when improved with very large, new houses.)*
I poke around PropertyShark.com when I see a house bought cheaply at a foreclosure auction. Quite often the (former) borrower had inherited the house, treated it like a piggy bank, defaulted, and boom--no more house.
It never makes sense to put a house at risk for a small amount like $5000. If you can't pay those credit card bills, the lenders can hound you and maybe get a court order to extract something from your checking account every month, but they can't take your belongings. When you sign a deed of trust or mortgage, you're giving a third party the right to kick you out of your home and take possession of it. You don't have any say in the matter. You might go to court, and say whatever you feel like saying, but if you owe many payments and can't pay them immediately, you're very likely to be out of luck.
Someone mentioned paying off credit card balances with the highest interest rates first. That's done by throwing whatever cash you have at them while paying the minimum on the lower-rate balances. That's financially sound, but there's a technique that turns out to be more motivating for some, which is attacking the lowest balance first. It leads to the quickest reduction in the number payments you're required to make every month, and quickly lets you add the money you were applying to the smallest balance to the payment you make on the next-smallest balance. (Close each card as you pay it off if you don't want to accumulate debt again.)
P.S. I don't know what your home's feed is, so I didn't address that. If it's some kind of rental income, every lender I have encountered credits 75% of the current monthly rent toward your gross income. They assume there will be vacancies and other costs.
Comment: This answer is really inappropriate considering the question. If you want to give a sermon on hard-money lenders, consider asking your own question and answering it.
Comment: @NathanL -- The OP asked "can use my home and its feed as collateral for a 3000-5000 dollar loan". DesdeCuando said "Yes, with a hard money loan" and then explained what that is and also listed the caveats. How is the answer inappropriate? I just upvoted it.
Comment: If you think a hard money loan is appropriate with an asset worth many times the value of the loan, go ahead and upvote. It looks like you're the only one.
Comment: @NathanL The answer in short is "You can use a hard money loan to borrow against a house, but it is very dangerous."  Valid answer.  And good information to have.  I learned something.  He makes it pretty clear that he would most strongly advise against doing it.  Appropriate has nothing to do with it.  It is technically possible.  OP may run across such a thing in searching for financing.  If OP reads this answer, she will know to run screaming.
Answer: You can.
You can take out a conventional mortgage and keep the cash.  A mortgage is nothing but a secured loan against your home.
You can open a HELOC and treat it as a negative-equity bank-account.
Note that both a mortgage and a HELOC tend to have significant up-front or administrative costs attached to them.  It costs the loaning institution some money to ensure they are in a safe position, and they will want to pass it on to you.
They don't want you taking out such a loan and not using it.
On the other hand, the interest rates on such a loan are often much lower than interest rates on other loans.
If you have a reliable source of significant income, getting a completely unsecured line of credit may be possible with a rate only a few percentage points higher than a HELOC without having to pay a cent in fees.  The bank doesn't have to appraise your home or ensure ownership before such a loan, just assess income (which is easy, especially if you have a regular paycheck auto-deposited into an account at the same branch; toss in some signatures from your employer and good to go).
If that is feasible, you could end up with a lower rate.  Withdraw from the line of credit, pay off your other loans, then work to repay the line of credit.
If an unsecured line of credit has a rate 1-3% higher than a secured one, and you are borrowing 5000$ against it and pay it off over 2 years, the total interest you would save from a secured line is about 50$-150$.

Note that in some jurisdictions your home is protected against loss from bankruptcy, unless you have used it as collateral for a loan, or it is easier to claim the home if you are insolvent if you have used it as collateral.  Determining what the consequences of securing your loan against the house could itself be expensive.
Comment: @KimberlyBoudreau Also, if you default on HELOC and/or a mortgage there are serious repercussions.  I do not know how defaults are treated for HELOC, but for a mortgage, the house is foreclosed.  Title is transferred to the lienholder.  You lose the house, including any equity in it.
Answer: Pete B mentioned adjusting your payments using the Debt Snowball Method and I agree it is one possible solution, another being the Debt Avalanche Method. Here is a link that describes both.
There was a time in my past when I had 17 credit lines open totaling about $12,000. If I had paid them the way the banks asked (minimum monthly payments) it would have taken decades to pay off. Then I was shown these two techniques and as a result I was able pay them down rapidly and close all but 2 lines within 5 years.
Like others I am going to say that if you already own your house free and clear never Never NEVER put a loan on it unless the loan is (a) to improve the house, or (b) a life & death emergency. If you get sick or fired and miss even a single payment on a HELOC you could lose your house forever and that just plain sucks. Not only will you then be forced into renting a place (money down the drain) but your credit rating will take such a huge hit it will be years (if ever) before you can even try and buy a new home.
Debts come and go, as do the "toys" and other things we buy with that debt. Homes are security & stability for tomorrow. Never give that up for a little ease & comfort today.
UPDATE: I had to go looking for it but here is some software that I used all those years ago to figure out my strategy for paying down all my credit bills. It's a bit clunky but it's super easy to use plus it has some other variations on snowball and avalanche methods as well. I definitely found it helpful.
Comment: @PeteB. uses anecdotal evidence, but has a valid point. In order to make any debt elimination strategy work, the person has to be committed to it, stop using credit of most kinds, and learn to defer gratification of desires. Prior to 60 years ago, you saved for what you wanted to buy, and waited to get it until you could buy it. The only real credit available to individuals was a mortgage.  30 years ago consumer credit exploded and credit cards allowed people to buy now and pay later. To eliminate debt, one eschews consumer credit, and returns to a generations old philosophy. Always use cash.
Comment: Its highly unlikely that this will work in this person's case and it rarely works in most people's cases.  One must understand that becoming debt free is more about behavior than math.
Comment: @PeteB.-- The first step in either of these strategies is "stop using your credit cards" ... aside from that you are making a huge negative assumption about the OP's ability/willingness to learn and to change their behavior which as far as I can tell has not been described or even mentioned yet.