sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

jurb6006@gmail.com: Apr 30 01:31AM -0700 This is all I got, I cannot afford a new one. I can't work because of my eyesight but it isn't quite enough to give me disability, even though I would not be able to run a cash register now.   Anyway, we got hit with bedbugs. Two schools got closed over it. It was an epidemic or whatever.   Anyway, my laptop is infested. I have researched and found that when exposed to temperatures of 135 F for like 45 minutes it kills them and their eggs. The government and the companies who do this assure us that this is safe. It probably is if not running.   I just checked the oven, the lowest it will go is 170 F. Is that safe for a non, running (at the time) computer ? Could it damage the screen if by nothing else but expansion and contraction ?   We are about to bring in new matress and whatever, but anything happening to this laptop IS NOT AN OPTION.

Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid>: Apr 30 10:08AM +0100 > screen if by nothing else but expansion and contraction ?   > We are about to bring in new matress and whatever, but anything > happening to this laptop IS NOT AN OPTION.   http://bedbugskilledwithgammairradiation.blogspot.co.uk/     -- Adrian C

N_Cook <diverse@tcp.co.uk>: Apr 30 10:51AM +0100 > Anyway, my laptop is infested. I have researched and found that when exposed to temperatures of 135 F for like 45 minutes it kills them and their eggs.. The government and the companies who do this assure us that this is safe. It probably is if not running.   > I just checked the oven, the lowest it will go is 170 F. Is that safe for a non, running (at the time) computer ? Could it damage the screen if by nothing else but expansion and contraction ?   > We are about to bring in new matress and whatever, but anything happening to this laptop IS NOT AN OPTION.   Don't rely on oven gauges, I nearly came a cropper using what I thought was a low temp set oven. Place a thermometer on insulation at the bottom of the oven to check first. I had to leave the door open a crack to get low enough temp

adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham): Apr 30 11:11AM +0100 > nothing else but expansion and contraction ?   > We are about to bring in new matress and whatever, but anything happening > to this laptop IS NOT AN OPTION.   Consider Isopropanol, but check with the handbook first to make sure it will not damage any plastic components such as the screen. If there are parts of the laptop that might be harmed by liquid, leave the machine in a sealed plastic bag with the Isopropanol soaked into an absorbent pad underneath it and let the vapour saturate it for a day or two.   Be careful to make sure all the vapour has dispersed before switching the machine on again, Isopropanol is very flammable and the vapour could explode.   Usual disclaimer: at your own risk.     -- ~ Adrian Tuddenham ~ (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply) www.poppyrecords.co.uk

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:09AM -0400 > Anyway, my laptop is infested. I have researched and found that when exposed to temperatures of 135 F for like 45 minutes it kills them and their eggs. The government and the companies who do this assure us that this is safe. It probably is if not running.   > I just checked the oven, the lowest it will go is 170 F. Is that safe for a non, running (at the time) computer ? Could it damage the screen if by nothing else but expansion and contraction ?   > We are about to bring in new matress and whatever, but anything happening to this laptop IS NOT AN OPTION.   Why can't you treat the laptop the same way you are treating the rest of the place?   I've never had them, thank God, but I have seen info about them and the temperature thing is supposed to be for real. It is a way to treat your entire apartment in fact as insecticides don't work very well. It seems to be hard to get the chemicals into the spaces where the bugs hide.   --   Rick C

Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca>: Apr 30 09:18AM -0400 >Anyway, my laptop is infested. I have researched and found that when exposed to temperatures of 135 F for like 45 minutes it kills them and their eggs. The government and the companies who do this assure us that this is safe. It probably is if not running.   >I just checked the oven, the lowest it will go is 170 F. Is that safe for a non, running (at the time) computer ? Could it damage the screen if by nothing else but expansion and contraction ?   >We are about to bring in new matress and whatever, but anything happening to this laptop IS NOT AN OPTION.   Check how professionals use dry ice for bedbugs. Saw it on TV.     Regards,   Boris Mohar   Got Knock? - see: Viatrack Printed Circuit Designs (among other things) http://www.viatrack.ca   void _-void-_ in the obvious place     --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

amdx <nojunk@knology.net>: Apr 30 11:13AM -0500 On 4/30/2017 8:18 AM, Boris Mohar wrote:   >> I just checked the oven, the lowest it will go is 170 F. Is that safe for a non, running (at the time) computer ? Could it damage the screen if by nothing else but expansion and contraction ?   >> We are about to bring in new matress and whatever, but anything happening to this laptop IS NOT AN OPTION.   > Check how professionals use dry ice for bedbugs. Saw it on TV.   The dry ice thing is interesting but, it seems to be a way to attract them. Yes, you can kill the ones you attract, but with a bed bug infestation it seems you need almost 100% kill otherwise they just breed and you are right back where you started. "An individual bed bug can lay 200 to 250 eggs in her lifetime. The eggs hatch in about 6 to 10 days and the newly emerged bed bug nymphs seek a blood meal." I also found 118* for 70 minutes or 122* for 20 minutes. I'd rig up something and do 118* for 2 hours. That seems much safer than 138*.   Mikek   --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Tomos Davies <cariadmenywod@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:43AM In <news:590545ec$0$40425$c3e8da3$b280bf18@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei suggested:   > the fence has a less "amazing" implementation but what it does, it does > it better. Android tends to be first with many features but implemented > with less quality.   That is a reasonable statement. But is it correct?   I only speak facts. And I'm very reasonable since I'm a logical thinker.   Most iOS users appear to be so inextricably emotionally attached to whatever the Apple Marketing Machine tells them to think, that their own words indicate that they can't even think facts on their own.   Contrary facts seem to befuddle them. But the Apple Marketing Machine message soothes them.   So, maybe it is true that the Apple portrait mode ends up with superior results in the final form (that is, in the photo itself).   Maybe it is true. But maybe it's not true.   Has *anyone* shown facts either way in this thread (or in the thread dedicated to this topic)? Nope.   So everyone is just guessing.   What we need is very simple, since it's a fact that both Android and Apple iOS phones have portrait mode.   We need to find a reference that does a blind test of the results. It's pretty easy to do the test.   1. Person 1 shoots a set of portrait mode photos with iOS. 2. They shoot the same set using Android under the same conditions. 3. A different person, a digital photo expert, compares the results   It's a simple test to run, and, depending on the conditions and the expertise of the digital photo expert, they can pronounce whether there is any meaningful difference in the quality of the results.   It's a valid question. Does anyone have a pointer to such a reference?

"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Apr 30 04:33AM -0700 The Troll is back. Please don't feed the troll.

N_Cook <diverse@tcp.co.uk>: Apr 30 10:55AM +0100 Not deliberately putting a data-stick in the path of a discharge, but cannot rule out the possibility of a casual situation like that. Removing nylon/polyester clothing , hearing daytime and seeing flashes at night, on removing clothing, corruptible possibility with a datastick inside such clothing?

"Ian Field" <gangprobing.alien1@virginmedia.com>: Apr 29 09:01PM +0100 Anyone know what to type into the server entry in WLM2009?   Its virginmedia but the email address is an old ntlworld.com.   Thanks for any help.

philo <philo@privacy.net>: Apr 29 05:03PM -0500 On 4/29/2017 3:01 PM, Ian Field wrote: > Anyone know what to type into the server entry in WLM2009?   > Its virginmedia but the email address is an old ntlworld.com.   > Thanks for any help.       https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Set-up-email-in-the-2009-version-of-Windows-Live-Mail-8f596cb1-1e6a-4f0d-98d8-0cecf804dc65#__finding_my_server

garci66@gmail.com: Apr 29 02:39PM -0700 I just did a 47" LG repair and was surprisingly straightforward. I followed the video (was a very similar TV) and took around hour and a half. Having a friend to help you is great though especially when lifting the LCD out of the frame.   The room I needed was a small (single) bed and a little table to place the TV when disassembling it.   Only one led had blown so I ended up just short circuit'ing it. You can tell a bit that the background is darker but worked well.

stratus46@yahoo.com: Apr 29 11:41AM -0700 > Philips rotors with the plastic gears that break in a windstorm? Is > it even possible to buy a good quality rotor, (besides a really > expensive Ham job) anymore? Lenny   Nobody using a DVR? Changing the antenna while in record ruins the capture. Home many locations are they trying to receive?   G²

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>: Apr 29 12:28PM -0700 >Nobody using a DVR? Changing the antenna while in record ruins >the capture. Home many locations are they trying to receive? >G²   Rotating or changing the antenna while receiving a program is only required if the signal is lousy and the user is trying to improve it. No need to rotate the antenna if the signal quality is good. If they were recording a lousy quality signal, I would think that rotating the antenna might improve the situation rather than ruining the capture.   -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.