I’m UK based, so all our plugs are fused. We also work at 240VAC.

As for my extension, it has no limiter on current, other than the 13A fuse. It does have a thermal cutoff built into it’s reel however. It might not be enough to stop the cable getting melty, but it should stop it catching fire. It would require a very high load, for a long time to reach that point however.

As I said, multi adapters aren’t inherently dangerous. They just make it easier to create a dangerous situation, if used inappropriately.

Short answer, it’s actually not.

The actual danger is overloading a socket. This is significantly easier with a chain of extensions.

Resistance on the individual plugs shouldn’t be an actual issue. The only way it might come into play is if you are using a switch mode power supply at the end. This would adjust its current draw to account the reduced voltage. This would increase the current draw at the plug.

E.g. a PSU trying to draw 1000W. At 120V this would be 8.33A. If you drop 30V, then the supply would draw 11.1A. The intermediate plugs would dissipate 333W. You would be drawing 1333W from the wall.

In countries with low AC voltages, and a lack of fused plugs, this could overload a socket and cause a fire.

It’s also worth noting that long extensions have the same issue though it’s less. They also have a far lower rating when coiled than when uncoiled. E.g. I have a 13A extension that can only provide 4A when fully cooled.

I’m after a name or model for the chip/led itself. Potentially along with info on its extra functions.

Yes, I read that bit. I’m trying to find out more.

They are obviously made in bulk, somewhere in china, since they are quite common, and cheap. Unfortunately, I’ve only found them in pre-built products, and none actually identify the chip model.

They obviously can be programmed (at least once) since you can buy arrays of at least 400. There is no way a factory is making 400 different chips, given the end price.

In battle terms, messengers and flags were key. The messenger core often included the children of officers etc. This meant it wasn’t a random person delivering the orders, but a trusted person.

Flags etc could also be used for simple transmission. It was often limited to predefined messages, but that was generally enough to send units around.

These 2 methods were why knowing where the commander was in a battle was so important. A big, showy banner could make them an arrow magnet. It also let everyone know where orders were coming from, and where to send reports.

The fog of war was ever present however. Messages could get lost, or misunderstood. The best commanders had highly competent underlings. A sub-commander sending in the reserves, without orders, could win or lose a battle.

As for longer ranges. There were several ways. Chains of trust were the most common. Knights etc would travel regularly. They got to know each other and so could vouch for each other’s identity. This is part of where knightly honor comes from. You faked messages and both you and your family would suffer for it. The unique armour designs also helped with identification. It’s hard to fake a suit of armour quickly, and taking one by force was difficult.

This also formalised into messenger cores. Various chains of trust were formed to identify imposters. Pomp and ceremony, along with expensive indicators made faking difficult, dangerous and expensive.

Another option was message relay towers. The Romans used timed lights to send messages along walls. Simple messages could be sent long distances without much risk of corruption. Semaphore towers served a similar purpose, with the ability to send complex messages. They were expensive to build and operate however, so tended to be for critical lines of communication only.

Combined with all this was a continuous arms race of message validation Vs forgeries, encryption Vs code breaking. Many cyphers were developed and broken. Things like signet rings were a classic. It’s easy to seal a message with one (pressed into hot wax), and relatively hard to fake. Your seal also lived on your finger, so very difficult to steal.

This wasn’t in America, it was a private group. Also both peoples had had their views respected, at different times. It was the collision of rights that caused fun.

Privacy advocates are quite common in hackspaces. They generally have their requests respected. The rule of thumb is to check before taking pictures of someone else, or their projects. Most don’t have an issue, but a few might want to limit some things.

For seasoned self hosters, it’s a little effort. For novices it’s more work. For the initiated, it’s a huge effort, for no apparent gain.

We are fighting the Nash equilibrium, and I can’t see how we can adjust it in favour of self host etc. It’s better to fight the battles we can win, than pour effort after the impossible. In this case, it’s to provide an independent option that is as low effort as possible. This can become a reference to keep the excesses of the big companies limited, to some degree.

A hackspace I am in contact with had an… interesting debate on this topic.

Member A used a wearable video recording system. His view was that it was fixing a disability (his poor memory) in the same manner as someone wearing glasses, or a hearing aid.

Member B was a privacy advocate. He had STRONG views on his right to not be photographed or recorded, without his permission.

These 2 members did not see eye to eye. Both had a valid view , but diametrically opposed. Normally, it wouldn’t be too bad. Unfortunately, both were on the governing committee! Apparently even trying to arrange how to run the meetings to discuss it was getting problematic!

Humans are lazy. Having someone else set up all the details is a lot easier than doing it yourself. Until we fundamentally change the human condition, it will be a losing battle. The best we can likely do is limit the damage and reduce the difficulty of taking the better road.