Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2012 October 15

= October 15 =

Alcohol-soluble window insulation foam ?
I'd like a spray-on foam that can be used to seal gaps around my windows in winter. My requirements:


 * 1) Should foam up to fill in any gaps.


 * 2) Should adhere well, because wind and changes in air pressure and temperature cause tape to come loose.


 * 3) Shouldn't be water-soluble, since there may be condensation on window.


 * 4) Should be easy to remove in summer, without leaving residue, when it's time to open windows again. This is somewhat incompatible with 2 and 3.  Perhaps it could be alcohol-soluble, to aid in removal.

Is there any product like this out there ? StuRat (talk) 15:55, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I know you specified a foam, but "rope caulk" (e.g. representative example, no product endorsement intended. ) is the traditional material to use to seal cracks around windows, etc. where you want to be able to remove it in the spring. It's substantial, so it shouldn't be pushed around by air pressure, and if you install it correctly, will seal tightly, but will come away cleanly (and reusably) in the spring, with perhaps only a slight oily residue which can be cleaned up with soap and water or alcohol. If the gap is larger than the ~1/8th inch diameter of the rope caulk, they also sell (non-adhesive) foam backer rods which can be wedged into cracks to fill most of it, allowing something like rope caulk to seal the edges. Although, if it's that large of gap, you either should fix your window (because such a gap might indicate some other window issue), install some sort of permanent weatherstripping, or permanently fill it in (if it's between surfaces which don't move with respect to each other during typical window operation) with minimally expanding (so you don't slightly bow the window frame, resulting in a sticky window) spray foam probably would be your best bet. --205.175.124.30 (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. No foams then ? StuRat (talk) 19:37, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Access to personal online profiles following one's death
Not sure the best way to phrase the headline for this question, which is part of my problem finding info on this, so I thought maybe you guys/gals could help. Let me preface this by saying I can see how this may be interpreted as a type of legal question, but I am not asking for advice, or even a direct answer, here; rather just to point me in the right direction for further research:

With many of our personal files and records now kept online behind logins/passwords, I wonder what happens to the ability to access these records upon someone's death. It is my understanding that the executor of an estate can be granted access to online financial records (online banking, bill pay, etc) through a process that allows them to settle any financial holdings. But what about things like Flickr, Facebook, personal email and blogs? Things like family photos or personal papers would obviously have value to one's heirs, but I could also imagine circumstances in which a person might want their personal records to "die" along with them. Anyway, I know there is a legal element to this, so guess I'd just like to be pointed to some sources that discuss this, rather than "own experience" type answers. Thanks, Ditch &#8733;  16:19, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I vaguely remember a magazine article about how some of those services are planning for that, something about along the same lines, where one provides some proof of another's death and relation to them to get access to those accounts. Unfortunately, I've got some source amnesia on this, but it would've been on either on Yahoo News or Buzzfeed at some point, maybe the Huffington Post.  Ian.thomson (talk) 16:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This article from Lifehacker might help, at least as a starting point for further research. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 17:12, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Facebook's current policy on dead members' accounts is here. No logins or passwords disclosed to anyone else; account will be "memorialized" on report of death; verified family members can request total removal. -  Ka renjc 18:41, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * And here's Google's. -- Vmenkov (talk) 17:01, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

How could I investigate if wealthy american climate change skeptics have made recent large land purchases in Canada?
Thanks.-Richard Peterson198.189.194.129 (talk) 22:34, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * First you would need a list of wealthy American climate change skeptics. It's possible someone has constructed such a list and posted it on the internet somewhere, but I suspect it's too broad a topic to canvass reliably. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:08, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Or you could start at the other end, with purchasers of large tracts of Canadian land. StuRat (talk) 04:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * She has HUUUUGE... tracts of land. -- Jayron  32  05:01, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The obvious answer is to check the article Wealthy American climate change skeptics who have made recent large land purchases in Canada.μηδείς (talk) 05:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Medeis, where are you going with that last comment? --Viennese Waltz 09:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Turns out Wikipedia doesn't have an article on everything...--Carnildo (talk) 00:36, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * To support Viennese Waltz, I had said something that could have been construed badly, but which hadn't been meant badly, so I deleted it, making their criticism seem perhaps overly strong, when really they were justified in bringing it to my attention. μηδείς (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd try looking up groups that profit from or advocate skepticism of climate change, and then see who's getting/giving the most money from/to those groups. You then have a list of wealthy climate change skeptics.  From there, you need to get a list of people who have been making large land purchases in Canada.  Compare the lists, and you'll have your answers. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Possible distorting factor: oil companies are widely regarded as benefitting from climate change skepticism (since it discourages people from seeking alternative power sources); oil companies have also engaged in lots of extensive land use in Canada recently in order to dredge tar sands - a source of oil, now that many of the most accessible subterranean reserves are depleted. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:24, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, good point. 198.189.194.129 (talk) 23:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * How would I find out, Stu and others, if someone is buying land in Canada? Is this public information at some Canadian federal website? That is the "other end" I'm thinking of starting on, although starting with a list of skeptics is also under consideration.198.189.194.129 (talk) 23:04, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * By the way I'm thinking you might not know the answer to my question and that's fine. But please don't, as cover, ridicule me with near tautologies, if that's what some of you were doing.216.86.177.36 (talk) 23:55, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Are you the same person as Richard Peterson aka 198.189.194.129? --   Jack of Oz   [Talk]  00:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * yup 198.189.194.129 (talk) 16:39, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, those are public records, but there's no guarantee they post them online, and, even if they do, there's no reason to think they are available in an easily searchable database (I don't think US records are). That is, if you know the proper information you can find info on one tract at a time, but don't expect to be able to run an SQL statement against the DB to answer your question in a single query: SELECT FROM LAND_SALE_TABLE BUYER_LAST_NAME,BUYER_FIRST_NAME WHERE BUYER_CITIZENSHIP = "US" AND SALE_PRICE > $1000000.  I suppose it's possible there might be such a capability, but don't hold your breath for: AND BUYER_CLIMATE_CHANGE_ATTITUDE = "DENIAL". :-)  StuRat (talk) 02:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Land registry in Canada falls under provincial jurisdiction, so except for the northern territories and disposition of federally held Crown lands, the feds will be keeping their noses out of things. Each provincial registry will be a public record, but with different degrees of accessibility. For instance, Ontario handed over land registry to Teranet and current records are searchable. British Columbia I believe also has an electronic database now. Naturally, you still have to pay to access bulk data, or go to a free-access registry terminal and write it all down by hand. Given that Canada is a vast land, the transactions will be similarly vast in number. Also, what about numbered companies (5678435 Ontario Ltd. bought a piece of land, does it deny global warming?) In fact for any corporate ownership, unless it triggers a FIRA review, I can't think of any records to show property title passing to a US corporation. So you have a tough road to follow to get your smoking gun proving whatever it is you're after. Franamax (talk) 03:26, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * See List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 00:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * 99% of the 1%, skeptics or otherwise, don't like to have their financial affairs aired in public, e.g. Mitt Romney. Often(?), they'll transact their business through intermediary companies. So, what you're asking is nearly impossible.Clarityfiend (talk) 02:36, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, if land sales are public records in Canada, and the purchase price is included, that's a hint right there at the wealth of the individuals buying the land. StuRat (talk) 03:00, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * But not necessarily their identities or meteorological climatological beliefs. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:32, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Many provinces have strict rules about foreign ownership of land. One of the strictest is Alberta, where the oil mainly is: a foreigner can only own 20 acres, in two parcels or less. Of course it's easy to incorporate a company in Canada, but even then ownership and control of the company is strictly monitored. --NellieBlyMobile (talk) 01:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the many thoughtful and helpful answers.-Rich Peterson198.189.194.129 (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2012 (UTC)