cww516

Tide posted yesterday in a mod forum thread that he had rebuilt the database- my guess as someone with basically zero knowledge about website back-end stuff is that that cleared up the rest of the issues, so we ought to be back to normal. Let us know if you come across anything else that's still broken, though.

I had the same issue as you for about the last day or so, so it's not just you. Looks like Tide was able to get at least most of the issues cleaned up, though, so we're inching back toward normalcy.

Just saw that myself. Not really in my wheelhouse, but I reported this post so that hopefully there's a better chance that someone who's able to get that cert updated sees it.

You missed the part about how we had to beat the Soviets there, because communism is bad- that alone would be more than enough to motivate the US to go to the moon... Sorry, that was the snark sneaking back in. Remdesivir is FDA approved as a broad-spectrum antiviral (thanks, Wikipedia), but currently only has emergency approval for use in treating COVID-19, so the testing done on that particular use case is approximately equivalent to what's been done to test the currently-available vaccines. It has full approval for other uses, but not treating COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine is a fully-approved anti-malarial that was studied early on as a potential treatment, but later abandoned after trials determined it to be pretty much completely ineffective at treating COVID-19. Invermectin is an anti-parasitic that's approved for use in humans and animals, primarily for killing (or preventing) worm infestations and getting rid of lice. Studies did show that it starts to act like an anti-viral (and target SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures) if you use enough, but considering the amount a person would have to take to actually see that effect is enough to be highly toxic, those studies were quickly abandoned. Ingestion/injection of cleaning products was an idea pitched by an individual who also suggested direct injection of sunlight as a potential method of killing the virus, preached about hydroxychloroquine as a miracle cure, and also spent some time pumped full of dexomethasone (approved glucocorticoid, often used as a treatment for individuals with dangerously-low blood oxygen levels alongside supplemental oxygen) and remdesivir (see above). The point I was trying to make is that people who refuse the vaccine because it's "experimental" and later die because they ate too much horse de-wormer confuse the hell out of me. Same with people who won't get vaccinated because they "don't know what's in it" while sucking down a hot dog. (Fun fact, Moderna open-sourced the genetic code in their vaccine, and it's available on github.) I'm not suggesting that the vaccines shouldn't follow established processes to gain full approval, and I would definitely agree that they should- I believe Pfizer actually just submitted their application to start that process not too long ago. Just saying that if I'm given a choice of preventative measures, I'm going to go with the one that was developed by real-life vaccine researchers and has successfully gone through multiple rounds of clinical trials, rather the one peddled by some crackpot social media influencer trying to get people to like, subscribe, and hit that bell icon. Willful ignorance is definitely a real thing, and it's actively killing people.

None of the COVID vaccines you can get in the States are experimental, so I guess the answer to that part of the question is technically a "no". They've all gone through clinical trials, gotten FDA (emergency) approval, and are in the process of getting full approval, so there's not really anything "experimental" about them at this point. No more experimental than remdesivir, and definitely much less experimental (and in some cases, much safer) than hydroxychloroquine, or invermectin, or ingestion/injection of household cleaning products, or any of the other "alternatives". Also, developments of vaccines as we know them today didn't really kick off until the late 1800s, and other than the Spanish Flu, there hasn't really been a global pandemic of this magnitude since then. The government pushes vaccination against plenty of other diseases pretty hard, though- mumps/measles/rubella, viral meningitis, all the fun shots you have to get before you can be enrolled in school. Other notable mentions include polio (I've never met anyone who had it, probably because of the vaccine that became available in the 1950s and was initially administered in schools) and smallpox (eradicated before I was born due to global vaccination efforts which were funded, in no small part, by the United States). I guess the tl;dr answer to whether or not the government has pushed any vaccine this hard before would be "yes, pretty much all the time". Which natural antibodies, the ones you get as a result of contracting the virus that the vaccine is meant to keep you from contracting in the first place? Putting my snark aside, and assuming you're talking about the antibodies you get from having contracted the virus, the answer is still "yes, they actually have"- the yearly flu shot is a booster vaccine to help protect you against contracting the newest mutation(s) of the 1918 Spanish Flu virus, and those flu shots generally get pushed pretty hard. The reason for that, and the point I'm driving at, is that having been infected with one strain of the virus doesn't make you immune to all of them, as evidenced by cases of individuals catching COVID more than once, or getting the flu more than once over the course of their life. So far, all of the COVID strains use the same (or similar enough) method of getting into your cells, and since that particular protein is what's targeted by the antibodies created in response to a vaccine, those vaccines have thus far (and I'm actively knocking on my wooden desk) been generally effective against all of them.

Valid points, and I'll agree that it definitely would have been nice to track break-through cases. I would like to point out, though, that 1 death in 102k for vaccinated individuals is a lot lower than 1-2 in 100 unvaccinated individuals. There are also results available for clinical trials, which should give a statistically fairly accurate representation of a person's odds of contracting the virus despite being vaccinated- 95% effective in trials does mean that 5% of vaccinated individuals in that trial contracted the virus. I feel like we're getting pretty close to having that "why wear a seatbelt if you can still die in a car crash?" argument again... So OSHA isn't requiring employers to treat vaccine side-effects as work-related recordable incidents? I'd honestly be surprised if they said otherwise, since that sort of off-the-clock off-property thing is typically outside of their purview. I'm not directly involved with OSHA regulations and such at my job, though, so I'll grant that I may not be familiar enough with standard recording procedures for illnesses to have a well-formed and educated opinion.

Only numbers I've seen so far on that (which I'll admit that I haven't verified) were that for every 102k vaccinated individuals, you can expect to see 1000 breakthrough cases and 1 (one) death. Sounds pretty damn effective to me. I'll agree with the booster shot thing, though. Every transmission of the virus is an opportunity for a new mutation, and given the number of people refusing to get vaccinated, there's plenty of opportunities.

Yep, and I'm fairly certain that's been known from the get-go, pretty much everything I've seen from "official" sources or sources with scientific backgrounds says "XX% of preventing serious illness" or something similar. The vaccine doesn't turn you into a magical virus-repelling magnet- it still gets into your body, and can even start replicating, but your body already knows to be on the lookout for it and can respond more quickly and effectively. The reason the Delta variant is so much worse is that it replicates much more rapidly than the others (I've seen 1000x viral load shortly after infection bandied about, can't say I've fact-checked that figure), which means (to me, anyway- not a doctor) that it has more of a head-start before your body can react.

Okay, which one of you weirdos does this belong to? Ashland, OR, according to the source I stole it from.

I'd agree with the suggestion to try higher-grade fuel- run a tank of premium and see if you notice a difference. The factory engine map on these cars (and probably every modern car) is tuned for peak fuel economy, which means you might get some pinging under load. The ECU is capable of adjusting timing when it sees knock, so you shouldn't be in danger of blowing anything up, but it's still less than ideal. Higher octane fuels are more resistant to detonation, so if you run a tank of 91 or 93 through it and the sound goes away, it's safe to say that's the issue. Mid-grade might be enough of an octane boost to help, too, and it's cheaper than premium.

Probably a little more snark than was required on my part, I'll give you that one. Let's try this again. You need to take it down a notch. Having read a little ways back in this thread, I can see that you're making solid contributions to the conversation. Truth be told, I agree with your position. However, this little gem, which appears to be what kicked off this whole mess, is a good example what needs to change: You knew that was going to ruffle some feathers. Please don't try to deflect by suggesting that you didn't know, or that you're "not in the business of stirring [things] up", because you clearly stated that that's what you expected to happen. In the post I'm replying to, you try to prod me into lashing out at you, then immediately state that you're "not in the business of stirring [things] up" and accuse me of making a scene or derailing the thread. Again, you're fully aware of what you're posting, and of the responses those posts will elicit. You, and you alone, are responsible for the content of your posts. Please take a moment to read, and understand, the forum rules (clicky). You are more than welcome to have and present differing opinions, so long as said opinions are presented with civility and respect.

Hi, mod here- not the one who deleted your post, but I'll have to do. You're pretty clearly aware that what you posted was inappropriate, and you did it anyway. You clearly know what you just posted here is inappropriate, and you did it anyway. I'll go ahead and edit out the naughty parts of your post like you requested. I'll also suggest that you maybe take a couple days off, maybe reconsider some choices, and think about whether you want to continue being a member of this forum.

That buzz you mentioned sounds an awful lot like a leak to me, so I'd try to chase that down before you go spending money on parts you may or may not need.

If you can get under the car with the engine running, you might be able to track down an exhaust leak (if there is one). If this only happens when the car is up to temp, you might have to time it right so the fans aren't on (or maybe just unplug the fans and be quick), but if you wave a lit candle near anything that has a gasket, you should see it flicker if there's a leak. Not a 3.6R owner myself, but from the looks of it, I think you'd only care about the manifold gaskets right at the heads unless there's a hole or crack in the pipe upstream of the cats, since everything else would be downstream of the front O2 sensor. Otherwise, maybe spray some ether near anything in the intake tract downstream of the MAF sensor that has a gasket, and see if you have a vacuum leak. The hard part there is that there are a lot of vacuum lines that end up connecting to the intake post-MAF.

I feel like there's the makings of a good joke there about Linux and not getting viruses...

I'll be honest, until I did a little searching on Amazon, I wasn't sure if DC amp-clamps existed, so I make no guarantees as to their accuracy. Slapping one of those over the negative cable just upstream of the battery post sure would be easier than trying to find the right place to put a shunt, though.

I'm not going to claim to have looked that closely at the battery cables recently enough to be sure about this, but I think there's probably a way to put a meter in there without also being inline with the starter. You wouldn't be able to put it right between the battery post and the main cable lug, but as long as you're in parallel with the starter motor, you should be safe. I think you could put a meter downstream of the power lug on the alternator and be safe, but that would only show net current generated by the alternator, and wouldn't show you what's going to (or from) the battery. The other option would be to look for some sort of an inductive DC ammeter, which would just go around the cable, rather than having to be inserted inline with it. Most of what I'm seeing on Amazon in the DIY realm looks to be 0-100A, but I'm not sure if that's 100A max reading, or if more than 100A draw will cook something. Here's one I found: https://www.amazon.com/bayite-Digital-Current-Voltage-Transformer/dp/B01DDQM6Z4

I will absolutely agree that forcing someone to be vaccinated against their will isn't really something that happen (military notwithstanding), although I think it's reasonable for restrictions to be placed on what unvaccinated individuals can or can't do, similar to how you have to get certain shots in order to attend most colleges. I'm just a dude behind a keyboard- just because I don't think "I don't wanna" is a good reason, that doesn't make it any less of a valid reason. Also, I hear you on the devil's advocate thing- I'm not above doing that occasionally just to get a rise out of people, and I've been known to be an easy mark on certain subjects (see exhibit A, 5 posts up). I'd much rather have a discussion with at least some level of disagreement, makes me more likely to want to verify my facts and opinions on the subject at hand.

So I typed this all out, and as I'm re-reading it, I feel like I should preface it by stating that this isn't meant as a personal attack on yourself or anyone else, and I sincerely hope that's not how it comes across. This just happens to be something I'm fairly passionate about, and since I'm generally incapable of being detached and apathetic toward the people around me, seeing opinions on this subject that differ significantly from mine tend to get me wound up pretty tight. Here goes: Here's the thing- if a person elects not to get vaccinated, or not to wear a mask when they're around other people, they're putting the people they interact with at risk. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" doesn't mean "do whatever you want, full stop," it means "do whatever you want, if and only if the thing you want to do doesn't interfere with anyone else's rights to life, liberty and/or the pursuit of happiness." Or, as first I heard it very succinctly phrased about 15 years ago, "your rights end where my nose begins." Everyone is free to wear or not wear masks as they see fit, or to be vaccinated or not, so long as they do it in accordance with the rights and freedoms of everyone else around them. If someone in one of those camps expects others around them to just go ahead and die for their convenience, though, that isn't just a violation of those other people's personal freedoms, it's unimaginably selfish. "I don't wanna" is something a 2 year old says to be contrarian when you tell them it's time for bed, so hopefully you'll forgive me for trying to hold fully-grown adults to a higher standard. Also, I'd argue that a 1.8% mortality rate (current US stats) isn't exactly a small number, but regardless, that figure ignores the host of possible long-term medical conditions the disease can cause in those who survive it. Maybe I'm a little more sensitive to such things, given that I'm in the age group most likely to experience those long-term effects, but I'm not personally looking to sign up for a chance to win permanent heart damage, lung damage, decrease in neurological function, mental health issues, blood disorders, or any of the other fun prizes. That's going to be a considerable issue, too- some of those lucky enough to survive are going to end up on disability and Medicaid for the next 40-50 years because they're unable to work, which means decreased productivity (GDP per capita), and an increased tax burden on those still able to work, not to mention the hit we've already taken by refusing to just rip the band-aid off early last year with a lockdown in favor of drawing it out into a full-blown recession. Even those "unaffected" by COVID are going to continue to be affected by it for years to come, and dragging this thing out by refusing to accept the readily-available and obvious solutions will only make it worse. Side note on the "rushed" comment from your previous post, I'd argue that "fast-tracked" would be a more accurate assessment. The vaccines approved for use in the United States have all undergone clinical trials in order to be approved, so it's not like corners have been cut and we're living in a medical Wild West. mRNA vaccine technology has been around for 30+ years now, too, so it's not exactly bleeding-edge tech- heck, if I (not a doctor, nor a biologist, nor adjacent to anything remotely close to the "squishy" sciences) can explain the general concept accurately in under 90 seconds, it can't be *that* complex. What's actually happening is that we're seeing the results of funding being made readily available for medical research, as well as reviews of that research happening in a timely fashion, rather than the standard process of researchers begging for grants and reviews being tied up in bureaucracy for years. It's faster than normal, true, but normal is far slower than it could (should?) be. I'm actually really excited to see where this research will lead- now that those who control the purse strings in the medical research community have seen the real-world potential of mRNA vaccines, I'd imagine we'll see some big leaps in the field over the next 10 years. The folks who developed the Pfizer vaccine were working on a cure for cancer before they pivoted to COVID, and it looks like there's been some promising work toward curing or immunizing against HIV as well. I realize I'm painting with a pretty wide brush here, but we Americans tend to be good at compassion and bad at empathy- could call it a hero complex. I'd speculate that there's a non-trivial level of overlap between the group of people your comment would resonate with, and the group of people who have already been vaccinated (or who want to be vaccinated).

I generally agree with that sentiment, although that decision should be an educated and informed one, and that's proving difficult in some cases. I understand that there are valid reasons to not be vaccinated (history of anaphylactic reactions to other vaccines, etc.), but if I was going to try to make a list of good reasons, things like "I don't wanna" and "this guy on YouTube said" wouldn't make the cut. In the specific case of the US military, though, there are already plenty of mandatory immunizations, so this would just mean adding one more to the existing list. https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Health-Readiness/Immunization-Healthcare/Vaccine-Recommendations/Vaccine-Recommendations-by-AOR

https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html Just sayin'.

I'm saying this without having actually changed the plugs on a 2010 Legacy, but it should be identical to the Outback in that regard, or at least close enough that you could follow an Outback guide. The Outback is essentially a lifted Legacy wagon, so other than some subframe spacers and a couple of slightly longer/taller suspension components, they're pretty much the same. Also, the intake manifold is on top of the engine, but you'd want to leave that alone. What phillbert is talking about is the air filter housing, which is on the passenger's side of the car just behind the headlight. I've changed my plugs without taking the filter box out, but I only tried that because it's a pain to get the rear half of the housing uninstalled on the GT.

I can't say I've ever had any issues with Kwik Trip, and given the number of them around me, that's about the only brand I end up buying most of the time. Their new(ish) fried chicken is pretty good, too...

There's a chance it could be the immobilizer kicking in. I had a remote start in a past car, and occasionally it would only try to crank very briefly- usually, that resulted in the immobilizer locking out ignition for 10-15 minutes. I suppose it's possible that if you only get the key turned far enough to engage the starter for a split second, the immobilizer could think the car is being hot-wired or something and lock things down. As far as the key is concerned, I know they're cut the same on both sides, but I'm not sure both sets of teeth engage tumblers at the same time. If you're really dedicated, you could keep track of which way the key is oriented when you have the issue and see if there's a pattern. Usually, the key will just refuse to turn, though, rather than flaking out like that.

One way streets must really grind your gears, huh?