YellowJersey

1 hour ago, Sarra said:

I approve of your huge PP.

Damnit, I was just about to make that joke

101km today in 4 hours 20 minutes. Not bad for my first ride in just over two weeks.


Total this year: 2,392km

Edit (July 22). Did 50km today. I would have done more, but the heat was nearly unbearable. I went through 3L of water during that time. I also had a hard time getting into a groove.

Total this year: 2,432km

Edit (July 23) 101km today. Much better day today!

 Total this year: 2,533km

1 hour ago, mew4ever23 said:

Yeah, what on earth happened to the audio on the youtube video? It badly desynced around the time Linus opened up LTTstore.com on that potato. Its like there was supposed to be a midroll LTTstore ad there but there was no footage to go with the audio.  Makes in unwatchable for me.

Same thing happened to me. It looks like a bad 80s dub!

3s across the board. All I have access to is a set of hex keys, a screw driver, and a pair of pliers.

Got a question. I'm in the market for a new bike as my current Giant TCX-1 seems to be on its last legs. I've got a good 12 years out of it, so I think I've got my money's worth.

First up, a Devinci Hatchet with the Tiagra component set for $2,200 CAD https://www.devinci.com/en/bikes/road-gravel/hatchet-tiagra20s-goldland/

The other option is a Giant Revolt 0 with a mix of various component sets for $2,600 CAD https://www.thebikeshop.com/product/giant-revolt-0-398094-1.htm

 My question is, are the higher tier components of the Giant worth the added $400? Any thoughts?

3 hours ago, Seccedonien said:

I am not sure why you gave me this rant as it's barely even relevant to what I said in my post, what you are on about is a completely different discussion and in that discussion I am sure allot of people (including me) agree with you.

It wasn't meant to come off as a rant, more just idle thoughts.

1 hour ago, Brooksie359 said:

No it isn't similar. American contract law would never allow a thumbs up emoji to be used as a way to eSign a contract. The biggest point in American contract law is that when esigning the intentions have to be clear otherwise it doesn't count and for good reason. Obviously there are other ways to do eSign like a checkbox for I agree but even with that the point is very clear that if you check the box you agree. Even if they had said that thumbs up emoji means I agree then you could possibly use it to eSign but that would take the ambiguity out of it as it was earlier determined the meaning. Would I feel bad for the person who bought the flax? Yeah but that shouldn't change how contract law works and they should have done due diligence tbh. This is in a hypothetical of this taking place in the US. 

Oh, my friend, you have much to learn.

1 hour ago, 8tg said:

I fucked up my entire drivetrain, it shifts like ass, I sent it a bit too hard and bent the front chainring(s), trying to force front shifts while in 6-8 in the back caused some chainstick and tore up my frame

i am upset, I want to replace the entire drivetrain because this just doesn’t hold up to what I’m trying to do

OOF! Sorry to hear that.

42 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

My ranting shouldn't be seen as "the court made a mistake" but more of "this should not be the reality". This is something courts can't fix but the legislator.

 

What does consumer law say about contracts? EU consumer law is very strict how legally binding contracts have to be agreed upon, while general contract law is quite open about it. In general, ambiguity and therefore a lack of due diligence would almost certainly rule out one party being paid for damages by the other party.

 EU law is generally beyond my knowledge and tends to work very differently, but I generally understand EU consumer laws to be far more strict. That said, this doesn't strike me as a consumer contract. This was a business-to-business contract, in which case, I don't think consumer law would apply anyway. As for whether the thumbs-up was ambiguous and whether the co-operative should have sought further clarification, that's going to be a matter of opinion. I personally don't think it was ambiguous, but my thinking is probably going to be more skewed towards seeing things the way the court did.
 

35 minutes ago, Sauron said:

What's special about a signature that makes is sufficient to seal a contract while no other form of acknowledgement will do? Usually the point is to guarantee that it was you who agreed to the contract, if that can be done through other means (i.e. by receiving a message from your phone, something the farmer didn't dispute as far as I can tell) then there's no need for it to be a signature specifically.

 

Could it have been a simple mistake? Sure, but then the farmer should have been more careful in his business dealings... imagine you were the one who ordered and needed the flax, sent a contract and all you got back was a "" or "ok" as you had multiple times before where the flax did arrive, what are you supposed to think? Maybe it should be required to be more intentional with this stuff but consider that in this case if that had been the law the receiving company would have been in its right not to pay the farmer for previous delivery since no contract was signed.

 TBH, a signature isn't all that special. There is a general misconception that contracts are required to be in writing and require signatures, neither of which is true. As I said above, all that's necessary is clear acceptance of the offer. Here, the dispute was whether the thumbs up constituted clear acceptance and the court said that it did. The court does expect people to 1) Know the law, and, 2) Take steps to protect themselves. "Caveat emptor" is the rule, or, "buyer beware." The standard is generally, "What would a reasonable person interpret the farmer's words/actions to mean?" Who decides what a "reasonable person" would think? Well, that would be the courts.

 Oh, BTW, this isn't legal advice; this is just general information (and I'm limiting myself to what a general business law textbook (not aimed at law students or lawyers; a textbook for the general public) would say). If you have a legal problem or question, don't rely on the information in my posts; consult a licensed and practicing lawyer in your jurisdiction.

15 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

For a $200 table this might be fine. For anything above a certain monetary threshold it is plainly wrong to accept this form of ambiguity. The intention of both parties should be clear, which a simple emoji certainly wasn't. In this case it should be the obligation of the party making the offer to ask for clarification. It's in their interest.

 

I'm also very sceptical about the court claiming prerogative of interpretation for the meaning of the emoji. Even with the history of short acknowledgements to confirm contracts there is plausible deniability about the intention of the emoji. Penalizing the farmer for the interpretation of his statement by the other party doesn't seem right. Generally speaking, any ambiguity should not be seen as a contract being confirmed. Any doubt about the intentions of the parties should nullify the contract.

While it'll be of little comfort to the farmer, now we have a precedent to answer the question, so in the event something similar happens in the future, we know (and are expected to know) what the court will say. And, knowing a few cases, this is fairly in-line with how the court has treated previous ambiguities (the common law legal system striving for "similar cases = similar outcomes" via precedent). I can think of one case involving a crane, for example, that seems very consistent with the court's thinking here.

It's important to note that the rules don't change based on the value of the contract. (whether that's right or wrong is not why I'm here. I'm here to tell you how it is, not how it should be) Whether you're putting 20 cents into a gumball machine or buying $10,000,000 worth of equipment; the same rules apply to both contracts.

 As I said with my learned friend, Brooskie, I'm not here to say that the court came to the right moral conclusion. I'm just saying I can see the court's thought process, the logic that led them to this decision. Whether that was the right decision, well, everyone's going to have their own opinion on that.

 I'm merely someone who knows a thing or two about how all this works and trying to shed some light on how the court came to this decision for those who are blessed enough to bask in the blissful darkness of ignorance.

I currently don't use an ad blocker, though it's increasingly difficult to continue raw dogging websites. It's part of the "aggressive ads --> increases usage of ad block --> more aggressive ads --> even more usage of ad block" positive feedback loop we're in. FFS, youtube is really bad these days. But, I also want to support the sites and creators I enjoy, so I put up with them... for now.

2 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I have no idea how contract law works in Canada and honestly I don't care if they want to have some backwards system. From what I know if someone is giving a written document like they did in this case you would typically have to sign the document as that was the format it was received as or you can esign. Also even in the cases where text are permitted to be used as acceptance of a contract there is a requirement for the text to be very clear. Something like yes I agree. I don't think ok would suffice and definitely not an emoji for obvious reasons that I guess Canada doesn't care about. 

American contract law is very similar. This is pretty basic contract stuff that's more or less universal across the common law world (UK, Canada, Australia, NZ, and, yes, even 'murica)

I loved this autopsy review. Luke's fucking savage! No wonder they don't have him on camera as much anymore!

40 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I don't think that is the same thing. Seeing as you could easily interpret his thumbs up emoji to be confirmation that he received the contract and not that he agreed. As a matter of law you really should have to sign a contract and not have someone be able to misinterpret your emoji as saying yes to a contract. Tbh I don't even think verbal agreements shouldn't work either. I mean how hard is it to just get people to sign a contract. I mean now are we supposed to make sure that everything we say and send couldn't be misinterpreted as agreeing to a contract? I feel like it would be much easier for everyone involved if a signature was required. I really don't see how this benefits anyone. 

 Well, whether you like it or not, that's what the law is. I'm not here to say if that's right or wrong (there are plenty of abhorrent laws out there), I'm merely here to explain the legal basis for the court's decision. Very few contracts actually require a signature to be valid. When you buy something at the store, simply bringing the items to the till is making an offer and the cashier taking payment is accepting the offer. That's a valid contract under Canadian contract law. No words even need to be exchanged.

Canadian lawyer here. I can see it making sense. In order to accept an offer to form a legally binding contract, the offeree must signal acceptance. For valid acceptance to occur, it must be something that a reasonable person would take as acceptance. Giving a thumbs up to an offer makes sense then for valid acceptance. I mean, if I said, "I'll sell my table to you for $200, how does that sound?" (this would likely be construed as an offer) and you replied with a thumbs-up emoji, it would be reasonable for me to think you had accepted my offer and agreed to buy the table for $200.

On 7/5/2023 at 4:41 AM, Seccedonien said:

Personally I am never afraid because everything can be fixed and replaced with tech and in a couple of years it will be out of date anyway.

Sure I am careful with stuff but in the end it just all comes down to it being replaceable.

I dunno, I don't buy the argument that everything will be out of date in a few years anyway. This really depends on what you're using your computer for. You only really need the latest and greatest if for incredibly demanding tasks (4k, ray traced, high refreshrate gaming, 8k and up video editing, etc). Most people I know don't game that much (only have a few really gamery-gamer friends) and get by just fine on 3 year old laptops with integrated graphics. Hell, I use an 8 year old laptop a lot for just web browsing and content consumption. Even tech that's 10 years old will be perfectly fine for a lot of people from a functionality perspective, status symbols notwithstanding. Is a 10 year old machine lacking in power by comparison? Yes, absolutely. But you'd be surprised how many people don't actually need all that new power. Outside of said resource intense use-cases, you just don't need it. I see this in the mirrorless camera space. Yeah, new cameras are "better" than older cameras, but there are diminishing returns, because once something gets so good, you're not going to notice the more-betterness (JFC) of newer stuff.

43 minutes ago, RONOTHAN## said:

At least with the T14 Gen 2 I dealt with a bit ago, it did have upgradeable RAM. Half of the memory was soldered directly to the board, so your upgrade path was limited to 48GB or 64GB depending on the initial capacity you went with, but you di still have the option to go with more or less RAM in the future if you need to. 

 

 

I've currently got a refurb'd T450 that I use for slouched on the couch light computing using Linux, so, thankfully, other than storage, I don't need much more than 8GB anyway. But, I understand that there are a lot of people out there who can't afford to have multiple machines.

11 minutes ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

 Hope you liked the Lenovo ThinkPad X Series because the RAM is soldered on there too now.

 

IIRC, even the T400 and T500 series now have soldered ram.. could be wrong about that, though.

1 hour ago, Kaetemi said:

 

You can put your PC in here, and it'll keep it cool.

Didn't LTT actually do a video where they tested this?

I'd check out Gamers' Nexus case round ups. They provide really good data on airflow, temps, and noise. I relied heavily on those when choosing my case (Corsair 4000D Airflow, which I'm quite happy with)
 

So long as the temps stay under control (65C is very reasonable) then you should be fine.

I've felt a great disturbance in the force, as if millions of fan boys cried out in butthurt.

I'm curious to know, how many people actually care about how their computer looks? I'm a bit baffled by the glass side panels as it is.

 Is the demand for clean and aesthetically pleasing builds as high as channels like LTT suggest?
 

Awesome band. My favourite album is Time. Can't say I collect the vinyls, though. 

Okay, back from my doomed voyage to do a loop around the southern portion of Canada's Rockies.

Day 1) Calgary to Canmore. 130km. Had a mechanical problem around the 20km mark that meant having to limp my way to a bike shop. The dude did the best he could, but I could tell something was still wrong. The wifey picked me up in Canmore and we drove home.

Day 2) Canmore to Radium. 162km in 7 hours 50 minutes with 1,225m of vertical. Wifey dropped me off in Canmore. I had initially wanted to spend the night there, but hotels/motels were all too expensive due to Canada Day weekend. I love her to bits, but FFS, trying to get her out the door on time is a nightmare if not outright impossible. I didn't get on the bike until 12:30 in the afternoon. Had another mechanical breakdown almost immediately, but managed to limp my way to Banff. The issue that had been plaguing me the past couple of days turned out to be two issues. First, my barrel adjuster for my rear derailleur is completely stripped and therefore useless. The guy in Banff managed to adjust the tension on the cable to get it working, but advised me not to try and use the barrel adjuster. The second issue was that I had a broken link in my chain (that's what was still wrong the previous day after the first bike shop visit). So, after an hour or so and one shiny new chain, fresh from the wrapper, I set off towards Radium.

 It took me nearly two hours to do the 30km(ish) from Banff to Castle Junction where I'd pickup the road to Kootenay National Park, so I didn't make it until five o'clock in the afternoon. I still had 100km left in the day with two major climbs ahead of me. The plan then was to just boot it. Thankfully, from the summit of the pass leading from Banff to Kootenay (the first of the two climbs) it's a long shallow descent until the base of the second climb that leads from Kootenay into Radium, so I made really good time between the two. The climb to the second summit started as the sun was beginning to set and I was losing light fast. I estimated that it would be about 300m of vertical, and I wasn't far off, as it was 330m of vertical, according to my bike computer. After about 2/3 of the climb, there's a nice little scenic viewpoint where I stopped to eat a few granola bars. I found a family having cake and tea. Turns out, it was the dad's birthday, so they offered me some tea and cake, which I happily accepted as I was absolutely starving and badly needed the energy. Nice people. I finished off the climb and then did the steep and windy descent into Radium, BC as it was getting dark. I rolled up to the only place in town that was still serving food: a pizza place. I got myself an extra-large pizza and then hobbled my way to my motel. Sadly, the office had closed an hour and a half before (it was now 10:30 at night). After half an hour of trying the emergency number of the motel over and over again, I finally managed to get through and got the key to my room. Sadly, the room was on the second floor, so I had to haul my bike up the stairs. I inhaled most of the pizza, showered, and went to bed. At my derailleur problems were over... or at least I thought they were.

Day 3) Radium to Cranbrook. 148km with 846m of vertical in 8 hours. Today was another bad day due to a severe headwind and I began having more derailleur issues. I lost the use of my lowest three gears on my rear cassette, which made the climbs a nightmare. But the real issue was the wind. I couldn't manage anything over 19kmph. It was like every time I felt I was making progress, the wind would come up and smack me right down. I was pretty demoralised by the whole thing. It's the kind of headwind that starts messing with your head and you start taking it personally, like nature is doing this just to mess with you. I'll confess that I screamed "would you just fuck off already?!" more than once up into the sky. I got into Cranbrook just after the sun had set but managed to find a burger place that was still open for food. The trip wasn't going so well. I also went through 10L of water as it was over 30C. 

Day 4) Cranbrook to Blairmore. 183km in 8 hours with 1,290m of vertical. The day got off to a great start (sarcasm) when my rear derailleur shat itself inside out after riding a mere 200m from the motel. I figured out what the problem was, and why I'd lost the use of some of my gears beforehand. The cable had come completely loose. I managed to yank the cable as tight as I could and then screw it down (not an easy feat given the average number of hands a human being normally possesses), which had the added benefit of restoring the use of all but my lowest gear. Thankfully, I didn't have to adjust anything after that since my barrel adjuster was shot. I also noticed that my rear wheel was rubbing quite hard against one of the brake pads. Yes, I did the entire previous day with my brakes partially engaged. FFS!

 But, I was actually in a fairly decent mood as I made it to the top of the first climb out of Cranbrook. It didn't last, however, because as I reached the bottom of the descent, I found that the road I was planning on taking was closed due to a major crash up the road, which meant having to go back up the climb and then do a 23km detour that added about 540m of additional climbing. By this point, I was in a pretty foul mood. Every day of the trip, something had gone wrong, meaning I hadn't been able to enjoy the ride at all. Once I completed the detour (which meant backtracking part of the previous day's route), I carried on. Thankfully, I had a nice tailwind that was slowly blowing me up the shallow climb towards Fernie. I probably gained a few hundred meters of vertical without really working for it due to that tail wind. I stopped in Fernie to get some calories in me before starting the last major leg towards Crowsnest Pass, the highest point of the day. I eventually reached the summit just as the sun was setting. "At least it's all downhill from here," I thought, not realising that I still had a lot of climbing to do. I suppose I was right, it was all downhill, only in the metaphorical sense. Yes, lots of rolling hills all the way to Blairmore. I didn't get into my hotel until after 10:00 PM. The last 20km of the ride were into yet another headwind and it was cold, only 15C. I was shivering when I got to the hotel.

 By this point, I was tired beyond exhausted, frustrated, and just not having a good time. A quick look at the weather forecast showed cold and rain for the next day, and that's when I decided I'd had enough. I called the wifey and she agreed to pick me up from Blairmore (about 200km south of Calgary). I had wanted to complete the loop, but this was beyond ridiculous at this point. Thankfully, the hotel let me stay in my room until 2:00 PM, so at least I got to sleep in, and I found a lovely little cafe that served delicious breakfast crepes. But that was the end of my trip.

 I did not enjoy myself much. I was either fighting my bike with mechanical issues, fighting the clock by trying to get to my accommodations before dark, fighting with the wind, fighting with highway closures. It was just one disaster after the next. My butt's also raw from my saddle, which usually doesn't give me issues. I attached a screencap of my route.

Total trip distance: 623km

Total distance this year so far: 2,291km