A more realistic metric would be used books (also reflects the quality of all but brand new fresh books which are a rarity obviously), but you can’t quantify that price, so yes using new is disingenuous, but go off on a rant I guess? I think it’s a great idea, but let’s not kid ourselves that people would actually be spending that amount on books. It’s great for a feel good story though, I’ll give you that.

It’s due to when you harvest the plant.

The longer you let the plant go, the more THC degrades into CBN which is what makes people relaxed. Sativas typically flower longer and take longer for the THC to degrade, so sativas typically lead to a creative high.

But it’s entirely down to harvest time, and yes there is a vast difference in the effects between THC and CBN. Cloudy trichomes = THC and Amber = CBN, let a plant go until it’s 100% amber and you won’t be moving after consuming.

So to answer OP find edibles that are fully THC and avoid CBN, or find some flower that’s not too amber and make your own. Thats kinda the only options, you don’t know what type of trichomes edibles are made from, some list the CBN quantity, but not all.

They wouldn’t have spent 60k on books over that time, they’ve only saved that much because the books were free. If they had to pay for the books they would have been more selective and less liberal in the amount.

Spending $150 a week is just a lot of money to spend on books, it’s only that much because of the free price tag, so it’s extremely disingenuous to use that amount as people wouldn’t realistically spend that.

Hrmm yeah that’s out of my knowledge, I’ve been having less issues as they filled out the tent.

I probably don’t need too, but they say to get it in a range of 5.8-6.2, so when it’s 6.5 I throw a little in. We do have really hard water (mountain/glacier runoff) and have a softener too. If things get worse I may look at getting RO water or even a system, but things seem ti have settled out. I’ve been hardly phing lately, but I’m still getting some issues, which is what’s leading me to the slightly imperfect PH.

Yeah I may just try not adjusting it unless it gets wild out, but that’s why we experiment and try things.

What recipe are you following? I went full board for the masters line and using the ph perfect 3 part.

So I noticed with this line I couldn’t just top up my reservoir like the other one, this time I’ve been emptying the reservoir and making a brand new batch each week, but I think I need to up my strength a hair.

I fill my bucket up with 25l and make the recipe for 20l, I was doing this with my old line, so just carried through. I check ph and ec every morning and adjust Ph if needed. 3-4 days later I usually need to add 20l tap water as there’s not enough water for the pump, sometimes I need to do it again the day before I change the res. If the EC is creeping up I add tap water earlier.

This is LPA, so glorified DWC, but I’m running Advanced Nutrients. I was having some issues myself as I switched lines over midgrow from Technaflora.

There are some specific things you should avoid in Aero since they can clog, humic/fumic it’s one of those, but what issues are you having maybe I can help?

My timing is 5 minutes off and spraying for 30 seconds.

Here’s an old build album, has the old line I was using though. Linky

\O/

Oh man, I did the same thing in one of my soil grows, I couldn’t figure out why the one was always showing deficiencies, turns out I was strangling the poor girl the entire time.

No, but it seems like you’re assuming they would look at this sandboxed by itself…? Of course there is more than one data point to look at, when you uploaded the image would noted, so even if you uploaded an image with older exif data, so what? The original poster would still have the original image, and the original image would have scraped and documented when it was hosted. So you host the image with fake data later, and it compares the two and sees that your fake one was posted 6 months later, it gets flagged like it should. And the original owner can claim authenticity.

Metadata provides a trail and can be used with other data points to show authenticity when a bad actor appears for your image.

You are apparently assuming to be looking at a single images exif data to determine what? Obviously they would use every image that looks similar or matches identical and use exif data to find the real one. As well as other mentioned methods.

The only vector point is newly created images that haven’t been digitally signed, anything digitally signed can be verified as new, unless you go to extreme lengths to fake and image and than somehow recapture it with a digitally signed camera without it being detected fake by other methods….

Removed by mod

….

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2024/09/google-seeks-authenticity-in-the-age-of-ai-with-new-content-labeling-system/

Its literally the method that’s used…

A group of tech companies created the C2PA system beginning in 2019 in an attempt to combat misleading, realistic synthetic media online. As AI-generated content becomes more prevalent and realistic, experts have worried that it may be difficult for users to determine the authenticity of images they encounter. The C2PA standard creates a digital trail for content, backed by an online signing authority, that includes metadata information about where images originate and how they’ve been modifie

For 5 fucking years already….

Okay, what does an image metadata and advertising have to do with each other…? I’m not here for conspiracy theories, I’m here to have a discussion, which you clearly can’t do.

You claim I don’t know much… I stated as much… yet you don’t know how images are verified …? The fuck…? Go off on whatever tangent you want, but exit data is the only way to determine if a photo is legitimate… yes it can be faked… congrats for pointing that out and only that this entire time… even though I already mentioned that…

What’s your point dude? Seriously I’m blocking you if you can’t have a discussion. Proof of ownership and detecting fakes are two mutually inclusive things, they can both be used to help the others legitimacy, why are you only looking at this from one angle here? Exif is for ownership, the methods in the comment I responded to are for other things. I mentioned THIS previously as well….

So you gonna address what’s identifiable about a phone… or are you just gonna ignore this and scream about the one thing we know can prove authenticity of an image? I’ve addressed the can be faked… you gonna address any of my points…?

I said I had a little knowledge, do you have a point here or you just gonna scream that exif data can be faked? I was trying to have a civil conversation about this.

If there’s an image with two different exifs data, this will flag it, problem solved, what’s your issue…? Isn’t that the point? Flag fake images…?

Meta data creates a string, if you want to claim ownership of an image and I show an image with earlier metadata, who’s is the real one? Yes it can be faked, but it can also be traced. Thats not a reason to not do something, the hell? That’s like suggesting you can’t police murders because someone can fake a murder.

What is identifiable about the type of phone you have…? Anyone that sees you in public has that information lmfao, there’s far more “fingerprintable” data in the exif than the device that anyone can visually see you have…… that’s the strangest privacy angle I’ve seen and you’re talking like it’s this big huge issue? I’ve asked you to explain and you haven’t, why is this?

And without that exif data you can’t prove any of that… you realize this… yeah…?

What is your point here? That you’re concerned that you might have someone knowing your phone? You realize you can scrub that information yourself if you’re not worried about proving authenticity…? Yeah…?

You can use metadata to prove an image is real, you can’t prove something is real without it, so it’s the only current option. It tells you a lot, you just don’t want people to know it apparently, but that doesn’t change it can be used to legitimatize an image.

What’s disgusting about knowing if an image was taken on a Sony dslr, and Android or an iPhone? And entitled…? This is so you can prove your image is real? The hell you talking about here?

To prove the legibility of the image? It’s a great data point that’s pretty anonymous, they don’t need to include the Mac, sim, serial or other information.

include some EXIF data

Thats what I said.

Date, device, edited. That can all be included, location doesn’t need to be.

I guess, but the original image would be somewhere to be scraped by google to compare and see an earlier version. Thats why you don’t just look at the single image, you scrape multiple sites looking for others as well.

Theres obviously very specific use cases that can take advantage of brand new images that are created on a computer, but theres still ways of detecting that with other methods as explained by the user I responded to.

I guess this would be a good reason to include some exif data when images are hosted on websites, one of the only ways to tell an image is true from my little understanding.

You can get some interesting explosive results if you monstercrop at about 3 weeks of flower.

It’s usually just about the right time for it to get roots and veg for a month to be ready when the others are done flowering.

It’s one way to save from having a mom and keep a continual crop and not have an over vegged clone.

Edit, or even reveg from a little left over flowered plant too, the possibilities are endless with this plant.

Oh yeah shit, if that’s feminized that’s a different story. That means it’s a herm, you could still collect the seeds which should be feminized, but it’ll be inherently more likely to herm from my understanding.