Slashdot Mirror


There's a Sucker Converted Every Minute

Ponca City, We love you writes "Once the US converts from analog to digital broadcasting next February, those who receive their signals over the air will need a converter box for older, non-digital models. Government-approved converter boxes sell for $60 or less and a government-issued $40 rebate coupon is available for the asking but that hasn't stopped companies like the Ohio-based Universal TechTronics from offering supposedly free converter boxes. The gimmick: the box is free, as long as you pay $88 for a five-year warranty, plus $9.30 shipping. Universal TechTronics seems to specialize in 'high-tech' products of questionable value, marketing the Cool Surge portable air cooler, 'a work of engineering genius from the China coast so advanced that no windows, vents, or freon are needed' that uses the same energy as a 60-watt light bulb. It works by blowing a stream of air over two ice packs that you have previously frozen in your freezer. What's the best tech scam you've heard of lately?"

395 comments

  1. Tech scam? by jeiler · · Score: 5, Funny

    "We have to filter P2P to solve network congestion"--Bell Canada.

    --

    If you haven't been down-modded lately, you aren't trying.

    Sacred cows make the best hamburger.

    1. Re:Tech scam? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mod parent insightful, instead of funny. Various people and some papers have suggested that upgrading network capacity is a better way to handle high traffic than trying to mess with QoS, because 1. it's cheaper 2. it actually works, which isn't really proven to be the case for QoS on a large ISP level network.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    2. Re:Tech scam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you - you made my day.

      -Bhell vicitm

  2. Maybe the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Electric Universe?

    1. Re:Maybe the by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real tech scam: you have to upgrade your PC every two years to run the latest and greatest versions of Windows and Office.

    2. Re:Maybe the by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Check this out: when I was working as a film-developing monkey for a large drugstore chain, we had a computer dedicated to downloading pictures from a VERY well-known maker of disposable cameras. One day, the tech had to come in to upgrade the computer so that it could dowload pictures from bluetooth devices. The tech opened up the computer and explained to me that he had to remove a piece of "epoxy"(which was a small blob of harmless rubber cement on the mainboard) which clearly obstructed nothing ad served no purpose whatsoever. Then, he put in a driver CD to enable bluetooth functionality. It was absurd! Why crack the box open at all? My guess was to rationalize an obscene price by making a simple driver install an illusion of a "ZOMG hardware surgery performed by a engineer".

      Absurd.

    3. Re:Maybe the by iwein · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then, he put in a driver CD to enable bluetooth functionality. It was absurd! Why crack the box open at all? My guess was to rationalize an obscene price by making a simple driver install an illusion of a "ZOMG hardware surgery performed by a engineer".

      He would have to check if there was any hardware to install drivers for now wouldn't he?

      Since you probably didn't bother to check if the price was reasonable either, nor if that which he needed to remove obstructed the slot he needed to stick the bluetooth card in, i'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

      --
      Show a man some news, distract him for an hour. Show a man some mod points, distract him for the rest of his life.
    4. Re:Maybe the by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uh, perhaps the bluetooth card was already installed. Suppose their customer(my employer at the time) decided to add bluetooth functionality afterward. And, if the blob was obstructing the slot as you suggested, then why would a bluetooth slot be purposely obstructed? That's still shady(though not at all surprising).

    5. Re:Maybe the by jessedorland · · Score: 1

      I do repair and upgrade on weekends. And last week I was training a guy who asked me the same question -- expect it was about "gum" stuck further side of the sata drive. I didn't answer him for the same obvious reason I will not be answering you.

      --
      Even veals have more autonomy!
    6. Re:Maybe the by iwein · · Score: 1

      This humor is way to subtle for the average moderating audience. Know though that it is appreciated none the less. Keep up the good work.

      --
      Show a man some news, distract him for an hour. Show a man some mod points, distract him for the rest of his life.
    7. Re:Maybe the by iwein · · Score: 1

      Uh, perhaps the bluetooth card was already installed. Suppose their customer(my employer at the time) decided to add bluetooth functionality afterward. And, if the blob was obstructing the slot as you suggested, then why would a bluetooth slot be purposely obstructed? That's still shady(though not at all surprising).

      Yes, maybe he could have just installed the driver and the guy was a moron for opening up the box at all.

      --
      Show a man some news, distract him for an hour. Show a man some mod points, distract him for the rest of his life.
  3. Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    DVD rewinders.

    1. Re:Tech Scam by RattFink · · Score: 1

      Scam? As I recall they were a gag gift and were never meant to be taken seriously nor marketed as anything but a gag gift.

      --
      "I don't necessarily agree with everything I say." - Marshall McLuhan
    2. Re:Tech Scam by AngryUndead · · Score: 4, Funny

      o ye of too much faith [in humanity].

    3. Re:Tech Scam by legirons · · Score: 2, Informative

      not for DVDs, but: http://dansdata.com/gz083.htm

    4. Re:Tech Scam by scottrocket · · Score: 2, Funny
      As I recall they were a gag gift and were never meant to be taken seriously nor marketed as anything but a gag gift.

      OOooooohhhhhh...

    5. Re:Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a dvd rewinder, you insensitive clod!

    6. Re:Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      A pricey stone to demagnetize DVDs.

      Or this thing:
      http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/demagnetization.html

      At least it has a blinky light on it.

    7. Re:Tech Scam by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Scam? As I recall they were a gag gift and were never meant to be taken seriously nor marketed as anything but a gag gift.

      When you hear the phrase "his shoe size is higher than his IQ", it is an insult not a description of someone with abnormally large feet.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    8. Re:Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, You may think that is funny, but I actually rewound my first DVD I ever played. Right after the credits started to roll, I hit the back button.

      I came back to it 5 minutes later and it was still rewinding. This is circa 1996 when DVD players were around $800 US. A VHS tape would rewind in about 5 minutes.

      I came back to it about 30 minutes later and it was still rewinding. I thought to myself that although this was a neet little package, DVD's would never catch on because of the slow rewind time.

      I hit the eject button and thought to myself that they can rewind it at the video store.

      When it finally ejected, I thought how dumb it was to attempt to rewind it. But, after 10 years or so of the slogan "Be Kind, Rewind", that mentality existed for 2 or 3 more DVD's before I never ever thought of it again.

      I've only ever rewound one DVD.

      I'm posting anonymously because I've never ever told anyone that I've ever done that, and I hope that nobody ever knows.
       

  4. I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just got a new Laptop with it installed. The laptop is just used for web, email, and MS Office type of stuff. It's not bad. It's not as big a pig as everyone states. The networking seams to be a little better. The only thing I can complain about is things that I don't like about Windows in general. I don't understand why everyone hates it so much.

    But hey, I'm an AC - a Slashdot Dreg.

    1. Re:I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It could be the fact you need a dual core machine with 2 gigs to browse the web now.

    2. Re:I like Vista by ThatFunkyMunki · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I disagree, I just got a new Dell XPS M1530 with Vista preinstalled, and I genuinely tried to get it to work for me, got all the applications i use in windows normally, etc. I used it for about 4 hours, after which i noticed my computer was not nearly as fast as the one it was replacing (aging pentium 4 system), and decided to install XP. Now, it runs great, and uses about 2/3 the ram that was being consumed by Vista. Oh, and now I have the ability to play games without the horrible FPS that came with Vista.

      --
      If patriotism is racist, is racism patriotic?
    3. Re:I like Vista by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Funny

      and now I have the ability to play games without the horrible FPS that came with Vista.

      Vista comes with a First Person Shooter?

      Let me guess - you score points by killing penguins with thrown chairs, you buy armour by making campaign contributions, and you power up by eating up all the ram chips lying around.

    4. Re:I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you bought into those networking seams? are they what hold the intertubes together?

    5. Re:I like Vista by Nightspirit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My laptop with vista is noticeably faster than my desktop with XP (with the exception of network transfer speed), even though they have the same specs (2.1ghz core 2 duo, 2gb ram. The desktop has a better videocard).

      For me at least XP seems to get much slower with age while vista does not do so. Yah, a fresh install of XP is blinding fast, even more so than Ubuntu IMO, but after several weeks just slows to a crawl (yah I scandisk, reg clean, defrag, spyware/virus check, etc) while Vista takes a couple days to get fast (due to indexing and prefetching, or whatever they call it).

    6. Re:I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love XP. Right now I am running it on an old laptop with a 1.8Ghz Pentium with 256MB of RAM and a 40GB HDD.

      I wanted to run Ubuntu, but it would not install. The Live CD took about a day to finally boot up. Attempting to install gave me various errors: from inside Windows I got "you need at least 256MB of memory"; from the CD menu the partitioner ran but the system became unresponsive after that and nothing ever happened; from booted as a Live CD the screen went garbled and stupid and Ubuntu locked up.

      And I did get Xubuntu installed but it sucks.

      So XP all the way.

    7. Re:I like Vista by peragrin · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think I hear coders working on that right now in flash just because.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    8. Re:I like Vista by AngryLlama · · Score: 0

      woosh

    9. Re:I like Vista by AceofSpades19 · · Score: 0

      there are more linux distros then ubuntu, you know

    10. Re:I like Vista by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      My laptop with vista is noticeably faster than my desktop with XP (with the exception of network transfer speed), even though they have the same specs

      I don't believe you.

      For me at least XP seems to get much slower with age while vista does not do so.

      Yes it's a well-known bug in XP that the code get tired after several weeks of use because there's a qi-leak.

      Now, why not take that weak shit to the park? Maybe the squirrels will believe it.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    11. Re:I like Vista by Nightspirit · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Wow, step in dogshit this morning?
      http://www.principledtechnologies.com/Clients/Reports/Microsoft/VistaSP1XPVistaHomeResp0208.pdf

      Looks like the study was sponsored by MS, so that probably won't sway you, but either way I don't give a shit. Perhaps you're right, my qi-enhanced magical laptop just has its meridians inline while my desktop must have liver fire rising.

    12. Re:I like Vista by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      I used it for about 4 hours

      Stop.

      Back in the fricking' BETA, Vista would run fairly sluggishly for the first day or so, as it indexed every file you've got. Then, it ran more or less at a constant speed.

      If you want to give Vista a test, give it at LEAST a week.

      Now, it runs great, and uses about 2/3 the ram that was being consumed by Vista

      Wait... you know enough to check the RAM, but not enough to do a google search for Vista using too much ram?.

      (Hint: Vista is your memory manager. Why should it waste cycles loading and un-loading files so you can have "free" ram when it can just, you know, keep some in memory until a program actually asks for the space?)

    13. Re:I like Vista by nabsltd · · Score: 1, Interesting

      (Hint: Vista is your memory manager. Why should it waste cycles loading and un-loading files so you can have "free" ram when it can just, you know, keep some in memory until a program actually asks for the space?)

      The problem with Vista is that is does waste cycles loading and un-loading files.

      Instead of working like every other cache system in the world, Superfetch tries to guess what files you might need in RAM. Based on the complaints, it appears that it guesses wrong most of the time.

      What this does is needlessly keep the hard drive seeking to load files, then when the user does ask for a file to be opened, they have to wait until the Vista-initiated disk activity stops before their request gets serviced. That's just bad design, and it gets worse because of how much more power this causes laptops to use.

      Last, when users turn off this feature, the system becomes more responsive to their requests. If that isn't a sign that the caching algoritm in Superfetch isn't broken, I'm not sure what would be.

    14. Re:I like Vista by asylumx · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with that? It's driving the economy by getting people to go buy a new PC when otherwise they'd be using one that's like 5+ years old by now!

    15. Re:I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there are more linux distros then ubuntu, you know

      and they are all equally painful to set up.

    16. Re:I like Vista by setagllib · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Broken window fallacy, look it up

      --
      Sam ty sig.
    17. Re:I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FPS = frames per second.

    18. Re:I like Vista by Dan9999 · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't say things this funny near an airport.

    19. Re:I like Vista by dcam · · Score: 1

      My use of Vista is limited to some quick experience with a collegue's laptop, but it is clear to me that it is pretty rough around the edges. Case in point, plug in a flash drive, copy a (very small) file on, select remove drive, it says the drive is in use. Wait 10 seconds, file still in use. I understand the issues with FAT drives and delayed writes, however XP does not show the same issues for similar sized files.

      --
      meh
    20. Re:I like Vista by asylumx · · Score: 1

      Sarcasm and/or Joke Buy a sense of humor. You can probably find one on ebay 4ch33p.

    21. Re:I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love XP. Right now I am running it on an old laptop with a 1.8Ghz Pentium with 256MB of RAM and a 40GB HDD.

      I wanted to run Ubuntu, but it would not install. The Live CD took about a day to finally boot up. Attempting to install gave me various errors: from inside Windows I got "you need at least 256MB of memory"; from the CD menu the partitioner ran but the system became unresponsive after that and nothing ever happened; from booted as a Live CD the screen went garbled and stupid and Ubuntu locked up.

      If you have less than 512mb of RAM don't use the LiveCD. The text installer will work well though it's not as n00b friendly.

      Still, though, why do you only have 256? Ram is pretty cheap. Bumping it up to 512 or 768 shouldn't cost you more than $30 (online, add 150% to the price for OfficeDepot/Best Buy/etc). The performance gain will be worth it.

      And I did get Xubuntu installed but it sucks.

      sudo apt-get install ubuntu-desktop

      Yes, Xubuntu does such. However, run the above command and you'll turn the Xubuntu desktop into a Ubuntu desktop.

    22. Re:I like Vista by Coppit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In the troll's defense, XP does suffer from disk fragmentation. In the past I've either moved to 64KB clusters or ran JKDefrag nightly. Is Vista better in this regard?

    23. Re:I like Vista by KillerBob · · Score: 1

      Instead of working like every other cache system in the world, Superfetch tries to guess what files you might need in RAM. Based on the complaints, it appears that it guesses wrong most of the time.

      Superfetch is like early speech recognition software (and some current gen stuff). At the beginning, it makes a lot of mistakes and generally sucks. As you use it more, it learns your patterns. It needs to be trained, and over time the miss rate goes down drastically, and it really does improve things. You can also improve the sluggishness in Vista by going into the performance settings and letting it auto-tune itself to your computer's capabilities.

      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
    24. Re:I like Vista by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      My use of Vista is limited to some quick experience with a collegue's laptop, but it is clear to me that it is pretty rough around the edges. Case in point, plug in a flash drive, copy a (very small) file on, select remove drive, it says the drive is in use. Wait 10 seconds, file still in use. I understand the issues with FAT drives and delayed writes, however XP does not show the same issues for similar sized files.

      FAT doesn't support delayed writes like NTFS does, so all writes to a FAT drive are immediate. You can just pull a USB flash drive out and walk away once the little light stops flashing. Selecting "remove drive" is asking Vista to perform an unnecessary step. There is no problem here--- unless you're formatting a flash drive with NTFS, in which case that's your problem.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    25. Re:I like Vista by psychodelicacy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm in the same position - my old laptop started pouring smoke, and since I'm in the middle of finishing up my doctoral thesis I needed to replace it pronto, which meant an off-the-shelf with Vista installed. I was really wary, but actually find I like it. I would have been annoyed to have to install it on my old and vastly slower machine, but since this one has much better hardware and runs much faster than XP did on the other, I'm quite happy.

      --
      A closed mouth gathers no foot.
    26. Re:I like Vista by dcam · · Score: 1

      FAT doesn't support delayed writes like NTFS does, so all writes to a FAT drive are immediate. You can just pull a USB flash drive out and walk away once the little light stops flashing. Selecting "remove drive" is asking Vista to perform an unnecessary step. There is no problem here--- unless you're formatting a flash drive with NTFS, in which case that's your problem.

      My bad, I meant write behind caching, which is the reason you you select safely remove hardware (or unmount on linux).

      In the end that is beside the point. If this is an unneccessary step, Vista should not fail and say the drive cannot be unmounted. If it is a neccessary step, vista should not fail.

      Short version: Vista -> Fail.

      --
      meh
    27. Re:I like Vista by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      I used beta Vista x64... the lovely operating system used up about 1.2GiB of RAM at idle... no, not system cache. Since I only had 1GiB of RAM, even when I started notepad.exe the system choked and sputtered from massive page thrashing. The product was so unusable that I was basically not working for a whole week while I was waiting for the extra RAM to arrive. Once the RAM arrived, Vista x64 actually ran fairly reasonably... until about a month later or so, and started sucking so bad that I simply went back to Server 2003 SP2 (which is a far better product IMHO).

      I gave Vista quite the fair shake, and the initial release sucked; period. When SP1 started to be offered, I actually got a hold of that and put it on my 32-bit machine at work, and it actually ran fairly well, and I told people that honestly, I was happy that Vista stopped sucking so back with SP1, and if they didn't have Vista yet, then to wait for SP1 to come out. I tried to use Server 2008 on my Itanium system, however it was such an old system that Server 2008 didn't support it. :( sad panda.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    28. Re:I like Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... a fresh install of XP is blinding fast,... but after several weeks just slows to a crawl (yah I scandisk, reg clean, defrag, spyware/virus check, etc) ...

      It's unbelievable how fast XP is when you uninstall this crap ==> "spyware/virus check,etc."

    29. Re:I like Vista by Nightspirit · · Score: 1

      I use nod32 which is incredibly lightweight and I only run spyware checking apps once a month, so I doubt any of that has much of an effect on performance, plus I'm running the same apps on my vista laptop.

  5. Careful with the word "scam" by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The "free" digital TV box gimmick is not necessarily a scam. Comparing a box with a 5 year warranty to one with a 1 year warranty is not a fair comparison. It's gimmicky pricing to make people think they're getting a great deal. A scam, on the other hand, requires deception to secure an unfair or unlawful gain. In this case, the user is getting a 5 year warranty rather than the typical 1 year warranty, so it is understandable the overall cost should be higher, meaning it's not an unfair or unlawful gain.

    (It could be argued that warranties aren't worth the paper they're written on. If a warranty is not workable, that's the part you can call a scam, not the gimmicky pricing.)

    1. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The "free" digital TV box gimmick is not necessarily a scam. Comparing a box with a 5 year warranty to one with a 1 year warranty is not a fair comparison. It's gimmicky pricing to make people think they're getting a great deal. A scam, on the other hand, requires deception to secure an unfair or unlawful gain. In this case, the user is getting a 5 year warranty rather than the typical 1 year warranty, so it is understandable the overall cost should be higher, meaning it's not an unfair or unlawful gain.

      (It could be argued that warranties aren't worth the paper they're written on. If a warranty is not workable, that's the part you can call a scam, not the gimmicky pricing.)

      I agree it's not a scam, but a 5 year warranty on an item with no moving parts?

      One is born every minute, especially since you could buy 2 for less than this one and have a spare if teh first ever fails after a year.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    2. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by nbert · · Score: 1

      (It could be argued that warranties aren't worth the paper they're written on. If a warranty is not workable, that's the part you can call a scam, not the gimmicky pricing.)

      It could also be argued that the real beauty of this (from the vendor's perspective) is the low probability that anyone who can't watch TV will send the box in and wait for more than a week for the repairs/replacement. It's far more likely that the entire household panics and someone is send to the next shop to buy a new box. If I was the vendor I wouldn't even bother to hire technicians for repairs - just replace the few damaged ones that make it back.

      This is almost like a victimless crime, but legal. I like the idea ;)

    3. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by RattFink · · Score: 1

      The "free" digital TV box gimmick is not necessarily a scam.

      That is all fine and good if they are up-front with it, however if they deliberately hide the $88 dollar charge things start heading toward sleaze. When they advertise something as free (or real cheap) and then start stacking on charges after the fact without the ability to opt out in my opinion and likely many others it becomes a scam.

      --
      "I don't necessarily agree with everything I say." - Marshall McLuhan
    4. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is the -1 Evil moderation option?!

    5. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Junior+Samples · · Score: 3, Informative

      (It could be argued that warranties aren't worth the paper they're written on. If a warranty is not workable, that's the part you can call a scam, not the gimmicky pricing.)

      I bought a pair of Zenith DTT901 converters with my government coupons after researching the experiences of other users on AVSForums. The Zenith DTT901 only comes with a 90 day warranty. Considering the out of pocket cost of $10 to $20 with the government coupon ($49 - $59 retail), and the reputation of the manufacturer, does the warranty really matter?

      A 5 year warranty doesn't mean anything if the product is a piece of crap. Universal Techtronics brand isn't even on the CECB approved list:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CECB
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_CECB_units

    6. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Deadstick · · Score: 1
      If I was the vendor I wouldn't even bother to hire technicians for repairs - just replace the few damaged ones that make it back.

      Nothing special about that...it's the preferred method of warranty service for any number of perfectly legitimate mass-produced products that don't have many modular subassemblies. The cost of disassembling, troubleshooting, repairing, reassembling and testing is generally way more than the incremental manufacturing cost of a new box.

      rj

    7. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by arth1 · · Score: 1

      In some countries, it's illegal to use the word "free" if it is contingent on making a payment, for anything, at any time.

      It's a neat idea called "consumer protection", and I hope we'll get it here in the US too.

    8. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Maxmin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Rubbish. Most electronic gadgets come with limited 30-day manufacturer warranties, with arduous repair/exchange requirements, and it's the retailer that offers an "extended warranty."

      Here, we have the next datapoint in the series, giving product away for free! But only if you pick up the expensive "warranty."

      The very fact that hardware manufacturers no longer stand behind their product means they now *anticipate* a high failure rate, which indicates they no longer design with reliability in mind. Gadgets have become disposable crap. Quality is no longer assured, it's avoided. Welcome the new revenue stream, "Quality Insurance," if you will.

      *That*, my industrialist-named friend, is the "scam" nowadays. Manufacturers have shifted reliability and warranty concerns from their pocketbook to the consumers.

      The day of the bathtub curve is over and done.

      --
      O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    9. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's a neat idea called "consumer protection", and I hope we'll get it here in the US too.

      Don't hold your breath. I think there was a Constitutional amendment a few years back that gave all corporations the right to fuck consumers.

      I mean, now Congress is trying to pass a law that gives our phone company immunity for breaking the law designed to protect us. "Consumer protection" my ass. It's been a few decades now since the companies in the Dow Industrial index and NASDAQ became the government of the US, and they put a big ol' bulls-eye on the back of every American.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Reagan gave away the farm.

    11. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by ZeroZeeds · · Score: 1

      Would agree. in the UK we have had Freeview boxes for a couple of years. Started out at £50 and can now be got for about £16. No matter which brand or price you get they do not seem to last for longer than a year. So, a 5 year warranty with a reputable company for about twice the cost of a normally bought unit could work out well in the long run. Guess who will not be buying a Freeview enabled TV set till all the issues are worked out.

    12. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      In some countries, it's illegal to use the word "free" if it is contingent on making a payment, for anything, at any time.

      That's what we here in the United States call an "unwarranted abridgement of free speech."

      In some other countries, you can't say "The Queen is a whore" or "Islam sucks", either. Me, I'll take the squirrelly advertising to preserve my near-absolute freedom of expression, thank you very much.

    13. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      No, it really isn't. The Supreme Court has repeatedly drawn a distinction between political and commercial speech, with restrictions on the latter being acceptable. I agree with its reasoning. Do we really want to repeat the days of patent medicine?

    14. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      I think there was a Constitutional amendment a few years back that gave all corporations the right to fuck consumers

      Actually, it was in the Constitution. Article I, Section 10. "No state shall ... pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts".

      They can fuck you any way they want, so long as it's in the contract. You have the responsibility to read, understand, and use the courts to enforce any contract you enter.

      I mean, now Congress is trying to pass a law that gives our phone company immunity for breaking the law designed to protect us.

      Congress wants to pass a law that extends the FISA court, and grants civil (not criminal!) immunity to any telecommunications company that did what the government told them to do. In fact, there's even an express time limit on this provision of the bill -- "authorized by the President during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007;" (link)

      If the President breaks the law, we vote him out of office or impeach him. If the President's men break the law because he told them to, and we don't impeach the president, then he can just pardon them. And you can't sue either one in the courts. That's what the AG's are for.

      Why the hell should a private company be the only one holding the bag for a wrong done to someone, at the behest of the President of the United States?

    15. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by hamburger+lady · · Score: 1

      sorry, but 'free speech' is not a defense for fraud.

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
    16. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Soruk · · Score: 1

      My Echostar and Nokia freeview boxes still work after several years, and my parents' Pace box (one of the first Freeview ones) is still going strong.

      --
      -- Soruk
    17. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Splab · · Score: 4, Informative

      The fun thing is they ship the crap stuff to the US and good stuff to EU because we require higher warranties. Here in Denmark for instance they are by law required to show that anything failing within the first 6 months is misuse by the customer. On top of that we get another 1 and a half year where any defects are still considered under warranty, but its up to the user to show that its a faulty product - however, in practice electronic shops grant a full 2 year warranty, with pretty much no questions asked due to the competition.

      So any company selling hardware in Denmark has to take care the stuff works or they will end up having to replace it 2 years down the road, that means the good runs end up here. (A good example is the Samsung F8 series, any model destined for Scandinavia is labeled BDX and comes with on site service per default and are pretty much guaranteed to work for 5+ years)

    18. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Peil · · Score: 1

      To be honest I finally binned my old Philips box last year when the house went all cable - I got it back in late 99/early 2000 as aprt of the OnDigital setup here in the UK

    19. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by jhylkema · · Score: 1

      Do we really want to repeat the days of patent medicine?

      Those days are already here.

    20. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by drew · · Score: 1

      I suspect that the "scam" is that the government issued coupon probably only applies towards the actual price of the box (i.e. $0), so the consumer is forced to pay the full price of the unit, rather than about half the price, if they just sold it for $80 with the 5 year warranty as part of the deal. I'm not sure how that benefits this manufacturer, but there is probably some loophole they are looking to exploit.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    21. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by mattsday · · Score: 1

      Yes, and the cost of devices (the Euro-tax, where pricing of $1 = â1) means that we're also the losers for low-grade stuff anyway.

      --
      Now there's one hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is!
    22. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Splab · · Score: 1

      Erhm?

      Currently a is $1.5, so if your stuff is priced the same i.g. $100 = 100 then you get the stuff way cheaper than we do.

    23. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by arth1 · · Score: 1

      In what country can't you say "The Queen is a whore"? Please be specific.

      As for here in the US, I can think of few other countries where your speech is as restricted. You can't say "shit" on TV, you can be arrested for making fun of policemen, or charged with sedition for voicing certain political opinions. Not to mentioned that after exercising your "free" speech, you can get sued for libel or even copyright breech, and can even get fired if you say something your employer dislikes.

      All in all, I find that here in the US, people are very careful about what they say.

    24. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Would agree. in the UK we have had Freeview boxes for a couple of years. Started out at £50 and can now be got for about £16. No matter which brand or price you get they do not seem to last for longer than a year.

      Actually, Freeview has been around for much longer- over five years, to be precise. IIRC the boxes started out at around the £100 mark, and quickly fell- I got my set-top box in early 2004 for around £60.

      Mine stopped working recently- not because of a component failure, but because Freeview made a minor change to how the channel list was handled and some old boxes didn't have enough memory.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    25. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by blippy · · Score: 1

      I agree it's not a scam, but a 5 year warranty on an item with no moving parts?

      One is born every minute, especially since you could buy 2 for less than this one and have a spare if teh first ever fails after a year.

      Why would I need a warranty on an item I got free?

    26. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      I agree it's not a scam, but a 5 year warranty on an item with no moving parts?

      One is born every minute, especially since you could buy 2 for less than this one and have a spare if teh first ever fails after a year.

      Why would I need a warranty on an item I got free?

      In theory, the warranty is to avoid replacement costs - ensuring you a fixed cost of ownership over the warranty life.

      If you could get the item for free every time (which you really aren't when you pay for the 5 year warranty) then buying a warranty would be stupid. Then again, $88 for a warranty when you can get two for less than half of that is rather dumb as well; as I pointed out above.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    27. Re:Careful with the word "scam" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in New Zealand we have the "Consumers Guarantees Act" that ensures that a product must be covered for a product's "expected life". This law overrides any supplier-given warranty periods. In fact, many retailers in New Zealand try to sell you extended warranties, but these are a load of bullocks since, by law, you are covered anyway.

      The great thing about this act (from a consumer's perspective, retailers will tell you otherwise) is that, during this period, the product must either be repaired, replaced, or returned for a full refund.

      In fact, some time ago now I got a completely new replacement scanner from HP since HP could not source a replacement part for it - this was after I had owned and used it for three years or so. I then sold the new scanner as near new after having tried it out and decided that HP had gone down the gurlger with their scanner technology and software (especially their 100Mb or so "drivers" and crapware it had you install in order to use it).

      Then, just recently, my Linksys modem broke down on me after having owned and used it for 2 or so years. I ended up with my money back because the only replacement the shop could offer me was some D-Link crap which I rightly considered an unacceptable replacement, so they had to refund me my money. (Had I only known this with my HP scanner...) I was quite happy because originally I had forked out over $250 (NZD) for it but now I could purchase an equivalent (read second-hand Liksys) modem for much less!

      -Andreas T

  6. Kinoki Foot Pads by MBCook · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've seem some scams recently, but the most amazing has to be Kinoki Foot Pads. Let's ignore the fact that my understanding is the word "kinoki" is meaningless and the characters they use in the ad don't even read "kinoki".

    I'm used to all sorts of pseudo science in TV ads, but this one is downright amazing. Did you know tree roots are used to dispose of chemicals, and that my feet are actually tree roots? I'm so glad someone told me. I especially love the list of conditions that these things can cure. Even if they weren't fake and actually would detoxify you, I seriously doubt it would even touch many of those conditions. I seem to remember reading someone wrapped carrots with the pads just to prove that anything will make them blacken from "toxins".

    The ad id just amazing. I was dumbfounded the first time I saw it. Diet pill ads look like something out of the Mayo Clinic in comparison.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    1. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The issue there is that you can have a disclaimer which says that none of these claims have been evaluated, even if it's not actually legible due the the TV screen resolution.

      The ad agency in general should never have been freed from the earlier regulations. Thanks to the Reagan administration, IIRC, advertising for medications is OK. You can also say whatever you want, as long as there's technically a disclaimer included, even if it's too long or small to be read.

      Advertisers are liars, that's basically their job, and it always has been. The problem is that the watchers would rather watch TV and the cash flow into their bank accounts than actually regulate the industry.

      The infinity razer springs to mind. It supposedly never requires a change of blades ever. Unfortunately, it doesn't break the laws of physics and as such the friction causes the blades to deteriorate. But the company is happy to sell you new blades. A cost which isn't disclosed in the ad, implying that it's free or of minimal cost.

    2. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, (in Japanese, as that pronunciation makes little sense in Chinese), the characters shown on their advertisement read "Tree tree sap", and it makes about as much sense to write it that way in English as it does Japanese. That alone should tell you it's bullshit.

    3. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Let's ignore the fact that my understanding is the word "kinoki" is meaningless and the characters they use in the ad don't even read "kinoki".

      I think they are going for "ki no ki" (the first "ki" being "tree" and the second "spirit"; US Slashdot doesn't do Kanji, sorry) as in "spirit of trees" or some such. The word on the screen reads "kijoueki" which is "tree sap" (a bit redundant).

    4. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I seem to remember reading someone wrapped carrots with the pads just to prove that anything will make them blacken from "toxins".

      Little known fact: carrots were originally a super-dark purple that is effectively described as black. It wasn't until selective breeding in the 15-th or 16-th century that we got orange carrots.

    5. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

      my absolute favorite is the extra "kitchen sink" inclusion of "ions" to purify your body.

      I would love to see them somehow manage to get loads of unbonded ions onto those pads. They tend not to be very picky about what they chemically bond with. I'd laugh so hard at the number of people whose feet have been eaten away.

      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    6. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by MBCook · · Score: 1

      I've read that before. I think it was the Dutch that breed the modern carrot.

      The point of the article was that those pads would do that up against anything organic (although I wouldn't be too surprised if a dirty coke can did the same thing).

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    7. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANJ (I am not Japanese) but... yeah, 'kinoki' is meaningless and wrong.

      for the kanji shown in the commercial:
      1. ki = ki (tree). they got one right!
      2. no = jyu (wood). there are no readings (that i can find) that read the 2nd chracter as 'no' (although alternative readings do exist).
      3. ki = eki (liquid). this cannot be read as 'ki', but must be read as 'eki'.

      proper reading would be 'ki jyueki', which i suspect most japanese speakers could decypher to mean 'tree sap' (although 'ki no jyueki', with the insertion of a hiragana 'no' between 'ki' and 'jyueki', would be much better). Japanese is pretty good with dropping particles, so maybe they were trying to drop 'no' while preserving the intent of the name... unfortunately for them, they chose the wrong part of the phrase.
    8. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like others have said, the first character is legitimately read as "ki" in some contexts. The others? Not so much. Third character (meaning, roughly, "fluid") is readable as "eki", which is wrong for what they put but at least vaguely close, and the middle character, which actually can be read as "ki" when by itself, totally lacks any reading even containing "no".

    9. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by AimHere2000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You think Kinoki foot pads are a scam? Well, I've got one that may just top that.

      In magazines I've bought off the newsstands, I've seen an ad for a company purporting to have a machine that makes some kind of "enhanced" water, which supposedly has all kinds of miraculous health benefits. They have testimonials from people whose arthritic fingers were freed up, cancers beaten down, and the like. Now, the machine supposedly works by rapidly heating and cooling ordinary water, with the end result being that the angle of the hydrogen bonds is changed to 114 degrees (the natural angle is 104.4). The enhanced water is supposed to somehow be easier for the body to use in fighting disease. They even claim that adding a few drops to whatever else you drink can have healthful benefits.

      Now, the ad doesn't come right out and say what this water processor costs, they instead urge you to write for more information. But, they WILL sell you a bottle of the enhanced health water, in a champaigne-style bottle no less, for something like $30 a pop.

      As absurd as these claims might be, the REALLY sad thing about this is that the magazines they advertise in are SCIENCE -oriented... Science Illustrated, Popular Science, Discover, and others...

      By the way, from what I've read, the machine is little more than a glorified distiller, and the pseudo-science claims of the company have been thoroughly debunked. (One such debunking: http://www.chem1.com/CQ/johnellisbunk.html.)

    10. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Sheesh.

      The issue there is that you can have a disclaimer which says that none of these claims have been evaluated, even if it's not actually legible due the the TV screen resolution.

      A disclaimer that is non-legible is not a disclaimer. If it didn't have to be legible, they could just flash it for one frame.

      Thanks to the Reagan administration, IIRC, advertising for medications is OK. You can also say whatever you want, as long as there's technically a disclaimer included, even if it's too long or small to be read.

      If it's a bonna fide medicine, they have to say the disclaimers that the FDA requires they say. All the commericals I've seen have had perfectly legible disclaimers, one after the other, while the program was playing.

      The infinity razer springs to mind

      Actually, their ads state they will give you them at "no" cost -- plus shipping and handling.

      I'm surprised they haven't been sued yet.

    11. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by retchdog · · Score: 1

      Also, black carrots are still common (e.g. pickled and with anise liquor) in Turkey and Lebanon. The pickling makes them a lighter purple - I thought they were just radishes at first since they were sliced.

      http://www.yigitfoods.com/eng_products_siyah_havuc.htm

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    12. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reducing mercury levels,

      Science cant do it but Kinoki CAN

      Thank you Kinoki

    13. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Little known fact: carrots were originally a super-dark purple that is effectively described as black. It wasn't until selective breeding in the 15-th or 16-th century that we got orange carrots.

      Is the same true of oranges?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    14. Re:Kinoki Foot Pads by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Kinoki is a wonderful scam, I agree. (From Wikipedia it looks like it's a white powder that turns brown and icky when wet. ZOMG, I know step 2!. Step 1. Advertise product, Step 2. Chemistry, Step 3. PROFIT!)

      Anyways, the one that I want to talk about is the "all natural" homeopathic pain reliever for pets. Of course it's "all natural", by US law, anything homeopathic can't contain anything but water. (seriously! Ok, so milk is another solute.) So, you're paying who-knows how much, for a spray bottle of water, that will make you think that your dog is getting less joint pain. AMAZING! Don't wait, act now, and we'll send you a SECOND bottle for FREE! That's a total value of $80 for just $19.99!

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  7. Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 0

    that when you buy them, automagically remove all of the CO2 you contributed to global warming out of the atmosphere and make you carbon neutral.

    It seems to violate the law of thermodynamics in that CO2 molecules are destroyed somehow, and proves itself to be very unscientific.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:Carbon credits by wizardforce · · Score: 5, Informative

      no. CO2 can be removed from the atmosphere without "destroying" anything. plant a tree, that tree takes in CO2, water, nutrients and with light can synthesize organic compounds locked up in the tree its self. no magical violations of laws of physics required.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    2. Re:Carbon credits by atraintocry · · Score: 0

      I think (hope) what the OP is referring to is the fact that plants remove CO2 from the air by converting it into plant mass. Once the tree dies, its carbon goes right back into the air.

    3. Re:Carbon credits by msgmonkey · · Score: 1

      Well some types of trees last hundreds of years without any attention. I'm wondering if a massive tree planting drive would make any difference or would it bearly scratch the surface?

    4. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once the tree dies, its carbon goes right back into the air.

      Um... no.

      Not until you burn it.

      Are you really that stupid, or are you just toying with the other morons posting here?

    5. Re:Carbon credits by mazarin5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Once the tree dies, its carbon goes right back into the air.

      Is spontaneous combustion a big problem for trees in you area?

      --
      Fnord.
    6. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but generally not in the form of CO2.

    7. Re:Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      Hard to say as people cut down trees quicker than they can plant them.

      It seems like folly to use carbon credits to plant trees that will be cut down as soon as someone has a need for paper or wood or some other product they use trees for.

      Common sense says don't drive short distances to get that $5 cup of coffee and instead invest in a Mr. Coffee machine and brew your own coffee or just quit drinking coffee and drink water instead.

      It would actually make more sense to just build canals and use them to transport food and products than using trucks that burn gas and contribute to the CO2 levels in global warming. Many people forget that it was George Washington who was one of the founding fathers for building canals in the colonies before the USA was formed. That the USA got rid of canals as soon as the coal burning railroads got started.

      I mean it would make better common sense to just stop using technology that puts CO2 in the atmosphere, than to keep using technology that puts CO2 in the atmosphere and then buy carbon credits and hope it just goes away magically because Al Gore said so.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    8. Re:Carbon credits by atraintocry · · Score: 1

      Organic matter still decomposes. In any case, I was just trying to shed some light on why someone might think the "carbon credits" thing was a scam. I personally don't think that it is. But I do think that people need to watch out for these awareness drives that originate at a company's marketing department. Like all of the pink products that show up during October, where they give half a percent of sales to breast cancer research. Doesn't accomplish much besides allowing people to feel good about not actually doing anything. I think carbon credits is like an awareness scheme...OK I'm aware now, that feels better.

    9. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, bears do scratch their back on the surface of trees. Does that help?

    10. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure if you're serious or not, so I'll explain. When you buy a carbon credit, it doesn't remove CO2. Duh. What it does is increase the demand (and therefore the price) of carbon credits. Then, polluting factories that *have* to buy these things to continue operating are forced to pay more for them. At some point the price of having to buy carbon credits outweighs the price of just buying cleaner machinery/power plants/etc. The point of the whole carbon credit system is to use "free market forces" to achieve a goal (cleaner factories) by causing an artificial shortage (of carbon credits).

    11. Re:Carbon credits by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      Common sense says don't drive short distances to get that $5 cup of coffee and instead invest in a Mr. Coffee machine and brew your own coffee or just quit drinking coffee and drink water instead.

      Well you know how they say you should be active 15-20mins a day? I've found that by choosing not to drive I get my daily dose of activity in spades. :)

      Makes it hard to get to that odd concert some times but the sheer satisfaction I feel as another black SUV rolls by driven by a cellphone attatched to a human...

      The real scam imho is we've let 4 wheels and blacktop dictate how we build, where we live work and play and how we socialize...

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    12. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Organic matter still decomposes.

      Sure, but that doesn't necessarily lead to carbon returning to the "air". You have heard of oil, coal, and other non-"air" forms of decomposed organic matter, right?

      Your comment appeared to be either intentionally misleading or based on ignorance. I think you haven't yet helped determine which is the case.

      And for the poster who implied that using trees for paper somehow defeats the carbon-trapping that the tree did when it was alive... you're wrong. Maybe you've been taking atraintocry too literally.

    13. Re:Carbon credits by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      Is spontaneous combustion a big problem for trees in you area?

      Not exactly, but combustion can still play a large roll in deciding the roll trees should play in carbon sequestration.

      I submit Idaho for your consideration.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    14. Re:Carbon credits by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      The parent post here deserves to be scored higher to combat the misinterpretations in the grandparent.

    15. Re:Carbon credits by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      that when you buy them, automagically remove all of the CO2 you contributed to global warming out of the atmosphere and make you carbon neutral.

      Nope. The idea of carbon credits, AFAIK, is that there is a limited amount of them. If you pollute less than your allowed amount, you can sell your credits to someone who pollutes excessively.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    16. Re:Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      Hey yeah and I agree with you.

      Only people like that can make it all okay by buying carbon credits and then continue to drive black SUVs and chat on a cellphone to go 15 blocks to buy a $5 cup of coffee.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    17. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is spontaneous combustion a big problem for trees in you area?

      No, but the eventual death and decay of living things is an unavoidable law of the universe.

    18. Re:Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      That makes about as much sense as a church selling sin credits to stop people from sinning. Which is why some people think that global warming is just another religion.

      Did you know that the whole cap and trade system of carbon credits was invented by Enron? Does that name ring a bell?

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    19. Re:Carbon credits by wik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Been to northern California recently?

      --
      / \
      \ / ASCII ribbon campaign for peace
      x
      / \
    20. Re:Carbon credits by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      just build canals

      And how are we going to move bardges along these canals?

      Do you expect we go the traditional route and use draft animals along a tow path beside the canal? Not exactly as fast as truck.

      Do we put engines in the boats? Back to the same carbon producing problem as the trucks, still much much slower.

      The best idea I can think of is string overhead power lines over your canal, and use electic motors on the canal boats. Sorta like a trolly car on water. Still there are lots of problems. The canals will be difficult to keep free of ice in winder. There is no way canal boats are going to run as fast as trucks, which means they wont satisfy our food transportation needs well, and this is a big part of trucking. You still have to generate the electric power to run, which will probably produce carbon emmissions ( I remain unconviced this is actaully a problem, but the price of petrol certainly is so replaceing trucks would be good ). The canals will have to be two lans wide so traffic can move in both directions. You are also going to need sides, just like with rail roads, so lower priority slower traffic ( bigger bardges ) can lay over and allow others to pass. Dealing with the overhead power might be trick there. I think you going to have to do a lot of land grabs to get these built and going useful places which means the NIMBY crowd will be working hard to kill it. All and all I like the idea, boats on still water can be very efficent. Electric or animal power could be cheap compared to petrol. Implementation seems a bit out of reach though.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    21. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if you bury it.

      Plant a forest, Cut it down, bury it.

      This has the added bonus of producing oil in a couple of million years.

    22. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Once the tree dies, its carbon goes right back into the air.

      Is spontaneous combustion a big problem for trees in you area?

      Living on the central coast of California, lately the answer to that is sadly yes.

    23. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carbon credits *are* a scam. I wish you had gone about criticizing the artificial scarcity such a scheme creates and how those who own the markets that issue those credits stand to profit obscenely, as well as how such markets would essentially work to transfer wealth from richer countries to poorer countries in a very socialistic fashion, and especially how forcing the population to live on a 'carbon budget' would drastically alter our quality of life - instead of making the completely inappropriate 'thermodynamics' commentary you offered. The carbon credits scam deserves wider 'exposure' but it certainly won't get it in this thread now.

    24. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It appears to be one in California right now...

    25. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At some point the price of having to buy carbon credits outweighs the price of just buying cleaner machinery/power plants/etc.

      This assumes that such alternatives even exist. If not, then the only effect that carbon credits will have is to decrease production as the artificially scarce carbon credits get used up and manufacturers are forced to stop producing due to a lack of carbon credits to spend. Even if such technologies exist, the price of goods will certainly go up to cover the cost of these more expensive manufacturing techniques. I say more expensive because, if they were less expensive, we wouldn't need a carbon credit scheme to goad manufacturers into using them in the first place. This increased cost will result in fewer consumers being able to afford said goods thus suppressing demand. Neither scenario is good for consumers or the economy.

      Carbon credits are also of dubious value for the environment as well. Several very large nations - like China - have already said that they have no intention of participating in such a scheme. If much of the world refuses to cap their carbon emissions it's doubtful that these carbon credit markets will be at all effective in actually lowering carbon emissions to the point of countering man-made global warming. All the 'carbon credits' scam stands to do is suppress the economies of those nations foolish enough to participate in it whilst simultaneously granting a competitive advantage to any nation that refuses to go along.

      The only winners in the carbon credits scam are those who own the carbon credits markets. These people literally acquire a license to print money. A little research will show that many of those most vocal about the need for these carbon credit markets are also those who own interest in companies that issue these credits (Al Gore, for instance). Call me cynical, but I think the 'big players' pushing the carbon credit scheme are far more interested in stuffing their pockets full of cash then they are in helping the environment.

      The point of the whole carbon credit system is to use "free market forces" to achieve a goal (cleaner factories) by causing an artificial shortage (of carbon credits).

      You should wash your mouth out after using the terms 'free market' and 'artificial shortage' in the same sentence. No market that has a condition of artificial scarcity imposed on it from the outside is free.

    26. Re:Carbon credits by compro01 · · Score: 1

      That makes about as much sense as a church selling sin credits to stop people from sinning.

      If you're going broke due to having to pay for all those sins/carbon emissions, the sensible man/business would likely start looking for ways to cut back on it.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    27. Re:Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      Canals use locks or boat lifts or inclined planes to move boats through the canals.

      Yes it will be slower to move the boats than the trucks, and yes we would have to use more land to make the canals, but it is a small price to pay compared to the higher price if we continue to burn fossil fuels like there is no tomorrow.

      We could use wind sails to move boats, but only if the wind blows in the right direction. Possible we could adapt wind turbines to boats instead of sails to power an engine, and use solar cells when the sun is shining. If not for moving the boat, then for refrigeration power for food so it does not spoil on a slow moving boat. With the right engineering cooling food might not use as much power as moving the boat if the refrigeration unit is modern technology. You could also put in stationary bikes and pay someone to peddle them to provide power if the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine. I am sure with capacitors and batteries to hold charge people can peddle for 15 minutes, take a 15 minute break, let someone else peddle, etc. It would be good exercise.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    28. Re:Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      I guess you don't understand how a business works.

      When it gets higher taxes it passes the costs on to the consumer.

      For example if XYZ Corp makes widgets, and it costs $1 to make a widget and they sell it for $2, with a $1 profit and $1 in expenses, but then the government decides that widgets are bad and puts a $5 sin tax for each widget, then XYZ Corp changes prices to $7 a widget to cover the $5 tax, and after deducting $5 for the tax, and $1 for their expenses, they are still left with a $1 profit. Does XYZ Corp get harmed, or does the consumer get harmed instead? With that in mind carbon credits and global warming is being used as a bat to hit poor people with, and I guess you just don't care how many lives are going to get ruined or how many people will die or lose their homes as a result, as long as the people and companies selling carbon credits get really really wealthy in this Enron engineered scam of the century. But then it has always been about the money, rather than helping out the poor and underprivileged on both the left and right side of the political compass?

      It don't work for cigarettes either, governments keep raising that sin tax on cigarettes to try and get people to quit smoking so they can be healthier and not die of cancer, but smokers still buy cigarettes even if the price of cigarettes has gone insanely high.

      You just cannot throw money at a problem and hope it goes away, that never works. You have to actually solve a problem to make it go away. You also cannot just willy nilly tax things and think that people will accept the higher taxes and not rebel in some way, how did you think the USA got started in the first place? Taxes where way too high, so they protested by throwing tea into Boston harbor. King George the III thought he could control the English colonies by raising taxes on them for certain items, if it didn't work back then, what makes you think it will work in the future?

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    29. Re:Carbon credits by bezza · · Score: 1

      You clearly don't understand what the purpose of carbon credits is and how they work.

      Yes, regulation in any industry is likely to raise the price paid by consumers. But in this case it is a necessary evil if you want the benefit of having a cleaner environment.

      the fact is that dirty coal is going to be cheaper than alternative energies for a VERY long time to come because we have so much of it. If our goal was to keep electricity as cheap as possible, we would burn coal and use hydro and nothing else. Hydro isn't actually as clean as you may think. The process kills off the lakes and estuaries that run from the dam.

      Unfortunately (which you don't seem to realise) is that due to the bad effect on the environment we need to come up with some way that makes it more cost competitive to use cleaner technology and to eliminate the use of dirtier technologies.

      Now, if you care for the environment you would want this to happen. But you can't just get rid of coal because we would be left with no electricity. The carbon credit scheme balances out the effect on these produces by supplying a grant of credits that makes up for the reduction in competitiveness of their power plants. Power will now be more expensive for them to produce, making cleaner tech more appealing.

      Enron came up with the idea, only with the desire to be the trading centre for these credits. Trading was the one thing Enron was actually good at.

      In short, if you care for the environment you won't mind paying more for electricity. If you don't then rebel your heart out. The parent to your comment was correct, you made yourself look foolish with lack of information.

      --
      WARNING: This sig does not contain a joke
    30. Re:Carbon credits by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      "That's not right. Hell, that's not even wrong!"

      Let's say we have a widget Q that is manufactured using substance F. F is deemed harmful to the environment, and it put under a cap-and-trade program. The price of F skyrockets. And yes, that cost is passed on the consumer.

      But the process doesn't end there. Market forces are more subtle than that.

      Assuming we have a market with competition, one competitor will figure out how to make a Q using less F, or no F at all. Since that competitor can sell his product at a lower cost, he will gain marketshare, forcing other companies to either make a similar change or be pushed out of the market.

      In the worst case, if a Q can't be made with less F, then the high price of F will discourage consumption of Q. That's a good thing if F is bad for society.

      I can't believe I have to explain this stuff.

      And for what it's worth - the American colonies didn't rebel because taxes were too high. We rebelled because taxes were unfair and arbitrary, and George III was acting like a petty despot.

      Also, you're wrong about cigarettes. In fact, demand for cigarettes decreases as price rises.

    31. Re:Carbon credits by dubl-u · · Score: 2, Informative

      It seems to violate the law of thermodynamics in that CO2 molecules are destroyed somehow, and proves itself to be very unscientific.

      I suspect you of trolling, as I'm not sure anybody could really be that retarded. But just in case:

      Most carbon credits come from emitting less. Say you've got an industrial plant with a big furnace, one that emits X CO2 per year. Then you improve energy efficiency, so you're now emitting X/2 CO2. You can just be happy with your contribution to terraforming earth. Or you can sell your emissions reduction to somebody else who has a harder time reducing their CO2 emissions. They will have bought a carbon credit.

      Another approach is sequestration, where you take the CO2 and get rid of it. Some of this does involve destroying CO2 molecules, which is perfectly scientific. Destroying mass is pretty hard, and destroying atoms isn't easy, either. But destroying molecules is so easy that I'm doing it right now. For sequestration, one might destroy CO2 while creating calcium carbonate.

      If you want to be less publicly idiotic in the future, try Wikipedia before posting:

    32. Re:Carbon credits by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Use barges powered by engines that use hydrogen for fuel. Make hydrogen from wind power and water. While hydrogen is a joke for cars (batteries will rule the day there), it makes sense for high energy density applications (boats, aircraft, farming equipment like combines).

    33. Re:Carbon credits by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      That makes about as much sense as a church selling sin credits to stop people from sinning.

      In the modern world, we call them sin taxes. E.g., the punitive tax on cigarettes to get people to stop smoking. They work quite well. One alternative to a cap-and-trade system is a carbon tax.

      Did you know that the whole cap and trade system of carbon credits was invented by Enron?

      Do you have the slightest bit of proof of that? As far as I can tell it goes back to a couple of Harvard economists, Roberts and Spence, in a mid-70s paper.

    34. Re:Carbon credits by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      When it gets higher taxes it passes the costs on to the consumer.

      Maybe, maybe not. If they do, then the consumer will change their behavior. As we are seeing right now with the price of oil.

      It don't work for cigarettes either, governments keep raising that sin tax on cigarettes to try and get people to quit smoking so they can be healthier and not die of cancer, but smokers still buy cigarettes even if the price of cigarettes has gone insanely high.

      You are utterly wrong. Wrong to the point of negligence. Could you look something up now and then before you run your mouth?

      I went to Google and typed in cigarette tax smoking rate study. In about 3 seconds, I found an easy-to-read newspaper article about a study that shows that cigarette taxes are very effective in reducing smoking. Carbon taxes would be similarly effective, but cap-and-trade systems seem to be an adequate substitute.

    35. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in California you insensitive clod!

    36. Re:Carbon credits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Combustible landscape + lightning = California

    37. Re:Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      So for the people that cannot afford alternatives to fossil fuels like those who are sick or on disability or poor and living on a fixed income, we just let die off and don't even bother to help them afford greener technology. Better to just let 3 billion people world wide die off because they cannot afford to buy food or live because they are poor. Basically you claim it is ethical and moral to do so, because it saves the planet? The ends justify the means? Anyone who cares about human lives of poor people like me are foolish?

      So then you support 100% the upcoming holocaust because you care about the environment more than human lives?

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    38. Re:Carbon credits by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      Assuming of course that entropy does not exist, and creating Q provides more energy or as much energy that it uses to create Q in the first place out of alternative matter and/or energy to power the machines to manufacture Q, so that F isn't needed anymore.

      The article on the American revolution cites history books that say "The issues with the colonists were both that the taxes were high and that the colonies had no representation in the Parliament which passed the taxes."

      and

      "The phrase 'No taxation without representation' became popular in many American circles. London argued that the Americans were represented 'virtually'; but most Americans rejected the theory that men in London, who knew nothing about their needs and conditions, could represent them."

      Americans are already claiming that representatives in government know nothing about their needs and conditions and that gas and oil are already too high. Since for the past 30 years both Democrats and Republicans promised to make the USA energy independent and at least find an alternative to oil, citizens are getting skeptical and as bankruptcies are on the rise and mortgages are not being paid off, how do you think they will react to even higher gas and oil prices due to carbon credits and cap and trade? If oil alternatives cost less than $2 gallon to drive a truck or car, things will be alright. But can you prove to me that oil alternatives that do not emit CO2 will cost $2/gallon or cheaper and be in abundant supply so poor people need not use gas and oil anymore?

      Oh yeah, cigarette sales are down because global deaths from cigarette smoking are up and consumers are dying off faster of cancer than being saved from quitting smoking. When the consumer dies, yeah demand will go down. That was my point.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    39. Re:Carbon credits by bwcbwc · · Score: 1

      Is spontaneous combustion a big problem for trees in you area?

      Well, SoCal seems to be suffering an outbreak lately.

      --
      We are the 198 proof..
    40. Re:Carbon credits by Invidious · · Score: 1

      Once the tree dies, its carbon goes right back into the air.

      Funny, I haven't seen many evaporating trees, lately. Generally, you have to burn it or have something eat it in order to turn cellulose into CO2.

    41. Re:Carbon credits by bezza · · Score: 1

      Not at all, I was just explaining how they work.

      If you want to treat it entirely from an unbiased viewpoint, try and form your opinion on how much you think a major worldwide environmental disaster would cost (in dollars and lives) versus giving up a little bit now.

      I'm not trying to convince you either way, as I'm actually undecided. I don't have enough information to accurately judge whether we even make a difference to our environment. It seems that a lot of people believe that there is enough info out there. Even if it doesn't turn out to be true, it seems to me that it is a pretty cheap insurance policy...some governments are even trying to reimburse consumers for the extra cost. The Australian government is doing this.

      All I'm saying is that carbon credits are a pretty good mix of capitalist values and green values. If most people say that they want to save the environment, then this is probably going to be the way forward. If you don't believe it, get out there and petition!

      --
      WARNING: This sig does not contain a joke
    42. Re:Carbon credits by anthonys_junk · · Score: 1

      GP is actually correct. Cigarette consumption is regarded as relatively inelastic, with governments receiving vastly more income from cigarette sales by raising taxes. Demand elasticity for cigarettes hovers around -0.4 for a 10% increase in tax there is around a 4% reduction in smoking. This means that taxes are an excellent way for the government to keep it's snout in the trough and still appear to be doing something to combat the issue.

      For a less sparkly, magical, utopian view check some <a href="http://www.choicesmagazine.org/2004-1/2004-1-09.htm">alternate sources</a>

      --
      Barbara Felden claims prior art on the flip phone, sues Motorola, Nokia.
    43. Re:Carbon credits by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      or a 10% increase in tax there is around a 4% reduction in smoking.

      Well, that's not quite correct; it would be based on the whole cigarette price, not just the amount of tax. Still, those numbers seem to be in line with the ones I linked to. Note that governments have been doing 100-600% increases in cigarette taxes, so the declines in smoking seem to be in line with the substantial cost increases. Thus, the tactic of taxes is, as I said, effective.

      And that's with something that is physically addictive, notoriously hard to quit. Carbon taxes should be much more effective, because nobody actually cares about emitting CO2 for its own sake; it's always a byproduct of what people actually want to do.

  8. Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by krnpimpsta · · Score: 4, Funny

    "It works by blowing a stream of air over two ice packs that you have previously frozen in your freezer." means = "no freon"?

    Well, then I'm also selling water-free water for places that have water shortages. Just add 1 cup of water to the device and you will have an entire cup of water that you can drink!

    --

    New webcomic updated on Sundays: HERE

    1. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just so we're clear on this: Blowing air over ice will cool that air. The energy removed from the air over time will be exactly the energy needed for melting that ice, which is substantial. That process moves heat, from the air to the back of your refrigerator. It may not be the most efficient or adequately powerful way to cool air, but it's only nonsense if the fridge is in the same room that you want to cool down.

    2. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One time I told my boss we should sell re-hydrated water. His response was that partially reconstituted water would probably be a better product.

    3. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It works by blowing a stream of air over two ice packs that you have previously frozen in your freezer." means = "no freon"?

      I live in Antarctica you insensitive clod!

    4. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, then I'm also selling water-free water for places that have water shortages. Just add 1 cup of water to the device and you will have an entire cup of water that you can drink!

      I am not making this up: according to a recent Washington Post story, "Desalinated seawater from Hawaii, meanwhile, is being sold as `concentrated water' -- at $33.50 for a two-ounce bottle. Like any concentrated beverage, it is supposed to be diluted before drinking, except that in this case, that means adding water to . . . water."

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    5. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Well that could work, but you'd have to market it as Dehydrated Water and sell it in reasonable quantities.

    6. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by vistic · · Score: 1

      You obviously have to use your freon-less refrigerator which works by blowing air over blocks of ice you harvest in winter and store in a specially insulated chamber of your house.

    7. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by GleeBot · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough, there actually is such a thing as dehydrated water. Normal drinking water isn't actually pure water; that's what we would call distilled water.

      Of course, if you're going to add water to something, might as well make it Gatorade or something similar.

    8. Re:Water-free water, pay only $9.99 shipping! by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      Apparently, if we're getting suckered for "concentrated water", we are deserving of the r-reversed crayon nutritional label that only has a certain finger raised for information.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
  9. Another scam by SpacePunk · · Score: 2, Informative

    The 'coupon' you can get that covers 40 bucks of the price expires. Sometimes before people can actally find a converter box.

    1. Re:Another scam by Zen · · Score: 1

      Citation please? I might need to get one for my 90 year old grandma. I've read that requesting a coupon does not mean it is sent to you immediately - they supposedly send the coupons only after the boxes are available from multiple retailers in the area the coupon was requested from. Mistakes happen, sure - a human wrote the software and runs the program. But is expiration of the coupons without valid retailers in the area rampant? I think they're supposed to be 90 day coupons. I'd love to see a citation that references what areas actually have them available for purchase today.

    2. Re:Another scam by wtfispcloadletter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Space punk is speaking out of his ass.

      The coupons last for 90 days

      You can get another one if you let it expire and only got 1 the first time around (you can get 2 per household)

      The coupon lists several places locally where you can get a converter box. My listed 8, 4 Radio Shacks, 2 Wal-Marts, Camping World and a local shop (and a partridge in a pear tree).

      I know for a fact Radio Shack and Wal-Mart have and have had them for awhile now.

      https://www.dtv2009.gov/FAQ.aspx

      Radio Shack also has a friendly page with info. They also have several models in stock online right now and did 4 months ago when I got my coupon.

    3. Re:Another scam by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      The 'coupon' you can get that covers 40 bucks of the price expires. Sometimes before people can actally find a converter box.

      I listened to the Congressional hearing on the coupons.

      The coupons expire because they want you to get your converter box *now*.
      No expiration date = procrastination till the last minute.

      They do not want to reissue expired coupons because, in addition to the procrastination issue, it costs money to send issue new coupons.

      And as a side note, from the hearing, I got the impression that the government might be willing to reissue coupons and/or add a slight extension to the coupon deadline, but were worried that if they publicly come out and said so, everyone would wait till the last minute.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Another scam by kenh · · Score: 1

      There is only so much money alloted to pay for the converter box "coupons", and when it runs out, there will be no more coupons offered. That is the real, hard, limit. I could understand the expire date issue to motivate requestors to actually move on the offer, so that they can assess what coupons are "abandoned" and can be, in effect, re-issued to a new requestor.

      I seriously doubt that the government only sends coupons when there is a sufficient inventory to satisfy demand - that assumes a level of Gov't involvement I can't see (managing/tracking shipments and sales of "low-cost" converter boxes).

      I got my requested two coupons quite quickly...

      Ken

      --
      Ken
    5. Re:Another scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone has the abundance of stores in their area as you do. Reading the letter that came with my converter box, the coupons expire 90 days after they are mailed. Some of the wal-marts near my mom in Florida have been out of stock more often than not. As for Radio Shack, I always thought us geeks made it a point to keep people out of there?

    6. Re:Another scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that you can't use the coupons online at Radio Shack and that every Wal-Mart and Radio Shack in my local area (a top 20 city) is sold out of CECBs, I'd say you're the one talking out of your ass.

    7. Re:Another scam by idfubar · · Score: 0

      Part of the apparent misunderstanding might have to do with the fact that many people applied for the coupons when they were first offered and received their coupons much earlier this year (at a time when some retailers still had not received their expected shipments). Also, A/V hobbyist websites have taken to discussions of chipsets & possibly created a sense that some models of receiver (e.g. Zenith DTT901/DTT902) may vary in quality between production date and thus further affected demand...

      --

      Rishi Chopra
      www.rishichopra.org
    8. Re:Another scam by wtfispcloadletter · · Score: 1

      Straight from Radio Shack's website:

      "Please note: Coupon can only be used in-store or through the toll-free number. Coupon cannot be redeemed on RadioShack.com."

      "2. Once you receive the coupon, purchase this converter box at your local RadioShack or call 1-877-RS-DTV-4U (1-877-773-8848) Mon-Fri 8a.m.-5p.m. (excluding holidays)."

      So yes, you are correct, you can't use it online, but you can call them at a toll free number.

      There is no excuse for not being able to use the coupon.

    9. Re:Another scam by Zen · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

  10. Why I wish I knew more science by saterdaies · · Score: 1

    So, if I have spare room in my freezer and it's already running 24/7, does it take more energy if there's more items in it?

    I assume freezers operate based on cooling the air to, say, -5C. If that's the case, if something has a high specific heat (like water) it doesn't take more energy for it to cool it, it just takes longer for it to cool.

    So, that ice-pack AC-like machine would use less electricity (if you don't use your freezer for food)?

    Not that it's so practical since you'd constantly need to be changing and refreezing the packs, but it might be greener in that respect. Of course, getting a smaller freezer would probably be even greener.

    Am I completely off base?

    1. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by MMORG · · Score: 5, Informative

      The freezer removes heat from the icepack and dumps it into the room (plus extra, because of the work done). Then you take the icepack out of the freezer, put it in the "room cooling" device, where it takes heat from the room and puts it back into the icepack. Net result, your room is hotter than it was before. In order to get a net cooling effect, you have to dump the heat into a separate system that you don't care about (like outside). That's why air conditioners have vents to the outside.

    2. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your freezer does not really run 24/7. Instead, it operates in two or more modes - one mode involves just using enough energy to keep the device in standby mode and to operate any devices related to checking the temperature. In other modes, energy is being used to cool the freezer or fridge.

      If you add a bunch of water to your freezer, the water will give off energy to the cooler freezer surroundings, increasing the temperature - the sensors will detect a rise in temperature and the cooling device, usually a pump that cools by allowing a pressurized gas to expand (connected to a pump that compresses the expanded gas and then cools the now hot, re-compressed gas in a radiator.

      So, the short story is this: There is no free lunch. You spend energy cooling anything you put in the fridge - the more you put in there, the more energy you spend. Additionally, all the heat that you extract from items placed in the fridge goes into the radiator on the back of the fridge ... along with some extra heat created by the whole process ... and that heat leaks out into your apartment.

      On a related note, that heat that is put out by your fridge is then effectively removed by your AC ... at yet another cost of energy. So if you want to save a little energy on your AC, find a way to get that radiator on the back of your fridge exposed to the outside air but not the inside air (via an enclosure covering the back of the fridge and opening to a vent that leads outside ... a vent with good airflow, of course).

    3. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by hedwards · · Score: 1

      No, you're not. I'm a little bit shocked myself that that product was advanced as a scam. Sure the marketing hype is a bit over the top, but the device is fairly similar to the swamp coolers which many have used for decades in the US. Back when my dad was a kid, movie theaters would use a similar device for cooling.

      The main question is whether it's more efficient than AC or not. Lowering the temperature by a given amount requires a certain amount of energy to be removed regardless of how it's done. But the amount of energy it takes to do so can and will vary.

      The problem with AC is that it's trying to do so in real time and doesn't get the advantage that a typical stand alone freezer does. You can potentially stock up most of an entire days worth of ice in the evening when things often times cool down and then shift those ice cubes to the part of the day where it's hotter.

      The only real question is how much energy is really saved over AC.

      It's a bit better than a swamp cooler, because it doesn't depend upon humidity to work.

    4. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by BrentH · · Score: 1

      And that's why AC's are more expensive and inherently less efficient than heating a house in cooler areas. You can create heat with 100% efficiency, but you can not ever cool with 100% efficiency.

    5. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by KPU · · Score: 1

      This is roughly the same as opening the door to your fridge. In the short term, the local temperature goes down. By the time the fridge has again cooled the air inside, it has emitted more than enough heat to cancel out the initial cooling. All this does is separate the heating and cooling. If the fridge is well ventilated, it might actually cool the place down. However, if you turn an inside fan on, all you're doing is heating the place.

      Subject to cooling the same amount of water, the amount of time it takes is irrelevant.

    6. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Nightspirit · · Score: 1

      The benefit is if your fridge is in a different room than the room you want cooled.

    7. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Informative

      Be carefull about moving the radiator portion of the fidge outside. A heat pump has to work harder the more against the gradient the tempature differential you are tring to create is. The compressor system in your fridge is designed to run lots of short cycles, where as the AC unit on your house is designed for few longer cycles.

      If you fridge can't pump much heat because its trying to exhaust the heat into an 90F+ world and its going to be running constantly. It might not last long in that configuration.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    8. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      The freezer removes heat from the icepack and dumps it into the room (plus extra, because of the work done). Then you take the icepack out of the freezer, put it in the "room cooling" device...Net result, your room is hotter than it was before.

      My house is, on net, hotter than it was before. My bedroom, where I might put this gizmo, can get cooler while my kitchen gets hotter. That may well be acceptable.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    9. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by EdIII · · Score: 2, Informative

      Am I completely off base?

      Yes.

      So, if I have spare room in my freezer and it's already running 24/7, does it take more energy if there's more items in it?

      Yes it does take more energy.

      I assume freezers operate based on cooling the air to, say, -5C. If that's the case, if something has a high specific heat (like water) it doesn't take more energy for it to cool it, it just takes longer for it to cool.

      So, that ice-pack AC-like machine would use less electricity (if you don't use your freezer for food)?

      The ice-pack AC would take more electricity, not less. You need to add in the electrical usage of the fans on the "super advanced product".

      Not that it's so practical since you'd constantly need to be changing and refreezing the packs, but it might be greener in that respect. Of course, getting a smaller freezer would probably be even greener.

      It's not greener. Not even close.

      Your freezer just exchanges heat. From what I remember about thermodynamics, heat "moves to where it isn't". Basically, what that means is that you if put in one of those billion degree Hot Pockets straight out the microwave into the freezer and wait long enough all the heat energy in the Hot Pocket distributes itself throughout the rest of the freezer. The Hot Pocket reaches equilibrium with the rest of the items in the freezer. Now maybe there is more to it than that, such as specific heats and what not, but like I said these are the basics that I am remembering.

      After you put the Hot Pocket into the freezer, the whole freezer might raise a couple degrees over time. Once it raises to a certain temperature, the freezer starts up and starts blowing air around inside of it and starts to "pump" the heat from inside the freezer to the outside. That is why if you feel the back of your refrigerator/freezer at some points it is hot.

      In order to "pump" the heat it has to use something like freon, a compressor, electricity, etc. The amount of electricity used depends on how efficient the whole unit is. Guess what the difference is between your house A/C and a refrigerator? There is no difference. Your freezer works exactly the same way your A/C works on your house.

      The amount of energy used to "pump" all the heat out of two large ice packs is more than likely where they are trying to get the 60-watt bulb analogy. That is not good at all, considering that we should all be buying the eco-friendly 13-watt equivalents now.

      Basically, that "environmentally friendly super advanced tech" is just outsourcing the cooling job to your freezer and then those ice packs are "pulling" the heat out of the air thereby lowering the surrounding temperature for a short period of time. Depending on how good the insulation is for your house, the heat from the outside of your house will work it's way in and raise the temperature back up. What is even more absurd is that your freezer is in your house. So when you put the ice packs back in the freezer, that heat will be "pumped" out of the ice packs back into your kitchen.

      Your house A/C actually acts like a relay for your kitchen refrigerator. Your refrigerator has a LOT better insulation on it and will keep heat from getting inside. It also pumps any existing heat (from the items) to the outside of the refrigerator raising the temperature of your house. Your house A/C then pumps that heat outside of your house.

      So in this particular instance, that super product is actually passing the heat to your fridge which is then passing the heat to your house A/C. How on earth is that more efficient? It's not.

      That was just a very good Marketing/Con job.

    10. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by ckthorp · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's not true. You can cool well beyond 100% efficiency. You do it because you're not "cooling" anything -- you're moving energy from one place to another. That's why heat pumps can be used to save money over plain electric heat!

    11. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by EdIII · · Score: 1

      It is a scam. You are forgetting one thing about a Swamp Cooler. It just uses water as part of a heat exchanger system, and ALSO pumps the heat outside of the house. This product does not pump the heat outside of the house, therefore it is not actually cooling anything. It is a scam.

    12. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Deadstick · · Score: 1
      First, as another poster mentions, you have to cool the icepacks repeatedly. Every time you return them to the freezer, you put some heat into it.

      Second, you increase the energy expended by the freezer every time you open the door and let warm air in.

      rj

    13. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by ColaMan · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's an old unit of measurement for heat transfer called 'tons'. You don't see it around much anymore, due to the switch to units like btu.hr or kWh. But it would be really useful to bring it back for things such as this.

      "1 ton" is the amount of heat needed to melt 1 ton of ice in a 24 hour period,or about 3.5kWh.
      Your typical car air-conditioner, or big-ish room A/C, has a cooling capacity of about 2.5 tons.

      The reason a ton is useful is that people know how fast ice melts. They know (roughly) that a ton is a heckuva lot of ice. When you tell them your A/C is a "2 ton unit" they can then get an idea of how much energy is used - a lot more than just mentioning a figure in kW.

      Sooooooo....How much ice is in those cooling blocks? A kilo or two?The only possible real effect is that it might temporarily de-humidify the air in your room a little due to condensation on the ice blocks, giving the impression that it is "somewhat" cooler.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    14. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      No, you're not. I'm a little bit shocked myself that that product was advanced as a scam. Sure the marketing hype is a bit over the top, but the device is fairly similar to the swamp coolers which many have used for decades in the US. Back when my dad was a kid, movie theaters would use a similar device for cooling.

      No, it's not. A swamp cooler works by letting water evaporate and requires no energy expenditure on that water beforehand. This device requires you to freeze the water beforehand which results in a net increase in the room temperature unless you do things creatively.

      The problem with AC is that it's trying to do so in real time and doesn't get the advantage that a typical stand alone freezer does. You can potentially stock up most of an entire days worth of ice in the evening when things often times cool down and then shift those ice cubes to the part of the day where it's hotter.
      The only real question is how much energy is really saved over AC.

      You may be using more energy in the end depending on the day/night temperature differences of the room in question. Efficiency is dependent on the difference between the hot and cold sides of a room and the temperature you want your cool side to be (and practical losses). An AC only needs to cool things to say 25C while a freezer needs to cool things to 0C.

      It's a bit better than a swamp cooler, because it doesn't depend upon humidity to work.

      Not really. A swamp cooler requires no heat pump at all and as a result only requires as much energy as it takes to power a fan (and supply the water).

    15. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by JebusIsLord · · Score: 3, Informative

      Specifically, swamp coolers work because of the energy (heat) absorbed in the phase change from liquid water to vapour. Changing a litre of liquid water to vapour, with no temperature change, requires that siginificant energy must be added to the system.

      Another way to look at it, is that a given quantity of liquid water has the same specific heat as a much cooler quantity of vapour.

      --
      Jeremy
    16. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The enthalpy of fusion of ice is 334J/g, or 334MJ per metric ton. 1Ws is 1J, so 1kWh is 3.6MJ. Melting a metric ton of ice (1000kg) takes 334J/g * 1000000g = 334MJ. That's 334/3.6 kWh = 93kWh, not including energy for warming the water and sublimation. A kilo of ice takes 0.09kWh to melt. That's 90Wh, minus 60Wh for the fan, leaves 30Wh. Melting about 3 kilos of ice this way every hour compensates the heat given off by one resting adult (and you get the air moving, which is probably more important).

    17. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      There's an old unit of measurement for heat transfer called 'tons'. You don't see it around much anymore, due to the switch to units like btu.hr or kWh.

      Central A/C and heat pump systems are still commonly measured in tons, at least in the U.S.

      Sooooooo....How much ice is in those cooling blocks? A kilo or two?The only possible real effect is that it might temporarily de-humidify the air in your room a little

      My understanding is that these gizmos are meant to direct a stream of cool air right on to you, not to cool your whole room. You can probably get about the same effect by putting a big bowl of ice right in front of a fan pointing right at you, except that the freezer blocks won't add humidity. That might cool you down enough to make the difference between sleeping and not sleeping on a hot night.

      Of course, you can buy a fan and a bunch of freezer blocks for a lot less that $200.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    18. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      The only possible real effect is that it might temporarily de-humidify the air in your room a little due to condensation on the ice blocks, giving the impression that it is "somewhat" cooler.

      I wouldn't even give them that... I'm sure that's just a happy coincidence for the 'engineers' that created such a stupendous device!

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    19. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by jbengt · · Score: 1

      There's an old unit of measurement for heat transfer called 'tons'. You don't see it around much anymore . .

      Uh, in the US, anyway, the "Ton" is commonly used, and you will see that unit used more often than btuh for the capacity of larger A/C and refrigeration equipment. You almost never see the SI units for heat. The origination of the term, I believe, is that one of the first uses of mechanical refrigeration was to make ice, which ice was delivered to ice boxes for keeping food cool and to commercial A/C systems for thaters and the like, which really were cooled at one time by blowing fresh air over melting ice.

      Your typical car air-conditioner, or big-ish room A/C, has a cooling capacity of about 2.5 tons.

      2.5 Tons would be large for a "room" A/C unit. A typical house would have about 1 Ton per 500 sq ft (YMMV, greatly)

      I know, I'm being pedantic above; the main point about how ineffective the system would be is valid. However, there is such a thing as spot cooling, where you live with a little overall inefficiency in order to blow cool air on the people or equipment that really need cooling. Also, nothing wrong with supplementing a fan with a little ice, even though you'd need a lot of ice if you want the effect to last.

    20. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by jbengt · · Score: 1

      You are forgetting one thing about a Swamp Cooler. It just uses water as part of a heat exchanger system, and ALSO pumps the heat outside of the house.

      No, that is not a swamp cooler. A swamp cooler does not pump heat outside, it just uses the energy of the air temperature to evaporate water, and delivers lower temperature air with higher humidity, without removing energy from the air stream. A swamp cooler works OK in a dry place like Arizona or Utah.
      Maybe you are confusing a swamp cooler with an A/C unit with an evaporative condenser, which still uses a compressor but increases efficiency by evaporating water to reduce the temperature of heat rejection. That works well even in a relatively humid climate.

    21. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Rakishi · · Score: 2, Informative

      As I understand it a swamp cooler does not pump any heat outside. When a liquid evaporates it cools itself and the surrounding substances. Thus a swamp cooler pumps dry outside air through wet surfaces. The moist air that comes out is cooler than the dry air that comes in. This cool air is then sent into the house.

    22. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by hardburn · · Score: 1

      In order to "pump" the heat it has to use something like freon, a compressor, electricity, etc.

      Strictly speaking, an AC compressor doesn't need electricity. You need something that can spin up the compressor, which could theoretically be a monkey on a bicycle. AC compressors on a car run directly off the engine. Refrigerators and home AC units need electricity to run an electric motor, which then turns the compressor.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    23. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by EdIII · · Score: 1

      I was speaking generically. Next time I will post links to the full schematics, preferably a 25 MB PDF.

      In any case we were talking about electrical usage in the "scam" product, a refrigerator, and a house A/C unit. I did not think I had to explain why these products use electricity, that seemed self evident.

      Also, show me a product that DOES not use electricity to spin up the compressor. It does not exist, and a car does not count. We are talking about products for the home.

      You have to have electricity one way or the other. Even thermoelectric, a solid state technology, requires electricity.

    24. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by TerribleNews · · Score: 1

      So, my question is, if the kitchen is hotter than before, but the area where you are is cooler, does it matter? We spend all this time making sure vast volumes of air with lots of surface area are nice and cool in the summer and hot in the winter, and then, for most people, I suspect, use only a tiny fraction of that air.

      This is sort of a neat solution in that it allows you to, potentially, turn the temperature of the whole house up a little bit but still keep the local area you are using at a lower, more comfortable temperature. I'm not sure if I would call that "engineering genius", but I think it could be useful.

    25. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt anyone sets their AC to 25. Humans find 18-20 comfortably warm depending on activity level (unless their circulation or thermo-regulation is shot, e.g. pregnant women, sick people) and 24 is nice weather to strip off and lie around naked. So most people are going to have the AC cranked beyond that.

    26. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      Uh, in the US, anyway...

      I live in a country that Saw The Light Of The S.I. Unit a generation ago and thus your olde worlde units are strange and confusing to me. Tons still crops up occasionally in A/C lingo, but now it's all kilowatts, all the time, baby,yeah. Regarding sizing of the A/C, a 6kW unit will do a reasonable-sized loungeroom in a 40 deg C north Queensland summer, due to the fact that insulation (huh? what's that?) is a unknown and mysterious thing here.

      Personally, if I lived anywhere where the humidity was below 50%, I'd just use an evaporative cooler instead.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    27. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Teriblows · · Score: 0

      problem is even if this is a swamp cooler and yes you can toss ice packs into swamp coolers as well, it might be a cheap and cheesy one. how good is the evaporative media, is it a thick honeycomb type thing where theres plenty of surface area and water or is it just one of those cheap ones with a sheet of fabric net thats sorta wet.

    28. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by inflex · · Score: 1

      Also in North QLD here... also suffering because the person who built this house didn't bother to even put in the basic blue/silver foil. God awful in summer, though I've nearly managed to finish fitting the foil into the ceilings again. Next step is painting the walls, growing more trees etc etc. Still can't believe they built a solid block house and didn't think to insulate it - they should have simply called this place "The Kiln".

    29. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to disagree.
            I have a new fridge, and its rated working temperature is up to 32 Celsius or some 90F - more or less, the temperature in the freezer starts to move out of the normal (the fridge has one compressor and temperature regulation in the main compartiment).
            If the temperature outside is above that, the compressor will work more and more, bringing the freezer below normal (-18 celsius), and if the external temperature goes below 14 or so Celsius, it will work less and the temperature in the freezer goes above normal.

    30. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Sport89 · · Score: 1

      C'mon people, use your heads! Just buy a second Cool Surge and aim it at the coils on the back of your freezer; Problem solved! Additionally, since you can use the very same water over and over, I'd have to say these things could give Carnot's Heat Engine a run for its money.

    31. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      Also, show me a product that DOES not use electricity to spin up the compressor. It does not exist, and a car does not count. We are talking about products for the home.

      You have to have electricity one way or the other. Even thermoelectric, a solid state technology, requires electricity.

      Gas refrigerators (could be powered by gasoline, diesel, propane, kerosene, etc.) don't have compressors and don't use electricity to operate.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    32. Re:Why I wish I knew more science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The house in total would be slightly hotter due to entropy from the freezer electrical heat but the cool air can blow onto a person and keep them cooler.

      I think the ice pack refrigerator isn't a bad idea, it leaves the cooling energy to be done in one go with a purpose built device you already have.

  11. Other scams by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You don't need techobabble to put one over on people ...

    Just look at the erpackaging of crap loans and blessing them with AAA ratings, and the proposal to bail out those who participated in the scam.

    Time was, the three biggest lies were "The check is in the mail", "I'll still love you in the morning", and "I won't come in your mouth."

    Now its "Mission Accomplished!", "Housing prices never go down," and "Jebus loves you- gimme money!"

    1. Re:Other scams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time was, the three biggest lies were "The check is in the mail", "I'll still love you in the morning", and "I won't come in your mouth."

      Once you start having wanting to have real sex, you'll discover that "just the tip, I won't do anything else" becomes the #1 biggest lie a man will tell.
       
      /Promptly followed by the #2 lie: "I promise I'll pull out"

    2. Re:Other scams by sxtxixtxcxh · · Score: 0

      i get the feeling that the lie about the check probably follows the other two lies more often than coincidence would dictate.

      --
      for a minute there, i lost myself...
    3. Re:Other scams by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      For some reason, this reminds me of the three things that a cowboy never lends:

      1. His horse
      2. His gun
      3. His Stetson hat

      Also, there's a fourth classic lie: One last beer and let's call it quits.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    4. Re:Other scams by Von+Helmet · · Score: 1

      Does that mean you are going to come in my mouth?

    5. Re:Other scams by Loualbano2 · · Score: 1

      Time was, the three biggest lies were "The check is in the mail", "I'll still love you in the morning", and "I won't come in your mouth."

      When you get to tell all these lies to the same person, you know you are doing something right. ft

  12. Yes, but umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    How many watts does a 60 watt lightbulb use?

    1. Re:Yes, but umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something like 60 watt-hours per hour...

  13. What's the best tech scam you've heard of lately? by frovingslosh · · Score: 4, Interesting
    What's the best tech scam you've heard of lately?

    Do you mean other than those $60 converter boxs and $40 Government coupons that expire in less than 80 days after people receive them? The coupons are a great deal for the importers and sellers, but in reality the customer ends up paying about whet they would if there were no coupon program, perhaps more when you realize they pay sales tax on the entire ticket price. In a world where I can buy a DVD player in a local store for $29 or less, these much simpler converter boxes should not be costing $60.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  14. Best Tech Scam by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, the cell phone antenna booster "stickers" were probably the single best tech scam. It combined laughably ineffective "technology" with the always successful price-so-low-it-doesn't-matter-if-they-don't-work.

    More recently, I'm still astounded by the number of "BOOST YOUR MPG!" schemes that involve additives or random crap shoved in your air intake. I especially love the accusations from promoters that the auto manufacturers are in it with the oil companies. GM and Ford are both facing a very real possibility of chapter 11 bankruptcy, and the word is that Cerberus is quietly readying a giant hammer of doom over at Chrysler. If all it took was a $2 piece of metal to get 9 more mpg out of a Malibu, don't you think they'd have done it by now? See the cell phone boosters for the basic premise: if you only charge $40 for one of these things, people won't be too pissed when they find out that it doesn't work.

    There are many MLM schemes that differentiate themselves from the regular Amway crowd by pitching websites that MAKE YOU MONEY. I was actually approached by two different classmates about five years ago regarding the scheme, and it was so comically bad to anyone with any kind of tech knowledge that you couldn't help but laugh. Picture MLM combined with an Amazon-style referral bonus for online purchases. Now charge someone $400 to participate, and charge extra for adding basic things to their company website. Now make sure the websites resemble GeoCities circa 1997. Now we're talking!

    My other favorite is the speaker scam, which someone tried to pull on me about two weeks ago (I hadn't heard of these for years). It's not really a tech scam, just your basic grift that happens to involve technology: an "installer" got an extra set of speakers/surround sound system/plasma TV accidentally loaded in his van for a big install job. Last time this happened, his boss reamed him a new one for not noticing in the first place, then sold them and kept the cash himself. Installer figures he'd "cut out the middleman" and you look like the kind of guy who knows good equipment. Usually they're selling actual speakers or receiver (the plasma scams generally involved an oven door in a box with a window), and they often have some custom-made audio magazine with their brand of speaker on the cover and a great review inside. You end up buying $20 worth of garbage for $200. Dogg Digital and Kirsch were the big names in the white van speaker scam years ago. Google them for an entertaining and depressing look at human nature.

    1. Re:Best Tech Scam by Hollinger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My other favorite is the speaker scam, which someone tried to pull on me about two weeks ago (I hadn't heard of these for years). It's not really a tech scam, just your basic grift that happens to involve technology: an "installer" got an extra set of speakers/surround sound system/plasma TV accidentally loaded in his van for a big install job. Last time this happened, his boss reamed him a new one for not noticing in the first place, then sold them and kept the cash himself.

      They've moved to eBay. A year or two ago, I was trying to find some new speakers. I spent several hours clicking around the various brands and types on eBay, and for kicks (maybe because I'm slightly evil) I'd place a few opening bids on obviously high-end items, knowing I'd lose the auction. The next morning I had "congrats! You've won!" email in my inbox, and an invoice for $78 for a pair of DR-SL-900 speakers. It took me all of 10 minutes to figure out that these were a scam. I offered to pay the relisting fees as a good netizen, expecting something like $5:

      Item: DR-SL-900 HOME THEATER SPEAKERS SURROUND SOUND (5836587072)
      This message was sent after the listing closed.
      ou_mike_hollinger is the winner.

      Hello,

      I just won this pair of speakers. To be honest, I didn't expect to win a $1500+ dollar pair. I thought my bid would be outbid rather quickly.

      Can I just pay your re-listing fees or something? I sell on eBay as well, and hate it when people do this, but someone offered to cover my relisting fees for eBay, which pretty much removed all the expense from my pocket.

      How does that sound to you?

      Sorry for the inconvenience,
      ~ Mike

      And promptly got this note back:

      From: Chrisstfo@aol.com [mailto:Chrisstfo@aol.com]
      Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 8:40 AM
      To: mhollinger@ou.edu
      Subject: Re: Message from eBay Member Regarding Item #5836587072

      Hi, that would be fine. Please pay $45 asap. Thanks, Chris

      After replying that that was a ripoff, I got back a note detailing the various fees they paid, which totaled $30. Where'd the extra $15 come from? After that, I told them I'd researched the product, and that they could initiate the dead-beat bidder process, so I could take the negative feedback and be on my merry way.

      I got this response:

      Hi, yes it does come out of stock as soon as we list the item. The item is taking down and packaged very well. There is nothing wrong with the products that we sell. Please see our feedback everyone loves them. They are great speakers and we stand behind d them 110%. The sites that you mentioned are all bullshit from people that have no idea what they are talking about. If you would like you could pick up a copy of E_GEAR and see that the speakers where tested by pros and the rated them 5 stars. We spent a lot of time listing them and packaging them. We are very easy to deal with. Please pay what you think is fair and we will leave it @ that. If you would like you can contact us @ 201-450-1145. Thank You, Chris

      I told them "no deal," and they opened an "unpaid item dispute" against me. I put in the dispute that they were a scam, and about an hour later the dispute was closed for the reason: "payment has been received." Hah. I was actually waiting for them to leave me positive feedback...

      So I learned my lesson: Always research before you bid on eBay, even if the bid's not serious. ;-)

    2. Re:Best Tech Scam by eln · · Score: 1

      That's funny, I had someone try to pull that speaker scam on me just a few weeks ago. I had never heard of it before, but the whole thing seemed shady to me, so I told him to take a hike. My initial thought was that the speakers were stolen, but now that you mention it it's probably more likely he was trying to sell me garbage in a box.

    3. Re:Best Tech Scam by schon · · Score: 1

      If all it took was a $2 piece of metal to get 9 more mpg out of a Malibu, don't you think they'd have done it by now?

      No, why would you think they would? What is their motivation to spend money they don't have to? Americans have proven that they don't care about fuel efficiency (witness the love of SUVs), so a lower MPG wouldn't increase sales - so why on earth would GM increase the cost of their cars when it has no benefit to them?

      Please don't read this to mean that I believe the "MPG enhancers" are a scam - it's just that your logic as to *why* it's a scam is entirely flawed.

      A story: the 1541 disk drive used software to determine the head position. It would simply step the head back 38 tracks (the largest amount). If the head was somewhere between 38 (as it most probably was), the stepper motor would the head assembly against a physical stopper, making a very loud and disturbing sound, and eventually moved the head slightly out of position (there was an entire industry created around realigning the heads of these drives.)

      Now, why didn't Commodore just put a sensor in there, instead of irritating customers? Cost. The cost of a sensor was around $0.04 - against a drive that originally cost $600.

    4. Re:Best Tech Scam by Jerf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, why would you think they would?

      No fair cutting the previous two sentences out of your quote; you either missed the point that they are directly connected to the sentence you quote or you're being deceptive.

      What is their motivation to spend money they don't have to?

      That the whole "big comfortable ensconced business takes advantage of its overwhelmingly dominant position to screw the consumer" storyline completely fails when it's actually "three big uncomfortable rapidly-dying businesses refusing out of (apparently) sheer-bloody minded hatred for humanity to spend $2 to get 9 more mpg out of their cars, thereby making them more attractive for purchasing and possibly saving their asses, but still holding this magical technology back". (Not my numbers, so don't attack me on the $2 and 9mpg values.)

      It's time for the milage-conspiracy-theorists to update their theories; it is neither in the best interests of the big companies nor the US government to continue to withhold the awesome milage technologies that we've been promised are being suppressed for so many decades anymore. Oooooooooor.... these technologies never existed in the first place. I know which way I would put my money, personally.

      So, what's their motivation to spend money "they don't have to"? How about... they have to or they will die? (And since they can't...)

    5. Re:Best Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If all it took was a $2 piece of metal to get 9 more mpg out of a Malibu, don't you think they'd have done it by now?

      No, why would you think they would? What is their motivation to spend money they don't have to?

      Nash equilibria. Take SUVs. Say one company decided to the $2 metal chunk. All other things being equal (as they more or less are with cars of one type like SUVs) then suddenly one company has increased their fuel efficiency by 50%. So they'll pick up more customers. Unless Americans are even more foolish than the rest of the world credits*.

      *I'm that rarest of creatures, a pro-US European.

    6. Re:Best Tech Scam by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My logic as to why they're a scam has nothing to do with their absence on manufactured cars and everything to do with an absence of any proof that they do work.

      Go walk into a dealership, take a look at a $27,000 truck marked down to $18,000 and tell me Americans don't care about fuel efficiency now. In the era of $1.50 gasoline, you're right, Americans didn't give a damn. That ship sailed about 3 years ago.

      Further, American manufacturers have almost no competitive advantage again Japanese and Korean autos, particularly in the sedan market. American cars depreciate like mad, often have to fight an oversupply issue because union contracts force production, and are still widely regarded as less reliable (even when most industry data says that they're about the same). If Ford, GM, or Chrysler could drop a basic sedan with 9 mpg better than a Camry, Accord, or Sonata, you don't think they would?

      If Americans don't care about mileage now, why is the resale value of SUVs and Minivans taking a nosedive while the resale value of compact and subcompacts rise? Why is GM dumping brazillions of dollars into the Volt, a car that some estimate will sell for far more than most Chevys in its size range? Why did Ford bother making a hybrid Escape, or for that matter, why is it one of the best selling hybrids outside of the Prius? Why is the Prius worth mentioning at all - outside of the mileage, it's widely reviled in the automotive press as being a gadget-laden car that can't make up for the fact that it's zero fun to drive for an auto enthusiast. Why does the TDI Volkswagen Jetta still carry resale prices near what it sold for new?

      Maybe Americans DO care about mileage, although it is sad that it took $3 and up gas for them to start caring.

    7. Re:Best Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your logic as to *why* it's a scam is entirely flawed.

      Sorry, I think it's your reasoning that's flawed, not the OP's.

      The car manufacturers have a huge economic incentive to increase fuel efficiency if it costs very little to do so.

    8. Re:Best Tech Scam by lubricated · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't get it. Why did you offer any money to someone trying to scam you?
      How did you figure out it was a scam, other than the cheap price?
      It all sounds good but the details don't make sense to me.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    9. Re:Best Tech Scam by hardburn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's tons of money to be made in the audiophile market. Just apply a little creativity along with some technobabble, then price it higher than anybody else. It won't be long before forum posts start praising your products as producing "warmer" sound.

      Some of my favorites:

      • Crygenically frozen cables; basically, dip the cables in liquid nitrogen (which you can get surprisingly easy and cheap), let them thaw, and charge $1000
      • Cable burn-in service; put a sine wave through a cable for a week and only charge $500. For those poor audiophiles who can't afford the cryo treatment. Package deal with cryo treatment for only $1300. Sawtooth waves are an extra $200, or $100 with cryo package. Send your cables back once a year for re-treatment for only $150 per go ($180 for sawtooth waves).
      • Wood block that has been "resonance treated" by sitting under an amp playing classical music for a month, which they then put under their own amp.
      • Claim you have a technology which can improve their sound setup over the phone. Basically, you're charging $100 for the service of processing their credit card.

      I've tried for years to tell these people that these companies are a big scam, but audiophiles are a daft group. I'm about ready to give up the argument and run a scam myself. Someone is making a fortune off them, and it might as well be me.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    10. Re:Best Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The radio program This american life did a feature on just this scam, on their episode entitled "suckers": www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?sched=943

      The reporter fell for it when he was in highschool, and then witnessed it again 12 years later. Retribution is attempted, but doesn't quite work out.

      Some dude in a minivan tried a version of this scam on me in a parking lot a couple years ago. I was able to answer "dude, everyone already knows about that scam!" and got a dirty look for my trouble.

    11. Re:Best Tech Scam by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 1


      So I learned my lesson: Always research before you bid on eBay, even if the bid's not serious. ;-)

      And to think--I knew that already, without having to go through your experience. Really, did you expect us to sympathize with you for placing bids that you had no intention of keeping?

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    12. Re:Best Tech Scam by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Americans do care about fule economy now. Over the course of the last year its become just about all anyone in the news talks about. Domestic auto sales are down too, some of the is due to the credit crunch but lots of it is due to fule prices.

      If you really could get 9mpg more out of a new Malibu with a $2 GM SURE AS HELL would do it. They faceing bankrupcy because their lines have been to bias toward big gas guzzlers; people no longer want. That extra 9mpg would put a Malibu in the area of Prius milage. GM would love nothing more then to sell the heck out of something like that. They would too, I would be at the dealer ship. I am planning on a new car soon anyway and If a Malibu was getting greater then 40mpg it would be an easy sell at the current MSRP.
      A Malibu is a much more comfortable and more usefull vehicle in terms of what you could put in then the tiny forigen hybrids.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    13. Re:Best Tech Scam by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      My Prius is actually plenty roomy and comfortable. It's my first foreign car, and I couldn't be happier. I've been impressed by the quality of the construction too. Even if GM did come out with something rivaling the Prius in fuel economy, I'd be hesitant to return to American brands anyway. (Though there'd be at least a chance: until Detroit comes out with an efficient vehicle, I'm never coming back.)

      It's kind of funny: I was the kind of guy who plastered his car with liberal bumper stickers. I haven't added anything to the Prius. I think the entire car is one big statement: "I give a shit."

    14. Re:Best Tech Scam by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Aaah, the old "Americans are idiots" argument.

      Their motivation is that they are getting their asses kicked by more fuel efficient vehicles from other manufacturers.

      You're right about one thing though... A lower MPG *wouldn't* increase sales.

      His logic was spot on. The reason they don't magically increase their fuel efficiency with a $10 part is because they can't. Which, incidentally, is why there aren't tons of mainstream, credible media outlets telling you where to get the $10 part to increase your gas mileage either.

    15. Re:Best Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Stolen" is what they want you to think. Well, they don't care, so long as you've come up with a story that justifies buying them. Most people will buy stolen goods if they think they won't get caught.

      Almost everyone knows not to take a deal that's "too good to be true", so scammers need you to believe that you're clever and there's an angle, you got lucky, you're taking advantage etc. Same principle as the Advance Fee Fraud, you think you're involved in a criminal conspiracy, but really you're just the sucker.

      I've had speakers offered, and a watch ("samples" from an exhibition, meant for decision makers, I can get one for £20 instead of the £200 list price...), plus obviously those guys who are "engineers" checking that you get the "discount" on your gas or electricity (they want you to sign a contract for a new suppplier), and all the usual email fraud ("Dear PayPal users, We were suspicious of your recent transaction, sending $5000 to Nigeria, please use your security details to either confirm or deny this transaction at our special anti-fraud website http://paypal.antifraud.example.cn/cgi-bin/.err87fhd7464.html")

      Scammers in technical fields that most people don't understand are really successful. MPG enhancement scams, "audiophile" gear, most stuff involving herbs, dietary "supplements" and so on. The fact that it's still possible, in the 21st century to make a fortune selling gadgets that claim to violate one of the laws of thermodynamics, should give us great pause in considering the existence of "common sense" since it's apparently anything but common.

      [ Ha, and, in 2008 Slashdot can't do UTF-8 correctly. Hilarious. ]

    16. Re:Best Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If all it took was a $2 piece of metal to get 9 more mpg out of a Malibu, don't you think they'd have done it by now? See the cell phone boosters for the basic premise: if you only charge $40 for one of these things, people won't be too pissed when they find out that it doesn't work.

      No! Apparently you are not aware that a private individual from Seattle recently purchased a vintage 1959 modified Opel w/ a modified carburetor which sat at the Taladega Raceway since it won the world's record for fuel efficiency in 1973. The record was 376/mpg!! Why don't you know about that? Because the co-evolution of commercial products and the media that's used to promote and sell them was orchestrated by people who found it easy and expedient to focus on horsepower and torque rather than fuel efficiency and clean air. After all, if you encourage your customers to focus on the collective effect of an ever increasing number of cars, then perhaps they'll start demanding efficiency everywhere. Who wants that? Not the gear heads who design race cars... When is the last time you heard about a race leader running out of gas before the finish line?

      If you read the works of economists such as John Maynard Keynes, Jr., you will find that the reason automobile companies have never rewarded themselves for the research & development of more socially responsible technology such as fuel efficient cars is CHOICE. The big 3 spend incredible amounts of money creating demand for the products they wish to sell... you see it on television everyday. The muscle cars of the 70's have been repackaged during each successive decade, and the federal government was successfully lobbied by a consortium of automobile manufacturers to allow for favorable tax status for gas guzzling, CAFE standards were modified to accommodate SUV's built on light truck frames, and the tax breaks extended to businesses which utilize the behemoths are available to anyone who claims them as a business asset. The millions that could have been used to develop efficient technologies were instead directed to encourage additional consumptiono. The choice to avoid a slow responsible transition was made consciously, and it had nothing to do with the cost of development.

      The U.S. manufacturers focused on the tradition of low-hanging fruit... sell big "luxury" vehicles w/ high profit margins and avoid the subjects of clean air, reduced consumption, renewable energy sources, or cradle-to-cradle engineering. It's not that business people are stupid or immoral; they are just lazy. We all "know" that executives are beholden to the stockholders. What we are taught to avoid is the identity of the of the stockholders and their ability to control the agenda of the stakeholders through the politics and editorial prerogative.

      Of course it's going to take more than $2 metal part... it takes honesty and integrity to question the intelligence of your peers as well as a desire to use your power to fulfill something other than your pocketbook or the sails of your yacht.

    17. Re:Best Tech Scam by Melibeus · · Score: 1

      I had someone try to pull the speaker scam on me late last year. Silly thing was that they were in the carpark of the theatre I worked in. It's not really a good idea to try selling crap speakers to a audio technician. Now, I could have really shown them some good speakers...

    18. Re:Best Tech Scam by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      It's kind of funny: I was the kind of guy who plastered his car with liberal bumper stickers. I haven't added anything to the Prius. I think the entire car is one big statement: "I give a shit."

      Someone purchasing an electric (or hybrid-electric) car may "give a shit", but the reality is that with the massive environmental cost of making the batteries for their car, all they truly end up with is misplaced good feelings about themselves.

      The short term personal savings on fuel cost and ability to use HOV lanes are strong sets of blinders that keep most people from seeing the long-term environmental reality of electric vehicles.

      It's especially sad when vehicles like the Volkswagon Jetta TDI (mentioned by others here), the Mini Cooper, and other small cars can get 80% of the mileage of a hybrid without the extra up-front cost or the battery-induced environmental damage.

    19. Re:Best Tech Scam by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      I find it hard to believe that battery production can be more environmentally (and politically!) harmful than fuel consumption. Remember, battery production is centralized, and what harmful outputs the production facility produces can be contained and disposed of properly. On the other hand, there's no helping millions of internal combustion engines on the road.

    20. Re:Best Tech Scam by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Now, why didn't Commodore just put a sensor in there, instead of irritating customers? Cost.

      Yes, a sensor would've solved the problem, but you're presenting a false dichotomy. Commodore wanted to cut every penny from the design, so they came up with a clever solution. The head alignment issue was wasn't a "screw the customer" move--- they didn't even know it would happen. The alignment thing didn't happen to every drive, only about one in every half dozen. I used to work for C64 game developer. We had drives that lasted YEARS without alignment issues, and ones that wouldn't hold an alignment for more than a couple months. You never could tell.

      If all it took was a $2 piece of metal to get 9 more mpg out of a Malibu, don't you think they'd have done it by now?

      No, why would you think they would? What is their motivation to spend money they don't have to?

      Even taking your 1541 floppy drive story as you presented it, the comparison is flawed. Commodore wasn't getting their ass handed to them by foreign drive manufacturer whose heads didn't go out of alignment. You think GM wouldn't add a $40 part that makes a Malibu get better gas mileage than a Honda Civic? You're out of your gourd! I mean, Commodore had the excuse of razor thin profit margins limiting their ability to redesign their product. How often do car manufacturers redesign their cars? No, they would jump on a modification like that in a heartbeat. They'd have only marketshare to gain and nothing to lose.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    21. Re:Best Tech Scam by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Even if GM did come out with something rivaling the Prius in fuel economy, I'd be hesitant to return to American brands anyway.

      I think the advantage GM would have over Toyota would be the sticker price for the Malibu being $5K less than the Prius. Some people are bottom line people. Other are "buy 'merican! yeehaw!" types. A prius-killer Malibu would sell if it were possible to make--- it just ain't.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    22. Re:Best Tech Scam by ristonj · · Score: 1

      My other favorite is the speaker scam, which someone tried to pull on me about two weeks ago (I hadn't heard of these for years). It's not really a tech scam, just your basic grift that happens to involve technology: an "installer" got an extra set of speakers/surround sound system/plasma TV accidentally loaded in his van for a big install job.

      This happened to me, too, out in the middle of nowhere in North Carolina at a gas station.

      Man in a white van asks me to roll down my window:

      White van man: Hey, buddy, got a kinda odd question for ya!
      Me: Shoot.
      WVM: Do you want a brand new home the-a-ter system? They loaded an extra one on my truck!
      Me: ::rolls up window and drives off quickly::

    23. Re:Best Tech Scam by hardburn · · Score: 1

      It's not all that centralized. It takes Nickel mined in Canada (a dirty business all its own), shipped to Europe for refining, then to China to make the actual batteries, to Japan to be put in Priuses, and then to wherever people want to buy Priuses, assuming they are predilected towards buying a Prius, which I would suggest against.

      Further, millions of internal combustion engines can be serviced with Fischer-Tropes gas if we have to.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    24. Re:Best Tech Scam by hardburn · · Score: 1

      No! Apparently you are not aware that a private individual from Seattle recently purchased a vintage 1959 modified Opel w/ a modified carburetor which sat at the Taladega Raceway since it won the world's record for fuel efficiency in 1973. The record was 376/mpg!!

      I do know that car. They stripped out weight to the point where the driver's seat was a lawn chair; shortened the rear axel, which will ruin the handling; used a chain drive that is more likely to break (and do so violently); popped on some superhard tires that will be useless for stopping and starting. Then top it all off by driving around an oval track at 30 mph.

      It's no secret that you can get 300+ mpg out of a car using impractical methods like these. Doing it under realistic conditions with considerations towards saftey and comfort is much harder.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    25. Re:Best Tech Scam by mxs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The OP is trying to make himself seem like the good guy in the story. Here is what happened :

      Guy goes to eBay. Guy finds lots of speakers that he thinks are worth lots of moolah. Guy thinks to himself, hey, maybe I can bid low and rip somebody off (legally, $1 auctions have been known to net you high-priced goods whenever christmas and easter fall on the same day). Guy proceeds to bid on stuff with impunity without researching what he's bidding on.

      Guy waits a day.

      Guy actually wins an auction for an item. He didn't bother to read the description and model number the first time. He did not bother to research the item before he placed a bid. Guy thinks he's being scammed because, hey, he actually got an item for the price he bid. Guy is panicking. Guy wants out of this deal. Guy comes up with "They are SCAMMING ! This is not the item I bid on ! This is sub-standard quality gear ! I know, let's be a douchebag and offer to relist the item, I don't want to be held accountable to the bid I entered !"

      Seller, meanwhile, gets annoyed. Since he does not want negative feedback (which is bad, bad stuff on eBay), he tries to work out a deal that is to everybody's satisfaction. Buyer offered to pay relisting, so seller takes the deal. Buyer does not believe the fee. Buyer is getting annoying and costing a lot of money in time spent. Seller offers buyer to pay whatever he deems fair as relisting fee. Buyer declines, frothing at the mouth. Seller initiates dead-beat buyer proceedings, as ANY reputable seller would, seeing as how they are the ones being scammed out of their listing fee.
      Seller ultimately decides to cut their losses and not deal with buyer anymore, not deal with eBay in this matter, not risk negative feedback, and just moves on, writing this off as the cost of doing business.

      Meanwhile, douchebag buyer thinks he's won and really shown them. He hasn't been scammed. The speakers were listed on the eBay listing. He could have researched. Since he feels he is in the righteous right, he posts unanonymized eMails and tries to pass these guys off as scumbags ... I have yet to see any evidence of that. If he had been delivered a box full of bricks, we might have a story. He hasn't.

    26. Re:Best Tech Scam by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 1

      Your version sounds more accurate.

      I really have to wonder why the heck people make lowball bids like that anyway. It's a total waste of everyone's time. ESPECIALLY if you're just going to try to back out if your lowball bid wins.

      Lowball bidders = morons.

      Also, bidders who bid multiple times on the same item instead of using the autobid feature the way it was intended = morons. Unfortunately, there are a HELL of alot of these morons around.

    27. Re:Best Tech Scam by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      A criticism of the supply chain is not the same as a criticism of the technology. The fact is that all progress depends on extraction at some point. You can't look at option A alone. You need to compare options A, B, and C against each other, because we have to decide on something.

      Fischer-Tropsch? Now I know you're either an idiot or a troll, and quite possibly both. Do you have any idea how much extra carbon dioxide that process emits? Perhaps if you could spell its name, you would.

    28. Re:Best Tech Scam by mxs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Your version sounds more accurate.

      And all just from reading his own post :>

      I really have to wonder why the heck people make lowball bids like that anyway. It's a total waste of everyone's time. ESPECIALLY if you're just going to try to back out if your lowball bid wins.

      To go colloquial on your ass : to be a dick. Best case scenario, you just cost the next-highest bidder money. Some people enjoy spending other people's money like that, a lot. This does not only happen on lowball bids ... Sometimes these people will bid very high as a form of a thrillride ... If they win, they will try to back out.

      Lowball bidders = morons.

      Well, not really. The actual moron is the guy who lists an auction with the low price below what he would reasonably sell the item for. Of course eBay encourages you to do this with the fee structure, and psychologically speaking it's easier to hook a bidder that'll go sky-high early with a $1 bid. It is, however, quite dishonest. The seller better sell for lowball prices too if that happens.

      Also, bidders who bid multiple times on the same item instead of using the autobid feature the way it was intended = morons. Unfortunately, there are a HELL of alot of these morons around.

      Well ... More than one school of thought on these; For one thing, you might change what you are willing to pay from one day to the next. This is legitimate. Also, you might want to avoid unscrupulous sellers who have sock puppet accounts driving up the price on their own auctions just to raise the autobid of bidders. This may even be worth eating the eBay fees if you get it wrong, if you do it often enough. And then, of course, it's the same tactic that sniping relies on; don't let other bidders know how high you are willing to go, but try to get the best price with a shot in the final seconds (or slowly increasing nonautobid bids).

    29. Re:Best Tech Scam by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Well, not really. The actual moron is the guy who lists an auction with the low price below what he would reasonably sell the item for. Of course eBay encourages you to do this with the fee structure, and psychologically speaking it's easier to hook a bidder that'll go sky-high early with a $1 bid. It is, however, quite dishonest. The seller better sell for lowball prices too if that happens.

      Actually, the retard is the person who bid on something not expecting to win. It is an auction site after all. Just because an item has a low starting price doesn't mean it's fake, nor is it dishonest. I guess some people are just slow.

    30. Re:Best Tech Scam by Teriblows · · Score: 0

      oh it gets worse. theres such a thing as Audiophile AC power cable. its a freaky world....

    31. Re:Best Tech Scam by hardburn · · Score: 1

      Fischer-Tropsch net CO2 emissions depend on what kind of biomass you're using. Coal would be a high net CO2 emitter, but that's exactly why you shouldn't use coal. The only reason anybody is suggesting coal is because the US has a large coal reserve. Algae may not be quite as convenient, but it has very high yield/acre and would produce no net CO2.

      The real problem is energy input to do it. For large scale production, it would pretty much require several nuclear plants all to itself, or alternatively, high-efficiency solar plants in the desert.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    32. Re:Best Tech Scam by LarsG · · Score: 1

      So I learned my lesson: Always research before you bid on eBay, even if the bid's not serious. ;-)

      I rather think the lesson should be: Don't bid on eBay unless you are serious, and especially don't post about it on /. trying to paint yourself as the good guy.

      As far as great scams go, I think the greatest one is social and not technical. That is, people's innate ability to twist a story around in order to make themselves believe that they are in the right.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    33. Re:Best Tech Scam by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      You're correct. The environmental issues caused by battery production is far less politically harmful, because a 45MPG hybrid sounds much better than 35MPG from a non-hybrid, when the reality is that it isn't much on an individual level, and isn't really anything in the big picture.

      It's much easier for a politician to vote to allow a hybrid driver to use HOV lanes and get lots of support from people that want to "help the environment", but those 35MPG cars with 2 passengers in the HOV lane make the 45MPG hybrid with one passenger look a lot more wasteful to me. And, that 10MPG bus with just 8 passengers really kicks the hybrid's butt, especially if the bus uses CNG or other more enviromentally friendly fuel.

      Then, there's electric powered subway or light rail, that although it does still use energy (what doesn't?), it doesn't directly emit any exhaust of any kind, so you can use some clean, renewable generation system (wind, hydroelectric, etc.) to power it with very little impact, and the passenger-miles per gallon-equivalent just leaps so far beyond that HOV-stealing hybrid that any extra enviromental damage caused by the hybrid's batteries becomes quite a big deal.

      So, yeah, it's easy for a politician to make hybrid cars more palatable to own, but the ones that vote to expand public transportation and vote against allowing hybrids in the HOV lane are the ones that have it right in the long run.

    34. Re:Best Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the douche bag. You're probably the seller of these scam of speakers.

    35. Re:Best Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How was this modded +5 interesting???

    36. Re:Best Tech Scam by Eil · · Score: 1

      I think you're a little too quick to judge a situation that you had no part in. If the OP was telling the truth, he didn't find out the speakers were crap until AFTER he bid on them, hence all the backpedaling. Yes, it was rather dumb to bid on an item before researching it, but everyone (and I do mean EVERYONE, even myself) has made at least one stupid purchase in their life. It's part of the process that we call "learning from your mistakes."

      Also, I can't be the only one who's getting a little tired of seeing the word "douchebag" in every other blog/Digg/Slashdot comment lately.

    37. Re:Best Tech Scam by Invidious · · Score: 1

      I had something similar happen: I was bidding on an infrared filter for what I thought was a remarkably good price. I put in the bid .. then upon winning, realized the shipping was $150. (This is for a camera lens filter, something you could fit ten of in your hand.)

      He sent me a threatening letter, I said 'fuck off, scammer,' and nothing happened.

    38. Re:Best Tech Scam by mxs · · Score: 1

      I think you're a little too quick to judge a situation that you had no part in.

      I do not. He offered his version of the story, I offered my take on it. I don't think that's uncalled for; I did not change the facts, I questioned the motives and exchanged them with, in my opinion, a more probable set thereof.

      If the OP was telling the truth, he didn't find out the speakers were crap until AFTER he bid on them,

      Assuming they /are/ crap, it is /entirely/ on him. He was the one who did the bidding. He was the one who /should/ have researched before bidding on them, not after. Even if you buy his argument that he "just" bid on them for fun, he is still the one responsible for that bid.

      hence all the backpedaling.

      He can backpedal if he wants. Painting it as anything other than that is just dishonest.

      Yes, it was rather dumb to bid on an item before researching it, but everyone (and I do mean EVERYONE, even myself) has made at least one stupid purchase in their life. It's part of the process that we call "learning from your mistakes."

      Indeed. Of course, this guy did not make the purchase, he assumed outright he was buying crap. Buyers are free to buy whatever they want, this guy was not forced into bidding. Hell, there is some stuff people buy I will never understand, but whatever floats their boat ...

      Also, I can't be the only one who's getting a little tired of seeing the word "douchebag" in every other blog/Digg/Slashdot comment lately.

      I think it is the first time I used that word on Slashdot, though I may be mistaken. I do think it's accurate given my set of motivations :P

  15. Extended warranties suck except where they dont by gelfling · · Score: 1

    I have a 20 month old Samsung 46" LCD TV. It now needs over $700 in repairs because of one of two blown video boards. So if had paid for the extended warranty I would already paid in that $700 - so it's a wash either way. If I paid $700 for the TV (e.g a smaller one), with or without any warranty at all, it's actually cheaper to throw the TV off the fucking roof and get a new one.

    1. Re:Extended warranties suck except where they dont by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 1

      Extended warranties make sense in a few situations. Of course, "self-insuring" is a much better idea. If you're tempted to buy the warranty on something, just take the money you would have spent on the warranty and dump it in a high-interest savings or money-market account. It's essentially the same thing the insurer is doing anyway (although, of course, they're spreading it out over many more claims than you will). You also get to make the call to toss it all and get a new one instead of waiting in repair limbo.

      My absolute favorite part, though, is that the salesperson is almost always unable to counter it during their warranty pitch. I used to sell the warranties while I worked at Circuit City and Best Buy in college, and banking the warranty cost was one of the few objections that really didn't have any easy, canned reply.

    2. Re:Extended warranties suck except where they dont by gelfling · · Score: 1

      I guess my basic objection is that the durability of consumer electronics is now INVERSELY related to the price. Seems like you're screwed either way. Get a cheap off brand TV and it breaks and no one can fix it. Get a name brand and they rape you on the repairs until it really makes no sense to bother at all.

    3. Re:Extended warranties suck except where they dont by philipgar · · Score: 3, Informative

      One thing that can make extended warranties worthwhile is that the cost to repair a broken item is much higher to you than it is to the company offering the warranty. For instance, if you have a laptop and something on the logic board breaks, you can easily spend $400 finding a replacement logic board. However the company making the machine really spends less than $200 on it (probably far less than that). The issue is that they are the only source of replacement parts, the whole vendor lock-in problem.

      I've learned my lesson, and now buy extended warranties on laptops. The extended warranty on my Macbook has more than paid for itself already, and in the end got me an upgrade to a model released a year and a half after I bought mine. Hopefully I don't need to use the warranty again, but it's very nice knowing I don't have to worry about it. Plus, while it might be cheaper to repair some things on your own, you really need to value your time on getting something fixed. How long does it take to find the parts, a place to fix it etc. How long will your item be out of commission. It's quite convenient to call one number and get a box to return the item in the next day.

      Phil

    4. Re:Extended warranties suck except where they dont by gelfling · · Score: 1

      And let me add that after a week and a half, one failed attempt to replace one board which wasn't defective, a trip back to the shop WITH the TV this time and now a report that the second board they're 'really sure' it is this time, it's of course, back ordered with NO ETA. Even if I had a warranty it wouldn't change that.

      I'm coming to the conclusion that consumer electronics at ANY price is non repairable. Which and of itself is fine, but then knock the price down from $2,600 if it's only going to last 2 years. That's more than $100/month for a TV.

  16. 2 GHZ with 1 GB of Ram. No problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It could be the fact you need a dual core machine with 2 gigs to browse the web now.

    It's a Lenovo 3000 with 2GHz Celeron and with 1 GB of RAM.

    Works FAST.

    Vista is working quite fine for me. I guess other brands don't know how to install Vista correctly or something.

    1. Re:2 GHZ with 1 GB of Ram. No problem. by Maxmin · · Score: 1

      But, which Vista? There are many, and the baseline versions don't run Aero. Got Aero?

      --
      O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    2. Re:2 GHZ with 1 GB of Ram. No problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Just imagine how much FASTER it would be with XP or Linux...

  17. Bathtub Curve by msgmonkey · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Retailers love to offer 5 year extended warranty because of the Bathtub Curve.

    Basically if a product does n't fail within one year then the probability it failing within five year years is very very low.

    This curve applies very well to consumer electronics with the added advantage that they depreciate in value quickly too.

    1. Re:Bathtub Curve by klui · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure because of potential bad capacitors out there.

    2. Re:Bathtub Curve by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Worry less about bad capacitors, and more about problems with solder joints due to RoHS standards. Also Google "tin whiskers".

  18. QRay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:QRay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CBC's Marketplace show did an expose on the Q-ray bracelet last year.

  19. Fat Fizz by Rick+Genter · · Score: 1

    Of course, Made in Eureka...

    --
    Don't underestimate the power of The Source
  20. Illegal Eavesdropping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has the Gov tried to bring charges against terrorists? What's their success rate? 'Nuff said.

  21. The cooler is not a scam by totalnubee · · Score: 3, Informative

    That type of cooler is called an evaporative or swamp cooloer. It's no air conditioner, but it can be effective in some cases and is definitely not a tech scam.

    --
    "Even when I say nothing it's a beautiful use of negative space." - Indelible, "Fire In Which You Burn"
    1. Re:The cooler is not a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That type of cooler is called an evaporative or swamp cooloer [wikipedia.org].

      That doesn't appear to be the case. It appears to just be a fan that blows air across a couple of frozen blocks... and you just heated your house in order to cool the blocks in your freezer.

      If you want a swamp cooler, get a swap cooler. They work great in places like Albuquerque. Don't get a $230 portable fan from a company that is trying to trick people with crap like this.

    2. Re:The cooler is not a scam by Phoobarnvaz · · Score: 1

      That type of cooler is called an evaporative or swamp cooler [wikipedia.org]. It's no air conditioner, but it can be effective in some cases and is definitely not a tech scam.

      I actually have one of these "personal" swamp coolers that uses a plastic bottle you fill up with water or other liquid & freeze. Bought it from Think Geek about 3 years ago for about $20-25...since the local electric company doesn't want to upgrade their equipment in our neighborhood so our power stays on all of the time. Just drag out the 2 batteries or the solar cell...the frozen bottle & let the cool air blow over me.

      Being this is Arizona & swamp coolers are more prevalent than AC.

      --
      Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia. - Charles M. Schulz
    3. Re:The cooler is not a scam by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of getting one of those for my car. It is a '99 Suzki Swift that gets over 40mpg, so I would hate to part with it, but driving home from my client site in the middle of summer can be a killer. I figured I could throw a water bottle in the freezer when I got there, and it should last me for the drive home.

      So, the you would say the one that Think Geek sells works?

    4. Re:The cooler is not a scam by drew · · Score: 1

      It appears to just be a fan that blows air across a couple of frozen blocks... and you just heated your house in order to cool the blocks in your freezer.

      Perhaps, but this still may be an effective device. It won't cool your house overall, but unless you live in a studio apartment, it could still be effective at redistributing heat. My kitchen almost never gets uncomfortably warm, but several of the upstairs rooms can occasionally get oppressively hot. In that case, pulling a couple block of ice out of the freezer an sticking them upstairs could help balance out the temperatures. Not saying that this particular device would or would not be an effective way to accomplish that, but it's not a total scam, either.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    5. Re:The cooler is not a scam by Phoobarnvaz · · Score: 1

      Only if there's not too much humidity & being battery powered...you're not going to get enough of a breeze off of the thing to make it worthwhile for cooling off the whole car.

      On the other hand...they do make 12V swamp coolers for cars that will do what you're looking for. The cost is about $300.

      --
      Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia. - Charles M. Schulz
    6. Re:The cooler is not a scam by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's not an evaporative cooler. The bottles are sealed, no evaporation from them takes place. Thus, you are limited to the amount of cooling that you can get from melting a chunk of ice and bringing the resultant water up to room temp.

      It might be enough to cool a person who was directly in its airstream, but I wouldn't blow my money on it. Get a real evaporative cooler instead, or make your own with a fan and a wet towel/sack over the back of it and save your pennies for some other "engineering genius from china" that actually uses a decent compressor-driven phase-change refrigerative cycle.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    7. Re:The cooler is not a scam by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      It also only works in dry environments, since the water has to evaporate at a good rate. My mother lives out west (105 degrees in the shade yesterday, almost zero humidity) and their house has an evaporative cooler. They don't have a conventional air conditioner ... they don't need it.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  22. Car runs on water by bsharma · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:Car runs on water by Acer500 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately a friend of mine became convinced of one of those scams, and will add water to his gas or something of the sort. I told him he'll ruin his engine but...

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    2. Re:Car runs on water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love it that Fox gets pulled in by the "HHO" scam!

    3. Re:Car runs on water by shermo · · Score: 1

      You know what's really sad? This scam got significant airtime on one of our 'news-magazine' shows. (Like 60 Minutes I guess, but daily and only 30).

      They interviewed a University Professor who utterly confused everybody (who should have just said "energy in > energy out"), and ended the segment on a "We'll keep an eye on this new technology" note. It was disgusting

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
  23. Web browsing... by kmkznobeikoku · · Score: 0

    ...doesn't require a dual-core, 2Gb setup, I find I can browse just fine with my Athlon XP w/ 700Mb RAM. But then, I'm running a Linux distro, and NOT Vista. Suppose that makes a difference? :)

    1. Re:Web browsing... by adonoman · · Score: 1

      I'm doing the same thing running XP, and even office 2007 - runs just fine. But I wouldn't even try to put vista on it.

    2. Re:Web browsing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At home, I probably have a similar setup to yours. Athlon XP, 1GB RAM. Using Debian with Firefox, browsing the web these days is slow ! All it takes is a few "Web 2.0" sites, maybe a tab or two of a Flash video player, and the thing crawls. CPU usage is very high, and audio applications get pre-empted and choppy. It seems these days a lot of websites these days expect you to have 2 to 4 cores.

      This problem has really gotten bad in the last year or so, maybe even in the last few months. It used to be I could browse the web pretty efficiently on an old 400MHz machine from ten years ago. Now, something that would have been state of the art in 2004 is really starting to be crap for simple web stuff. You can blame Vista for all this, but I really don't think that even scratches the surface of the issue...

  24. Re:The Science of Refrigeration by Migraineman · · Score: 1

    First, you have to accept that you can't just create "heat" or "cold" from nothing, nor can you destroy it. You can, however, move it from one place to another. As water freezes into ice, it absorbs "cold" from the local environment. Similarly, when it melts, it releases the "cold" into the surroundings. That's how the ice-pack air conditioner works.

    "Hot" and "cold" are basically the same thing, only with opposite polarities. The above thermal exchange could be viewed as "melting ice absorbs heat" and "freezing ice releases heat." So the thing you really need to worry about is the ice pack moving heat into your freezer. With more items in the freezer, you have a bigger "cold" buffer which will offset the "heat" dumped into the freezer by the freezing water. Remember, "heat" can't be destroyed, only moved. It's just a matter of time until the "heat" accumulates to a problematic level.

    I run a small business on the side, helping people deal with Catastrophic Retention of Accumulated Pthermions in their home refrigeration systems. For a nominal fee, I can have a crew come over and purge the pthermions from your freezer, ensuring years of continued, reliable service.

  25. In former free Canada,people want to throttle ISP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And government who is working for MaFIAA, too!

  26. Frys DVR by mzs · · Score: 1

    I bought a DVD VCR combo from Frys that only recorded to the VHS tape. I only learned this when I took it home and read the manual. The sign on the shelf clearly called it a 'DVR' even said it was 'compatible with DVD+-R' but not that it recorded to DVD. I had to take it back. They said that the sign was not misleading saying that a DVD player was 'digital' and the VCR was the 'video recorder' part. Then I had my wife try to take it back and she had no problems. I wonder if it was a scam or incompetence.

    1. Re:Frys DVR by fyrewulff · · Score: 1

      Misunderstanding on both sides. On some DVD players, they'll note that it's compatible with both -/+ burned discs.

      --
      "We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
    2. Re:Frys DVR by kenh · · Score: 1

      Their reaction makes sense to me - not that I agree with it.

      Sounds like you walked in and said (in effect) "you guys lied to me, your signage was wrong and you tricked me!" They took the position of defending their signage.

      Later when your wife attempted the return, there may have been one or more reasons she faired better:

      1. She simply asked for a refund (didn't accuse them of fraud, put themon defensive)
      2. Others had returned similar units for the same reason, so they stopped questioning it
      3. Your wife simply got a more reasonable sales clerk
      4. Or, all of the above

      Ken

      --
      Ken
    3. Re:Frys DVR by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      They said that the sign was not misleading saying that a DVD player was 'digital' and the VCR was the 'video recorder' part.

      Ha! That's fabulous. In that case, all VCRs are digital: they all have digital clocks right on the front!

    4. Re:Frys DVR by theskunkmonkey · · Score: 1

      You forgot one possibility...

      4. Your wife has big knockers, blonde hair, and wore a low cut shirt.
      5. Or, all of the above.

  27. Another irrational MS Hater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But, which Vista? There are many, and the baseline versions don't run Aero. Got Aero?

    Vista Home Basic. So, no Aero. But so what? I said it's running fine with what I'm using it for. Regardless if it's Vista or not, if you're running intensive stuff and your hardware isn't up for it, it's going to be slow.

    I mean, if I were running Fedora 9 on a PII/500MB with Apache, MySQL, and GNOME, and then complained about how slow and sluggish it was, everyone would be up my ass.

    So, I guess if Windows Vista is too slow, shut some unneeded shit off. Geeze! Get a life!

    1. Re:Another irrational MS Hater by Maxmin · · Score: 3, Informative

      You seem to be misreading my point, coward -- I use Windows every day, at work and home (where it runs under Parallels on my Macbook.) Lots of great software runs under it, the benefits are tangible and positive.

      Vista, however, was marketed as a speedy, pretty *new* O/S. I'd expected a redesigned kernel to do better than it actually does.

      I've been programming and using computers since teletype days (jr. high anyways.) That O/Sen require so much horsepower bothers me so. The Vista upgrade at work ran too slow on my core2duo Dell laptop, so I downgraded to XP, sadly. Yes, even OS X runs slower than I'd like. There's always Linux for compute-intensive jobs, however.

      --
      O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    2. Re:Another irrational MS Hater by iwein · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's always Linux for compute-intensive jobs, however.

      Well, I'm running Ubuntu Hardon at home where it is mainly used by my wife for browsing purposes. I reasoned that for browsing the web you don't need more than the AMD 3200+ 1gb I put in there.

      Strangely it manages to get completely swamped with talking to my wireless router when I take it far enough away from it.

      I confess that I probably managed to screw with it and I should just do a clean install like I used to to with windows; it is just some anecdotal evidence to the point that you can slow down any box running any OS.

      --
      Show a man some news, distract him for an hour. Show a man some mod points, distract him for the rest of his life.
    3. Re:Another irrational MS Hater by jessedorland · · Score: 1

      This laptop came with Windows Vista Preminum -- I downgrade to XP, and dual boot with Kubuntu. I really didn't like Vista -- too many "demo" software, other crazy stuff. I just couldn't take it. Why can't they give us clean OS? I know the answer but it's worth asking.

      --
      Even veals have more autonomy!
    4. Re:Another irrational MS Hater by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      If it is getting swamped when you get further away from the wireless router, it is more likely that the signal is either getting a lot of distortion and interference or it is getting too week and the NIC or Router is downgrading the wireless speeds to improve the integrity of the connection.

      Using a different computer with a different wireless card isn't a valid test either. It needs to be checked with the NIC in use that is getting swamped. I would check your signal out before blasting an install. It is likely that the problem has nothing to do with the install or it is because of an obscure setting in the radio interface of either your router or wireless NIC.

    5. Re:Another irrational MS Hater by iwein · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tips. We're going completely off topic, but anyway.

      fwiw I've tried again with the pc 3 meters away from the router with clear line of sight. The speed is still well below 0.5mbit. I have tested the same nic before on windows: speeds were fine. I'm pretty sure it is either the linux driver or my configuration thereof.

      I should really try with ndiswrapper before doing a clean install. But getting the inf and sys files out of the exe is a whole new part of hell (yes I have tried wine). Or maybe I should just build a cantenna. Or an antenna on a really long wire...

      --
      Show a man some news, distract him for an hour. Show a man some mod points, distract him for the rest of his life.
    6. Re:Another irrational MS Hater by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      You might be on the right track. There is likely either a power setting where the card isn't turned up (radio controls) or the driver can't properly control it.

      Maybe going with the NDIS wrapper is the way to go. To find the files, try searching driver guide or some windows driver sites (look for the free ones) for the driver files. sometimes, it is just the INF and SYS files. Alternatively, If you have a windows install somewhere, you can look for InstalRite or some other tools. Here is some suggestions I came across that might be helpful. I like the orca suggestion if the windows installer uses an MSI installer. I have used the InstalRight in the past with some success but it basically indexes the file and registry system them diffs the before and after to show the changes. It starts to take quite a lot of space up after a while.

      I saw that we were going off topic. You sound like you got a good grasp on it and what I offered was of little use to you, but someone else will end up google'ing for similar symptoms and perhaps end up one step closer to their answer. Anyways, good luck with it.

  28. Audiophile Hardware by Dr.Pete · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm going to get all the /. audiophiles offside with this, but whatever. Some of the stuff targeted at audio pimpers is truly ridiculous. See http://www.ilikejam.org/blog/audio/audiophile.html For example:
    • The CD stop light pen: A giant disregard of optics leads people to believe that the probe light "goes somewhere in the CD" and needs to be trapped.
    • Audio-pimp cables: Yes, a good cable with decent materials and a well engineered, within spec connector will help with sound. Some of these audiophile connectors, however, provide no discernible or even measurable benefit. Certainly not for the cost required.
    • My favorite, the volume knob: A turned wooden knob. Ha ha, knob. This may be aesthetically pleasing to some, but to claim it has anything to do with audio quality is just wrong.

    These audiophile things offend me. I realize some people like to mess with their hardware to make it look pretty in their eyes (ricers, for example) but to claim such "behind-the-scenes" hardware mods do anything except drain the bank accounts of the ignorant is beyond the pale and simply a scam perpetrated by those who know better.

    1. Re:Audiophile Hardware by lysse · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of a comment I saw just today on the Sound on Sound forum - something along the lines of "Audiophiles use phono cables because they have unbalanced personalities". I'm grotesquely misquoting, but doesn't that simple observation just tell the whole story...?

    2. Re:Audiophile Hardware by dpiven · · Score: 1

      I guarantee you will flat-out HATE Monster Cable. Guess the kind of product this description applies to:

      ... features a unique, advanced nitrogen gas-injected cellular dielectric, Xtra Low Noise® construction and high-density, triple-layer shielding to help reject interference and deliver fast and accurate signal transfer. Advanced design and construction maintain proper impedance to reduce jitter, optimizing focus, clarity and extended dynamic range.

      Hint: it's 7 feet long and runs for US$30.

      It's hard for me to fully plumb the depths of their shitfulness.

      (Oh, okay. The above prose describes an IEEE1394 cable. Digital transmission. Seven feet. Thirty bucks. SHEEEEEEEEEESH.)

    3. Re:Audiophile Hardware by Dr.Pete · · Score: 1

      Heh, my favorite statement from the monster cable ad: "Nitrojen gas-injected cellular dielectric for extended frequency response." That is, gas injection formed plastic. Just like every, other cable.

    4. Re:Audiophile Hardware by jmauro · · Score: 1

      Most 7' firewire cables run $25-$30. It's not just Monster who over charges for those things.

    5. Re:Audiophile Hardware by dpiven · · Score: 1

      Where are you getting yours, Nieman-Marcus?

      I can go to, say, Newegg and get a 10' FW cable for three bucks.

    6. Re:Audiophile Hardware by ikkonoishi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thats nothing.
      http://www.amazon.com/Denon-AKDL1-Dedicated-Link-Cable/dp/B000I1X6PM/

      You save $49.75!!!

      Check out the user reviews.

      If I could use a rusty boxcutter to carve a new orifice in my body that's compatible with this link cable, I would already be doing it. I can just imagine the pure musical goodness that would flow through this cable into the wound and fill me completely -- like white, holy light. Holding this cable in my hands actually makes me feel that much closer to the Lord Jesus Christ. I only make $6.25/hr at Jack In The Box, but I saved up for three months so I could have this cable. It sits in a shrine I constructed next to my futon in Mother's basement.

      I only gave it four stars in my review because I can't find music that is worthy enough to flow through this utterly perfect interconnect.

    7. Re:Audiophile Hardware by Homburg · · Score: 1

      "Audio-pimp cables"

      My favorite example here is gold-plated USB cables. For when you need really hi-fidelity 1s and 0s, I guess.

    8. Re:Audiophile Hardware by santix · · Score: 1

      Also "cable burners" and "main conditioners" are part of the audiophile scam.

    9. Re:Audiophile Hardware by owlstead · · Score: 1

      Oh, man, I never found many of those reviews useful, but these ones really hit the spot.

          Why did it have to be blue?, June 28, 2008

      By Harmless Gryphon (Nowhere worth mentioning) - See all my reviews

      I knew my day was going to improve when the truck pulled up at my home with this cable deep within. No ordinary truck, this one was Holy White, and the gold Delivery logo sparkled like a thousand suns reflected through shards of the purest ice formed with unadulterated water collected at the beginning of the universe. The driver, clad in a robe colored the softest of white, floated towards me on the cool fog of a hundred fire extinguishers. He smiled benevolently, like a father looking down upon his only child, and handed me a package wrapped in gold beaten thin to the point where you could see through it. I didn't have to sign, because the driver could see within my heart, and knew that I was pure. Upon opening the package, an angelic choir started to sing, and reached a crescendo as I laid this cable on my stereo system. Instantly, my antiquated equipment transformed into components made from the clearest diamond-semiconductor. The cable knew where to go, and hooked itself into the correct ports without help from me - all the while, the choir sang praises to the almighty digital god. With trepidation, I pushed "play," and was instantly enveloped in a sound that echoed the creation of all matter, a sound that vibrated every cell in my body to perfection. I was instantly taken to the next plane, where I saw the all-father. I knew with my entire soul, that all was good in the world.

      But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.

    10. Re:Audiophile Hardware by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      Audio-pimp cables: Yes, a good cable with decent materials and a well engineered, within spec connector will help with sound. Some of these audiophile connectors, however, provide no discernible or even measurable benefit. Certainly not for the cost required.

      My favorite rebuttal of this is the experiment which ran a blind comparison between Monster cables and a wire coat-hanger.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    11. Re:Audiophile Hardware by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      Whoops, I should've said "rebuttal of the myth of overpriced cables". Sorry about that.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    12. Re:Audiophile Hardware by Eil · · Score: 1

      I think they're having an sarcasm-a-thon in the reviews for this thing:

      I knew my day was going to improve when the truck pulled up at my home with this cable deep within. No ordinary truck, this one was Holy White, and the gold Delivery logo sparkled like a thousand suns reflected through shards of the purest ice formed with unadulterated water collected at the beginning of the universe. The driver, clad in a robe colored the softest of white, floated towards me on the cool fog of a hundred fire extinguishers. He smiled benevolently, like a father looking down upon his only child, and handed me a package wrapped in gold beaten thin to the point where you could see through it. I didn't have to sign, because the driver could see within my heart, and knew that I was pure. Upon opening the package, an angelic choir started to sing, and reached a crescendo as I laid this cable on my stereo system. Instantly, my antiquated equipment transformed into components made from the clearest diamond-semiconductor. The cable knew where to go, and hooked itself into the correct ports without help from me - all the while, the choir sang praises to the almighty digital god. With trepidation, I pushed "play," and was instantly enveloped in a sound that echoed the creation of all matter, a sound that vibrated every cell in my body to perfection. I was instantly taken to the next plane, where I saw the all-father. I knew with my entire soul, that all was good in the world.

  29. Heat pumps work both ways. by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 2, Informative

    Heat pumps can move far more heat than the energy they consume doing it. So much so, that people are now using them to warm their homes, as well as cool them.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_source_heat_pump

    AC is expensive because people design houses and offices with giant windows which both let the sunshine in and keep the heat from getting out. And then build them in Texas.

    1. Re:Heat pumps work both ways. by jbengt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      AC is expensive because people design houses and offices with giant windows which both let the sunshine in and keep the heat from getting out. And then build them in Texas.

      Boy, you got that right.
      I worked on the HVAC design of a big modern house in the Dallas/Ft Worth suburbs (summer design temperature 105F/40C). It had a Great Room with a 12 ft high, 60 ft long glass window (the entire wall, floor to ceiling) facing West, overlooking a reflecting pool. (not much reflief from the hot afternoon sun in that layout) The building had lots of windows, skylights, glass elevator, glass stairs, even some glass floors. Interesting design, but about 3 times the A/C you would otherwise expect for a house that size.
      To be fair, it didn't inefficiently pump the heat to the hot outside air, but had a system of water-source heat pumps using ground-tempered water pumped in a closed loop through about sixteen 150 ft deep wells. (the architect refused to have visible condensing units for cooling or gas vents/chimneys for heating)

    2. Re:Heat pumps work both ways. by T-Bone-T · · Score: 1

      You've got to be kidding about that window! My parents' west wall stays 90 degrees for well after an hour after sunset.

  30. Sarcasm mixed with ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Natural decomposition via bacteria, fungi, cows, whatever you want to mention releases almost all the trapped carbon back into the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide(at best) or methane (which has a GWP of about 40tCO2/t). You can tell that this is an important effect because the ground is not entirely coal.

    1. Re:Sarcasm mixed with ignorance by mazarin5 · · Score: 1

      Natural decomposition via bacteria, fungi, cows, whatever you want to mention releases almost all the trapped carbon back into the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide(at best) or methane (which has a GWP of about 40tCO2/t). You can tell that this is an important effect because the ground is not entirely coal.

      I bet cows burn especially easy because of all the methane.

      --
      Fnord.
  31. What's the best tech scam you've heard of lately? by asCii88 · · Score: 0

    "The universe is made of tiny little strings vibrating together."

  32. Cool surge referral by Pincus · · Score: 0

    I love that the Cool Surge link appears to have a referral code:
    http://www.coolsurge.com/index.cfm?DropCode=CSWG8&gclid=CL76seeoqZQCFQKaFQodHEFWtg
    1. Write article denouncing scams
    2. (??? has been replaced with:) Refer people to scam
    3. Profit!

  33. Hey, who can forget... by Deadstick · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...laser rot? You could buy a green Magic Marker for about $20, paint the edges of your CDs with it, and not worry about the laser rotting the bits off.

    Or the $400 Denon Cat5 cable only last week?

    And there was a $10 gadget heavily advertised in general-interest magazines in the Seventies, especially Sunday supplements, that was designed to LOOK as if you could pirate cable TV with it. You just hooked it up to the antenna terminals on your TV and presto, you would get "the same type of programs you'd get on cable" -- i.e., sports, movies, news -- but you wouldn't have to pay monthly bills "because you're not getting cable!" What it was, was a rabbit-ears antenna with a plastic disk in the middle shaped like a dish antenna.

    The prose in the ad was a masterpiece of subtlety. There was not a single misstatement of fact in it, but innumerable people read as a pitch for something like the pirate HBO setups that were in the news then.

    rj

  34. How about this sneaky ad disguise as a user blog? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.best-teeth-whitening.com/

    It's actually a fake but it doesn't directly try to sell you the product in question. It just claim it's the best, better than other well known brand teeth whitening product.

    It's a little bottle of some white solution and a tooth pick like bush. It doesn't say what's in it. You are suppose to apply the stuff with the bush to your teeth. How is that stuff going to stay on the teeth? It just doesn't work!

  35. Hydrogen fuel by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

    It's the same as saying "my car runs on electricity, it's completely pollution free and carbon neutral!"

    Hydrogen is not a fuel. It's a way of storing and transporting energy. That energy has to come from somewhere - generally fossil or nuclear fueled power plants. Free hydrogen does not naturally exist on earth, it has to be manufactured, stored and transported at enormous cost in energy. The overall efficiency is crap.

    1. Re:Hydrogen fuel by potat0man · · Score: 1

      Hydrogen is not a fuel. It's a way of storing and transporting energy.

      Fuel. Noun. 1. a substance that can be consumed to produce energy

      Hydrogen can be consumed to produce energy. It is a fuel. A fuel is a storage of energy. Whether that storage happened five minutes ago by electrolyzing water or 500 million years ago by decaying organic material is irrelevant.

      And you think making hydrogen is inefficient and costly? Try making some oil from scratch. Good luck finding a couple of dinosaurs.

    2. Re:Hydrogen fuel by Teancum · · Score: 1

      While I would agree that hydrogen isn't a primary energy source, neither is gasoline. A considerable amount of energy is consumed to prepare either substance so that it can be consumed in whatever device you would like to use it in.

      Indeed, far more energy is consumed in the processing of gasoline than could ever be released from the gasoline even under ideal conditions. In other words, you could never have a gasoline-powered oil refinery as more than 100% of the fuel would be consumed in the refining process. Surprisingly (or not!), electricity is the preferred energy source for most refineries as it is more easily controlled and doesn't need as much maintenance in terms of the heating elements.

      More to the point, more electricity is consumed in the refining process than the amount of energy you get when you put it into your car. Of course refineries purchase electricity at industrial rates, so they get that energy for dirt cheap prices.

      Getting specific here, your argument doesn't hold any validity as nearly all forms of fuel have "to be manufactured, stored, and transported at enormous costs in energy". All that is different here is how the energy is stored and can be released when desired.

      In this sense, Hydrogen is most certainly a fuel and I think you would find that the energy required to produce it would compare quite favorably to a great many other forms of energy. Furthermore, OPEC doesn't own a cartel on the world's water supplies or other readily available sources of hydrogen, and is quite difficult to set up a naval blockade preventing the consumption of water.

  36. kquade by kquade · · Score: 4, Funny

    Q: What's the best tech scam you've heard of lately? A: Windows Vista.

    1. Re:kquade by Porchroof · · Score: 1

      I've been using Vista for over a year on my latest computer after having used WinXP for several years on the old computer. I haven't seen ONE DAMNED BIT OF DIFFERENCE between the two operating systems.

      --
      Fata viam invenient.
    2. Re:kquade by kquade · · Score: 0

      ...I haven't seen ONE DAMNED BIT OF DIFFERENCE between the two...

      that is part of the problem ;) can we say "no growth" from MS. Vista is a "shiny" os, just like mac os has always been. "cool looking" has NEVER been MS forte; It's a competition for looks and style, not for structural dynamics or efficiency. Me personally, I hate it. After two decades of being around computers, I have learned that if it doesn't feel or look right, it probably isn't good. In all fairness, XP was a terrible RC.

    3. Re:kquade by ymail.com · · Score: 1

      And the best scammer is one who says they can visually see that malware is slowing down a Vista box.
      That is tantamount to glancing at a 220 pound co-worker one morning and announcing they are pregnant.

  37. Free project boxes! by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Have you requested your free converter box from Uncle Sam yet? I certainly have! And no, I don't receive over-the-air television ... I've got DirecTV and I'm quite happy with it. But with the coupons, I can get a couple of free boxes with power supplies and RF modulators in them ... quite nice for various geek projects! One of them will probably be fitted as a simple RF modulator appliance so my son can play video games on his TV which only has an antenna input. The other ... who knows? Who cares? It's free! (More accurately, it's already paid for; it doesn't even begin to make up for the thousands of dollars the government steals from me each year.)

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    1. Re:Free project boxes! by antdude · · Score: 1

      Free converter boxes? You still have to pay taxes and whatever ramining. I paid 59.99 bucks for one so I still have to pay 19.99 + 8.75% taxes. So, it's not free. I wished it was!

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    2. Re:Free project boxes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet another insight into human nature.

      If you don't need the converter boxes, for which government subsidies are limited, why get one? You're taking it away from someone who could use it. It's one thing if there are coupons/boxes left over in 2009 and geeks want to snatch them up; it's quite another to act with unadulterated greed.

      And cue the "but I don't respect my government" or "poor people suck and TV is a luxury anyway" responses...

    3. Re:Free project boxes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can get a used VCR for $5, less if it doesn't play tapes.

    4. Re:Free project boxes! by Eil · · Score: 1

      I had the same idea but these converter boxes aren't really that big a deal.

      First: they aren't free. You'll be hard-pressed to find any converter boxes for less than $50, so you're still paying between $10-$20 per box. I would bet anything that once the government coupons have expired, all of the converter box prices will magically dip to $35-$45.

      Second, the coupons are only good for a particular class of converter box: 1 RF input plus 1 RF and/or composite output. Any additional features (like composite input or digital output) make the box inelgible for use with the government coupon.

      I bought a couple of Zenith converter boxes and they work fine for receiving digital TV. Upon disassembly, though, there's not much to them. A power supply plus a mainboard containing a RAM chip, the flash ROM, and an SOC made by LSI. That's it. I have more research to do, but so far it looks like the most hackable part (within my skill set at least) is the power supply.

    5. Re:Free project boxes! by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 1

      If you don't need the converter boxes, for which government subsidies are limited, why get one? You're taking it away from someone who could use it.

      "Someone who could use it" is probably already receiving large sums of cash and other benefits that were stolen from me by the government in the form of tax-funded social welfare programs. I have no remorse over taking back such a tiny fraction of it.

      --
      Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  38. Ronco of the Digital Millenium . . .? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    . . . gee, this story conjures up memories of Ronco ads for Ginsu's, Spiral Slicers, Pocket Fisherman's and *-O-Matics.

    "In Japan, the hand can be used as a knife!"

    "But this doesn't work on a digital television signal!"

    Maybe a really humongous Cool Surge might be the answer to global warming?

    Now that I have too much money to spend on high-tech gadgets that I don't need, I really feel the urge to buy a Spiral Slicer, and have a whack at a sack of potatoes . . .

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  39. Crap TV shows unchanged by HDTV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with high-def TV is a crap TV show is still crap even in HD.

  40. Concentrated Water by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny
    From the Seattle Times: Buying bottled water: Should you feel guilty -- or trendy?
    (and probably other places) ...

    Desalinated seawater from Hawaii, meanwhile, is being sold as "concentrated water" -- at $33.50 for a two-ounce bottle. Like any concentrated beverage, it is supposed to be diluted before drinking, except that in this case, that means adding water to ... water.

    [ Yes, people really are that stupid. ]

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Concentrated Water by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Yes, but concentrated water, which contains a higher proportion than normal of the isotope deuterium, as deuterium oxide, or as deuterium protium oxide, can be used as fuel for the Universal TechTronics "Cool Fusion Reactor."

      If you lose power during a hurricane, one bottle can power your house for a couple of days.

      Probably.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  41. Bigger Penis Pills by UncleWilly · · Score: 1

    I can't imagine any of them work. But many must order them for the companies to keep running adverts.

  42. Comcast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do nothing! Comcast has you covered for your digital conversion!

    Then later, when you want to leave Comcast, you'll not only have to pay to receive television, but you'll have to pay more, because you won't get the federal subsidy.

    Not a scam, per se, but a sleazy way for Comcast to get the effect of a termination clause, and it only costs their customers $40.

  43. US Patriot Act by Prisoner's+Dilemma · · Score: 1

    While we're at throw in some of the many other items compliments of the current US administration.

  44. HDMI Cables by jdcope · · Score: 1

    HDMI cables at the retail level are a scam. Best Buy sells a basic 6.5 foot HDMI cable for $60. I can get a 10-foot cable at a local computer shop, in bulk packaging, for $13. But Monster Cable is the worst. $80 for a 4-foot HDMI? Please. USB and firewire are equally as bad. $20 for a retail 10-foot usb, but $3 at a local shop.

    1. Re:HDMI Cables by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      When I lived in the Sacramento area, I found that the various dollar stores were the best place to buy USB and Firewire cables. As you can guess, they were $1.

    2. Re:HDMI Cables by Dal+Platinum · · Score: 1

      Even $13 is a rip for an hdmi cable. Try monoprice.com, I've heard nothing but good reviews.

    3. Re:HDMI Cables by nerverunner · · Score: 1

      Agreed. The list price for a 6-ft USB cable at the local Best Buy is around $30. My son worked there for a while, he bought this item with his employee discount for $1.87 . Absolutely incredible markup and a serious ripoff.

  45. It's called the Carbon Cycle - look into it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy Christ. What *are* they teaching the kids in school these days? Why don't you do yourself a favor and learn about the Carbon Cycle:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle

    The CO2 in the atmosphere is constantly being recycled back into the earth and out again. If it weren't, we wouldn't even be alive right now. The carbon in the dead tree will go into the soil and into other plants and animals. Sure, some of the carbon from the tree that goes into animals will be respirated back out into the atmosphere as CO2, but that CO2 will be pulled from the atmosphere in the form of plants, or as carbonate rock - etc., etc., etc.. It's a never ending cycle. The Carbon Cycle has been going on since long before man walked the earth and will continue long after we're gone.

  46. biggest tech scam-digital bits by zogger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Treating easily replicated digital bits exactly the same as tangible commodities, by (relatively) newly written laws and by industry practice, creating a purely artificial scarcity business model.

    Digital copying is a huge game changing tech advancement, and society has fallen flat on dealing with it. It is one of the few "star trek" level tech advances in the past few generations, yet we can see that business society has freaked out, it made a lot of the older practices virtually unneeded, and wants both to be able to use this tech freely for themselves, and also to be able to restrict it to others, entirely in their favor following the old and now obsolete so called "laws" of supply and demand as they might pertain to such products today. There is the potential for unlimited and "so close to free it doesn't matter" supply now, so they are trying to restrict it through DRM and laws and lawsuits such as they can still extract the same (or more) level of profits "per unit" as when back in the day they had to actually publish a dead trees book or stamp out a vinyl album, etc.

        What will we be seeing when we can do such replication as easy with tangible objects, if we can't even embrace and adapt to digital copies? This effort is not only ill conceived it should be *embarassing* to humanity in general, why it is even contemplated. We all should be enjoying the big freedom to freely share and share alike and have a huge expensive burden of transferring knowledge and culture from each of us and to all of us removed from our backs so we can concentrate on the next tech hurdles that could ultimately lead to humans being able to universally exist without a huge amount of drudgery and dangerous labor. Isn't that some sort of goal anyway?

      It won't happen all at once, but every time we lick a major tech problem, like we have with copies of this or that chunk of knowledge or culture, why should we -or even allow- go out of our way to create an additional problem just to perpetuate the old problem, which has been solved now? This is illogical and makes no long view historical sense. Unless we want the space aliens to start calling this the planet of the buggywhip traders (part of the embarrassing part)

    disclaimer: all I can do is not be hypocritical about it. I have a ton of digital stuff on the net over the past decade, if anyone thinks it might be useful (stop laffing!), take a copy share a copy, go for it. I work ag in meatspace, I encourage everyone who is so inclined to get seeds and "grow their own copies", use open pollinated so you can share copy making potential, go for it, feed yourself and the planet as cheaply and nutritiously as possible, leading to all free someday when the tech gets better. I seek no DRM restrictions or patents or any of that other nonsense on your ability or desire to produce your own food, even if that means I might theoretically make less, I'll be much happier once everyone is fed for cheap or free, and will go on to do something else. And that's the best I think I can do right now with voluntary sharing.

    1. Re:biggest tech scam-digital bits by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Just imagine a world without scarcity of any kind. Imagine Diamond Age style matter compilers in every house. It'd be amazing, wouldn't it?

    2. Re:biggest tech scam-digital bits by zogger · · Score: 1

      Yes, it would be, and that should be our goal as advanced monkeys who can use and make tools. Why so much of society and in particular the business community is against this is beyond me, they should be the first ones to see the obvious advantages. Some do, obviously, witness the slow and gradual rise of FOSS and some of the more benevolent "open university" efforts. Most of them though, bucket 0 fail. When you have a huge problem eliminated..well...just that! Go on to the next one, then the one after that. Hopefully, eventually, most everyone will "get it". Can you see back in the caveman days "sorry mr. Ug, that stick you are using as a lever is patented!" We'd probably just now be using fire on demand. Maybe. Probably homecaveland security would make it illegal though.

    3. Re:biggest tech scam-digital bits by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      While I agree with your rant, you would be seen as a villain by many here if they thought about what you said. Not because you want copyright obliterated, but because you actually advocate living in enough space that you can grow food for yourself. There is a very large segment of Slashdot that believes anyone that doesn't live in a tiny apartment in a densely packed city, is evil and the cause of global warming.

    4. Re:biggest tech scam-digital bits by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1

      You pay for the transfer medium and a license to use the contents of it. What, it's a scam to sell software now? Oh, or music, whatever you're ranting about...

      First of all, if the reproduction costs of ANYTHING, tangible or not, fall to zero or near zero, there are still additional significant costs in facilities & manpower required to create the original and run the reproduction equipment. Hell, datacenters, internet connections, webservers, and admins are _nowhere_ near free, so I'm not sure you've entirely though this through before.

      The "laws" of supply and demand STILL apply, as not everybody is out writing/performing/authoring/taking quality software, music, books, articles, photographs, etc, and if everyone WAS, they'd still apply, we'd just pay a lot less for this stuff.

      What kind of fairy land do you live in where it's embarrassing to make a profit selling things that are easily reproduced by others? Do you really aim to remove all incentives from doing creative work? Are you suggesting that trade be regulated such that pricing is decided by dividing design costs by number of consumers? I can't think of a model more artificial than that!

      My definition of creative work is something produced with mostly a mental effort, and therefore able to be replicated fairly easily.

      Do you see that with lower manufacturing/reproduction costs, it's EASIER for competitors to enter the market? Protection of these creative trades IS required if you want to continue seeing high quality works. We could argue all day over to what extremes they should be protected, but it is in our best interest to keep it a healthy market one way or another.

      Now, comparing creative works with food, a necessity, is just plain WRONG. I don't know what you're trying to achieve with this, but that BS won't fly past me. The hypothetical question of whether cheaply/freely reproducible food should be given away has JACK SHIT to do with giving away creative works. What are your motives for this? You want entirely free music, software, or literature? Are you going to go out and make the world a better place if we give it to you? Are you going to create your own and give it away for the same purpose? GO AHEAD, ULTRA-ALTRUISTIC MAN! You want to call the rest of the world embarrassing because we participate in a free market that's been working out just fine, shame on you!

    5. Re:biggest tech scam-digital bits by zogger · · Score: 1

      your antique buggywhip pure bloated price gouging model is from last century when a copy cost serious money to reproduce. Now that is not so, yes , it isn't totally free, but it *is* so close to free the differrnce is highly negligible, especially with file sharing and people already paying for their own infrastructure and bandwith with their connections, that even helps eliminate the lame need for expensive "server farms" and so ion, that's another artifically constructed 'scarcity" model when it comes to simple file sharing. If you say "shame on me" you are saying the same thing to all the folks who contribute freely to all the foss projects and the written literary projects out there that are free to share, for people who voluntarily share. Because they "get it" on why this is a good thing and how this new system works. You are more than welcome to charge a hundred dollars a byte or whatever you choose for your products in the digital age, and good luck with that. For the record, I have never downloaded and kept anything that wasn't authorized, I have paid for every shareware I ever used except for one that was abandonedware and zero contact information. I don't have a single pirated tune nor movie nor anything like that. If you want to try and keep artificial scarcity going for your stuff, go right ahead, I predict the effort is doomed for the most part, no matter how much DRM you throw at it though. And if you want to throw millions of people in jail for copying your stuff, good lick with that as well. As for people not creating because they aren't being directly paid in money..HAHAHAHAHAHAH! totally wrong, exceptions to your "rule" out there by the thousands and millions to look at. Maybe YOU won't, but a lot of other people WILL and are, daily, and have been doing so.

      Sorry, it used to be "illegal" to terach women or black people to even read, couldn't share knowledge freely, it used to be illegal for anyone but kings and monks to have a hand copied book, couldn't share knowledge even if you wanted to pay for it. That middle ages style restrictions on sharing knopwledge let us enjoy centuries of social and intellectual stagnation, and your business model is just an evolutionary offshoot of the same dang thing, put artificial restrictions on knowledge and cultural sharing.

      Freely sharing knowledge and having the ability for everyone to benefit and profit from it, all the way to society in general, is one of those complex things you either grok, or do not grok, you obviously don't, or not enough anyway to see you are being paid, all the freaking time 10 times as much, more, a lot more, "in kind" -which is an actual legal and business term, go look it up- with other digital bits, that aren't yours, that you didn't create, but are free to use, by having the ability to use others works, as much or more "wealth" as you would ever get trying to translate that into the bankers counterfeit "money". I don't care if you personally are a billionaire, that billion still isn't enough to cover all the freely available digital bits you can get today because others aren't so narrow minded and greedy. That's the game changing part, you get paid more by not being narrow minded and seeing what true wealth is, money in huge quantities and a direct one on one exchange is no longer needed for some-note, I said "some"- aspects of our society. If you want a society where every step you take costs money, if every action you take needs a lawyer and a contract, if every aspect of our lives has to be legally restricted based on which is who's "intellectual property" this or that is, where does it end? You need a "license to view" the design of a building on the street? How far? If that is what you want then you are welcome to such a society, sounds like a living hell to me, and the problems we are having today in coming to grips with digital bits and the extreme low cost thereof should by now be a little clearer, you suffer from ideology of the past where cheap copies were not possible. We hit the 21st century man, enjoy

  47. Monster cables by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Biggest tech scam right now, period.

  48. Memory Management Score by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

    Demand paging with a unified buffer cache is a difficult concept for laymen to grasp. They tend to think of memory being a finite resource that is used up, rather than simply another caching layer for permanent storage.

    So what would be a good, simple number we can use to gauge an operating system's memory efficiency? Working set size? Pageins and pageouts on a typical workload?

    The average person needs a number, at least some kind of letter grade.

    There's also the idea that even with a unified buffer cache, an operating system can be memory-inefficient - bloated data structures and inefficient page-aging algorithms can make that 2GB of RAM seem like 1GB.

    Is there any simple gauge of how well an operating system uses memory?

  49. Clarins Expertise 3P Spray by blueharv · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Clarins Expertise 3P spray ranks up there in the top bracket on my list of tech scams. http://www.strangeharvest.com/mt/archive/the_harvest/spray_on_magnet_1.php Here's some of the juice on the spray... "An ultra-sheer screen mist containing a pioneering combination of plant extracts capable of protecting the skin from the accelerated-ageing effects of all indoor and outdoor air pollution but most significantly, the effects of Artificial Electromagnetic Waves." Apparently the British government didn't take too kindly to the marketing of the product.

    1. Re:Clarins Expertise 3P Spray by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Just about every cosmetic or beauty product marketed to women uses techno-babble and pseudoscience. It's kind of frustrating being a girl, because I can't find any products that do what I want them to do (like, say, clean my face) without there being some special additive that they're all hyping up.

      I came across this cart at the mall one day, that had "dead sea salt extracts" in their product. The facial cleanser worked really well, and I wasn't sure what the full ingredient list was or how to make it, so I went ahead and bought it. (Sometimes convenience is worth $20.) However, the hand lotion she first showed me was, I kid you not, "dead sea salt and oil"... I was like, I can buy that at the local grocery store for the same price, but have 6 gallons of it... I know there's nothing "special" about the dead sea salt as opposed to other salt.

      Anyways, girls get the brunt of every scammer in the world. It's annoying and it sucks.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  50. A similar scam (World Reserve Monetary Exchange) by core_dump_0 · · Score: 1

    Not a tech one, but very similar to the one you just described: There is a company called "World Reserve Monetary Exchange" which advertises in major newspapers like USA Today. They trick you into buying normal, non-collector-quality presidential dollar coins, which you can get at the bank, for ridiculous prices.
    For a while, they were offering "free" presidential dollars, where they were only "free" if you bought the expensive case, and they wouldn't give you the coins without the case.
    Recently they've been marketing back-dated state quarters, which they sell in rolls (these rolls, you can say, are "proprietary", since they're not normal bank coin rolls), also at ridiculous prices. They market them as "These coins are so valuable, and they stopped making them, so buy some now!" except that they are the same state quarters that circulate in our pockets every day, NOT proof or otherwise collector-oriented coins.
    Yep, there's a sucker born every minute...

  51. Re:What's the best tech scam you've heard of latel by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

    They aren't "much simpler". An ATSC tuner is a very complex device. Only recently have chipsets with good performance and low cost become available.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  52. This one website by British · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...that you can 'subscribe to'(for money) to get links to tech stories earlier than the non-subscribers. Yes, paying for links to other stories, earlier than anyone else would see it.

    Like really, who the heck would pay for THAT? :)

  53. It's really sad... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    It is really sad that we have come to the point that people don't consider it a scam when a product that is advertised as "Free" costs over $90.

  54. Kinoki Foot Pads by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

    The scam so nice they remarketed it twice! These handy dandy foot pads, using an "Ancient Japanese Secret", drain the toxins from your feet in exactly the same way a tree's toxins flow out through their roots (?!?). How do you know it works? You adhere a pad to each foot, and wear it while you sleep, and lo and behold, it's a different color when you wake up in the morning! Thanks to a little iron oxide in the pads reacting to the sweat from your feet.

    https://www.buykinoki.com/

    That's pretty much it, and plenty of suckers have bought into it.

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  55. In before 500 dollar cat5 cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and monster cables.

  56. latest tech scam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uhhh. All fuel injection, auto ecus, injectors, sensors and backwards foriegn diagrams. Calling all prescotts single core, as they smp fold at home faster than a core 2 duo...while using less power. oh god. intel almost got my mulah again. Allow me to set my affinity to the invisible #2 and watch from a distance .... ouch. the pga pricked me into a perfect spot.
      the fan over ice is almost smarter..wait...it is smarter than all automobile air conditioning . what in freakin hell is up with ac and ridiclous pumps demand? it is cheaper to hire someone to agitate the freon in a alcohol shaker and elctricity free... theres a gap missing in alot of things, and needs laws about engineering integrity, truthfully. I hope I am not the only unblind. time to make bankrupts in the name of God. Whose god? my god. I am crazy enough to babble on street corners.And for my gods sake make at least 20million more carbed 1987 subarus with dual range 5 speeds and 15 inch wheels. Keep the retarded a/c while I am at it...shove that 40mpg up your electric tailpipe. I'm gonna have a roll-your-own cigarette. light filtered tubes and light tobacco soothing the jet fuel burns.

  57. Already exists since Space Quest 5 by Romwell · · Score: 1

    First mentioned in Space Quest 5, where you had to drink it while travelling in the desert, now available in stores. See the website to purchase.

    1. Re:Already exists since Space Quest 5 by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      In Space Quest I, you had dehydrated water in the survival kit from your crashed pod. You could use it to kill the Orat by throwing it at him: the Orat would swallow it and explode.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
  58. Detox by freeweed · · Score: 1

    The local summer carnival type thing started up this weekend. Inside they have dozens of booths of "as seen on TV" type products. Guys demo'ing knives, you name it.

    Anyway, one of the products is the latest in the detox snakeoil business. The funny part was their sign: "Detox is the latest Buzz Word!".

    They were seriously advertising something as a fad, and claiming that "buzzword" had a positive connotation. I was completely floored.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  59. Extended warranties suck, period by freeweed · · Score: 1

    I don't avoid extended warranties because I figure I'll just fix things myself and save money that way.

    I avoid them because in the 10+ years I've seen them for sale, not a single electronic anything I've bought has needed one. Not one. Every single electronic device I've owned in that time has either failed within the first year or so (manufacturer's warranty), or well after any extended warranty would have gone for. Or is still working, many years later.

    That's 3 TVs, 2 DVD players, a home theatre system, 3 laptops, enough desktop PC parts to build 10 or 12 systems, 3 MP3 players, 2 GPS units, 4 video game consoles, and 3 digital cameras, just off the top of my head. The extended warranty on all these would have ended up costing me thousands of dollars. Much better to just save all that money, and in the once-in-a-blue-moon event that something does break, buy a new one.

    Maybe I'm just phenomenally lucky, or maybe I just take care of my stuff. I don't know, but I'm astounded that anyone would ever buy an extended warranty. Maybe for a person who only ever buys one thing a decade...

    Consumer electronics just aren't that fragile.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    1. Re:Extended warranties suck, period by jamesh · · Score: 1

      but I'm astounded that anyone would ever buy an extended warranty.

      For some products, I'm astounded that they don't. A certain computer manufacturer (or maybe others do this too?) has a basic 1 year warranty on their laptops, or a 3 year upgraded warranty. The upgraded warranty means several things:
      . Call center in the same country as you, with accents that you can actually understand
      . Onsite warranty, as opposed to carry in
      . Something else I can't remember right now.

      The problem with blanket statements like yours is that you'll always find someone who will disagree with you :)

      Concerning extended warranty, you basically have to make a judgement call yourself on a case by case basis, eg:
      . What will the warranty cost me?
      . How long is it for?
      . What is the value of the product?
      . What is the likelihood of the product developing a fault?
      . What other value does it add to the product?
      . If the product broke outside the standard warranty period, how would it affect me?

      I bought a washing machine a few years back. It came with a 2 year warranty, with the option of a 5 year warranty for an extra $50. The washing machine cost about $800 (had to serve a family of 6 so I wanted a decent one), so $50 represented a 6% increase in price, which I was happy enough to pay. It broke down after 3 years and required about $30 in parts and probably another $40 in labour. Had it not been under warranty i'd have repaired it myself, but still I think it was a pretty good deal.

      On the other hand, if it was a $200 TV with a 2 year warranty, and the upgrade to a 3 year warranty was $50, then I would probably be saying no thanks. If it broke down i'd just gift it to the local repair shop (if they wanted it) and would get a new one.

  60. Solar Powered Clothes Drier by spcma · · Score: 2, Funny

    Someone, somewhere paid $25 dollars for a solar powered clothes drier: 10 feet of rope.

  61. Tech Scam: Pure Water by st33med · · Score: 2, Funny
    I see this ad in one of my mags. It says that the bottled water is even more unhealthy than smoking...

    (If so, why haven't I died yet?)

    There water is so pure that it cures diseases such as Multiple Sclerosis.

    (So, this water can reach my brain???) Their purifying machine even unclogged sewage.

    (Haven't heard about this on the news...)

    They even said the secret is that the bonding angle is at a perfect 104 degree angle compared to other water.

    (FYI, that is the normal angle...)

    Also, they say don't listen to the doctors or other people because they are JEALOUS

    (OK, so, how jealous are they over your water...?)

    I read the ad because I was just bored... :)

  62. who is greener by zogger · · Score: 1

    I think big cities are partially to blame, everything they need has to be transported in to them, nothing actually comes from big cities that much, stuff comes from the countryside and the outskirts mostly. Big cities main export is governmental BS and what passes as "culture"..like gangstah rap! And also because of the corporate practice, a carryover from when it was manadatory before electronics was developed and communications became easy, of having central command giant ego office towers that force people to commute to them when all they do more or less is electronic office work that can be done at home. Forget efficient commuting using mass transit, that is still wasteful; as all get out, no different from driving SUVs around, because a ton of it is *not needed*, it is done, but it isn't needed. Just eliminate commuting all together whenever possible. This is the digital age, why are people still "going to the office" like it is the Dicksonian ages with quill pens, to stare at a computer screen and mash the print button? that's crazy stuff now, just mega silly. Collaboration can be done over the net. Eliminate the entire middleman as much as possible of moving people instead of moving electrons, then people can stay home, and we won't need to waste as much resources keeping those giant buildings up, or even constructing them in the first place. Just the sheer *waste* building those looming office towers is appalling. And cities screw up nature, no place for rainwater to soak in, Most trees that are there struggle, the only nature you see is ghetto rabbits and skyrats mostly, they trap heat and poisonous pollution gases and so on and screw up the weather downwind from where they are. Personally, I wouldn't raise a kid inside big cities now, I think it is borderline abuse just from the pollution they soak in 24/7 while their brains and bodies are developing.. We probably wouldn't even be having a fuel crisis right now if as many people who could work at home just did so. I think a lot of these pro giant cities people just have never thought it through all the way, they skip the bad parts of it, gloss over it. big cities came about from the necessity of face to face with trade and transportation way back in ye olden days, a lot of them are on the old river routes and ocean ports, but now...no need for all that face to face all the time, they exist from *inertia*. People went to the suburbs en masse when they could because they wanted to, they wanted out of the big cities, a lot of humans actually need some green around them, and then you *do* have space for a decent garden and a yard where the kids and dogs can play safely.

    As to space for food, urban guerrila gardening, on wasted public lands and over grown weedy unkempt lots, rooftop gardening, etc, are all viable. There's a huge movement in cuba now to do mass scale urban gardening and it is actually working out quite well. You don't need a ton of space per person, a 10 foot by 10 foot square in total size will give a lot of food during the season. Heck, I once went nuts in a second floor apartment I had that had a few sunny windows and one little sunroom on the south side, at one time I had over 200 houseplants in there, including a lot of veggies (no pot though..). I even had a baby apple tree growing in there and some sunflowers that reached to the ceiling that had peas and cucumbers climbing them. It worked OK as a daily small salad provider. Oh ya, a couple rose bushes! That made that apt smell pretty nice all the time. On the cheap and small all you need is a 5 gallon plastic bucket or two, a bag of dirt from the garden center, and a sunny window. Throw a tomato and a pepper plant in there, done, healthy snacks. I've kept the same tomatoe plants growing for years before inside apartments, I mean, ya, your traditional ferns are cool, but why not some tomatoes or something else you like? the colored lettuces are all nice and grow like crazy. spinach is easy, radishes are fast and throw a lot of green around the room. Big fun, cheap eats, you are paying the rents anyway, might as well get a little payback from the windows!

    1. Re:who is greener by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Hehe...Sir, I like the cut of your gib. I can't agree that urban gardening is a successful large scale plane though. It, like many things, is great when a few people do it, but if everybody in a place like San Francisco tried to do it, the simply isn't even close to enough empty lots and rooftops for everybody. Cities just cannot support their own populations. Of course one should be careful about pointing out the flaws of urbanites logic concerning ecology and 'culture', as the conflict between urban and rural citizens has been known to cause civil war, right here in the US. ;)

    2. Re:who is greener by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      There's a test I like to apply to environmentalists:

      Suppose that scientists discovered a cheap, waste-free way to generate practically limitless energy, would you

      1) Embrace the technology as being able to help mankind
      2) Protest the technology so as to prevent it being used for more human growth.

      People who choose the first option are people with whom I can reason. People choosing the second option are members of the lunatic fringe who are as out of touch with reality as Apocalyptic Evangelicals.

      By the way: only about a third of our fossil fuels are consumed by automobiles. A bigger portion is used for power generation. Without cities to concentrate people, we'd need to generate even more power to overcome rural transmission losses.

      People are more important than nature. Yes, we should preserve nature when we can, but always keep in mind that we do so for our own benefit. We have cities for a reason. They're quite useful in bringing many specialized people together in the same place-and often, being physically in the same place is useful. They're centers of culture and trade.

      So what if they wipe out the environment over a couple square miles? That land is far more useful to us as city than as forest or farmland.

  63. a scam, or cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know a woman (not very well) who gets paid $30 an hour to make high-end audio cables. Like, the kind of cables that sell for $1,000 each (as part of a $30,000 package). I think it takes them a couple of hours to make the cable (I'm not sure why exactly; they do everything from scratch though, and they filter and QA ruthlessly at each step so only something like 1 in 15 cables that they start making are completed to an acceptable level of quality and end up being sold to a customer.)

    I don't know if it's a scam, but it doesn't seem to be. If audiophiles are willing to shell out $1,000 for a set of cables, why not supply them with what they want? So they make the best damn cables they possibly can. The guy who started the company has a PhD and spent years experimenting with different materials, etc. trying to make better and better cables. Now they have something like 30 people working for them, assembling these $1,000+ cables. And they get paid almost as much as I do.

    Is it an honest day's work? Are they ripping off their customers? I don't know. It seems like their customers want to be ripped off--or at least, want to be able to brag to their other Hollywood friends that they have a $30,000 speaker system with the best damn cables money can buy.

  64. Spells over the web by dubl-u · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is my most recent favorite: http://www.fastspells.com/

    It's a pretty standard web shopping cart system, where you buy spells. Not that you can perform, mind you. You're paying for them to do hoodoo. No proof or anything, but they do guarantee their work.

    My favorite part is that they link out to a review site, ratethecaster.com, an independent site that says how good they are. Which just happens to be on the same IP.

    BEST SCAM EVAR!!!

  65. Dasani concentrate by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There really is "Dasani concentrate". "Dasani" is purified tap water to which some minerals have been added. The mineral mix is sold to bottlers by the Coca-Cola Company in Atlanta. This is the standard Coca-Cola business model; Coke works the same way.

    1. Re:Dasani concentrate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC that is why it didn't sell in the UK. Dasani didn't meet UK health regulations for Bromate concentration, though the Thames water it was made from did, i.e. they made London tap water worse!

  66. Re:Careful with the word "scam". Scam scam scam. by arbitraryaardvark · · Score: 1

    Parent post is +5, insightfully wrong.

    The "free" digital TV box gimmick is not necessarily a scam. ... A scam, on the other hand, requires deception to secure an unfair or unlawful gain.
    The deception is advertising as "free" something that costs money. If you have a coupon for a free cheeseburger, and they charged you $88, wouldn't you be displeased?
    Stewart's law: it always costs more to get something "free" than to just buy it.
    Hint: if they want you to pay for it, it isn't free.
    If the widget with the 5 year warranty is $88, and you can't get the one without the other, no part of it is free; there's an $88 minimum per transaction.
      This is a very common kind of scam, even used by come companies that are otherwise considered reputable, but it's always a scam.

  67. Re:What's the best tech scam you've heard of latel by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    I find that pretty hard to accept. Sure, the chip may be complex, but certainly also is a DVD player, which contains a precision optics electro-mechanical device, as well as sharing many things in common with a converter box. This isn't exactly brand new technology, one local station here has been broadcasting in HD since 1966. If the industry has been dragging their feet on producing devices (and it certainly seems that they have been), that just might be because they saw these $40 coupons as a government goldmine and lobbied for them and waited for them. And as to chips, you know what they say, the first one costs a million bucks, the next ones are a penny a piece. I really doubt that there is much that you could say to convince me that a DTV converter should cost over twice what a DVD player costs, or that there are really free market forces at work here. As soon as the coupons are no longer available, the price will drop fast. Perhaps delayed a little because of whatever inventory is in the supply chain that the retailers have already overpaid for and will try to pass that inflated price along to the consumer, but it will be kept artificially inflated by the coupon program until then.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  68. Re:What's the best tech scam you've heard of latel by Detritus · · Score: 1

    The receiver circuits are much more complex than the transmitter circuits. It has to do decoding for error correction, which is always harder than doing the encoding. The major problem with ATSC tuners has been handling multipath. A great deal of effort and money has been spent on improving the performance of the tuners under conditions of severe multipath. That's why the latest tuner designs work so much better than those designed just a few years ago. Besides R&D and design costs, the transistor count has increased. Despite that, the end user cost has greatly decreased. The first ATSC tuners were more than $1000 and their performance was terrible on real-world signals. The previous generation of boxes cost more than $200. The current boxes are a bargain and a good example of how mass production can drive down costs and prices.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  69. Not so fast by aepervius · · Score: 3, Informative

    The reason a ton is useful is that people know how fast ice melts. They know (roughly) that a ton is a heckuva lot of ice. When you tell them your A/C is a "2 ton unit" they can then get an idea of how much energy is used - a lot more than just mentioning a figure in kW.

    I have NO IDEA on how fast ice melt, and I am a physicist (*). I bet whatever you want the average joe on the street won't have an idea either. As for knowing a ton is huge... Well no shit sherlock. Does that help your average A/C unit buyer ? Not at all. On the other hand, 3.5 kwh means I know how much I will pay on my next electricity bill (which are not counted in tons). And that tell 95% of the world how much energy will the A/C unit consume. And I bet your average US consumer would be more happier knowing one A/C consume 3.5 kwh than 2 tons for the same aforementioned reason. Combine that with a clearly defined efficiency and you are all set.

    (*) but I can talk to your hours long about boring forbidden transition n-sigma*

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Not so fast by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      I have NO IDEA on how fast ice melt, and I am a physicist (*)

      tsk. Hang your head in shame.

      Then put your degree back in whatever cereal box it came in and go out and start drinking. Isn't "Introductory Alcoholism" a required first year physics subject? :-P

      Your average joe has no fucking idea what the heck a kilowatt of cooling is in real-world terms, but I'm sure that they've put some drinks on ice, or watched a few cubes melt in a glass on a lazy afternoon. It's relatively easy to extrapolate:

      "Hmmm. A 5-pound bag of ice keeps a dozen beers icy-cold for a day... what? Your average A/C is a like melting a couple of tons of ice a day? That's a lot of ice! It would keep my beers cold for weeks! Let me look at these piddly little cooling packs in this widget. Huh. They don't stand a chance in hell of keeping me cool all day."

      I know, I know, if I had managed to work in some bastardised units involving volkswagons, football fields and Libraries of Congress, perhaps factoring in daily running costs in terms of monthly Gulf War expenditure, it would have made it that much more understandable to the common man.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
  70. Tech Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Frequency grease.

  71. How about the gold plated Optical cable by deadDox · · Score: 1

    A listing on ebay lists High Quality 24K Gold Electro-Plated Connectors, High Purity OFC Copper for High Transmission Speed, Anti-Interference Ferrite Filters as well as Anti-Noise, High Density Shields & Ability to Restore the Signal, as some of the features of there TOS Link optical audio cable. I found this one very funny.. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2m-Gold-TOSLink-Optical-Cable-TOS-Link-Lead-XBox-PS2_W0QQitemZ290243153497QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item290243153497&_trkparms=72%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C65%3A12&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

  72. de centralized by zogger · · Score: 1

    de centralized power in the form of billions of solar PV modules could help eliminate any new huge transmission lines being needed. My theory is, if it's a roof sitting in the hot sun, it needs to be covered with solar panels. And the government wouldn't need to do much more than a few lines on a new law authorizing 100% tax credits up to..some level determined, around 20 thousand amortized over five tax seasons would be sufficient I guess. Not partial credits or deductions, full credits. The slack in taxes there could be made up elsewhere as new manufacturing and service industries grew, with the end game result of a lot more energy independence. Last place we lived as caretakers was mostly all solar powered, a 29 thou installation did the bulk of the circuits for the owners three story mini-mansion. I've lived with it and seen it work, awesome. That and also use the same form of credits for just more insulation, and mandate better energy efficiency standards for new construction and deed/title transfers.

    As to cities, to be clear, I am not saying tear them all down, but help people who can and want to not be forced to live there or be forced to commute there to have a viable option or two. I have no idea what the real figures might be, but there simply has to be millions of jobs that can be done at home that are currently being done by commuters to the cities.

  73. Digitial Television itself as a Scam by Teancum · · Score: 1

    One of the things that is just driving me up the wall in nearly all of the advertisements about HD television is how it is so much better and improved over analog television.

    I'll agree that in a rough technical sense there are more pixels than analog television, and under "ideal conditions" perhaps you get a better quality viewing experience. But I don't buy for a minute that analogy television is any better or worse than digital television.... it is only different.

    For myself, I would rather have some occasional snow in my viewing picture and some background noise in the sound channel than having some awful MPEG artifacting, pops, clicks, chirps, and other audio artifacts that happen when digital signals start to seriously degrade. Or worse, right in the middle of some discussion you are seeing on the television the frame suddenly freezes or is jerky and only updates every 10 seconds or so with the audio dropping out entirely.

    From my own experience, HD television is giving me far worse "quality of service" than analog television ever did... and rural areas are getting shafted even worse than in the days of analog television as well. Reception is worse, and dead spots that had problems with analog television are going to be even worse still.

    The only thing that HD television has going for it right now is that some video engineers did have a chance to review the new standards with quite a bit of experience under their belts when it was developed. Analog television had decades of backward compatibility to earlier standards to work with including having to support the older B&W devices.

    In spite of all of the advertisements about digital television, there are going to be a whole bunch of people pissed at the government, television stations, and others when the analog transmitters go off the air.

    1. Re:Digitial Television itself as a Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boy, you got that right! As a Broadcast Television Engineer, I can tell you that the amount of compression, quantizing error, and other artifacts make "digital" the worst thing to happen to US Television - ever. Nobody is going to broadcast full 1080P - takes too much bandwidth. The only place you will ever see that is in the store, coming from a DVD - and not all DVDs, either - most are over compressed. It was, and is, a big screw job to sell new hardware - to the broadcasters and the consumers - the only ones who make out big time are the JAPS who make all of the hardware. Always follow the money.

  74. the great schism by zogger · · Score: 1

    Well, I don't want civil war, but I sure would like to see a more realistic and equitable split in the worth of this or that area of the nation and between urban and rural. I really don't think a lot of pure urbanites understand how their lives and lifestyles are so very much tied to a healthy and robust rural economy and infrastructure, so they dismiss it out of hand.

    As for myself, I saw the upcoming economic collapse starting around the late 90s so I moved back rural. When I was a kid I listened and paid attention to my older relatives stories about the great depression, and when I saw all the same clues they mentioned that were the prelude to that, I knew the same result would be coming. And it isn't really rocket surgery, it's just seeing trends, reading and understanding some history, noting that human behavior isn't all that different from thousands of yearts ago, and having the ability to work simple sums.. the economy isn't even near done collapsing, and that's reality, I won't even put it in the speculation category anymore. The monetary supply is inflated WAY beyond any sort of rationality, and they have pushed magic beans paper financial products into the realms of clinical insanity. There is no possible way to avoid collapse, none, it doesn't exist, it isn't even theoretically possible at this point..

        Being poor and broke in the cities is an absolute no win situation, at least in the rural areas you have some immediate and onsite fallback positions for life's necessities. And all these highly paid folks now in the cities will be almost helpless to do anything about their situations once those big checks stop coming in, or even if they hang onto their jobs, a really big *if* right now, that money simply won't be enough to cover the basics, although their contractual debts will remain intact.

    1. Re:the great schism by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      No one wants to see civil war, and the geographical layout of our rural vs. urban locations is far more intermixed than during The Civil War. I was just pointing out that contrary to grade school history, the US Civil War was about the inequities and lack of understanding between urban and rural citizens. It is a problem that, as a nation, we have seem to have forgotten.

      I certainly hope you are wrong about a depression. I'm not saying you are. Just that I HOPE you are. Of course, many in rural areas will also have problems. Being in debt is not just an urban problem. True, rural, and even real suburban areas can delay the problems by growing some of their own food, but having that space doesn't help when the bank comes in and repossesses the farm.

  75. Religion! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes it's the obvious scams that get us. I especially love those religions that 'suggest' members pay 10% of their income to the church.

  76. Re:Careful with the word "scam". Scam scam scam. by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 1

    The deception is advertising as "free" something that costs money. If you have a coupon for a free cheeseburger, and they charged you $88, wouldn't you be displeased?

    If that wasn't made clear before I entered into a contract, yes, but that is not the likely case here. If they took your details, gave you the box, then deceived you by charging for the warranty later on, that's a scam. If you know about the warranty before entering into contract, it's not a scam.

    Your argument does not make logical sense, even though it successfully appeals to the emotions. If, say, Toyota offered you a free car, but you still had to pay for the registration, insurance, and so forth, does that mean the car is no longer "free"?

    It depends how you view the purchase, whether holistically or in a logical sense based on the individual components of the transaction. You appear to be looking at the TV box transaction holistically, whereas I am just duly itemizing the cost of the various parts of the transaction. There is room for both arguments, and while only one is strictly logically correct, the other may be more pragmatic in scope.

  77. air cooler by eck011219 · · Score: 1

    Universal TechTronics seems to specialize in 'high-tech' products of questionable value, marketing the Cool Surge portable air cooler, 'a work of engineering genius from the China coast so advanced that no windows, vents, or freon are needed' that uses the same energy as a 60-watt light bulb. It works by blowing a stream of air over two ice packs that you have previously frozen in your freezer.

    I'll grant you that it's not high-tech and that it's crappy and deceptive to bill it as such, but unless you're willing to work inside your refrigerator, it's a good low-tech way to transfer some of that cold to your workspace. I bought something similar from ThinkGeek a couple years ago (it wasn't billed as cutting-edge technology there, of course), and it did help cut the heat a bit during the stretch when we lived in a basement apartment without air conditioning (my office routinely got to 85 degrees F, summer AND winter). It wasn't the arctic blast I would have liked, but it was colder than a regular fan of the same size.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:air cooler by xlcus · · Score: 1

      I think the bigger deception in the marketing is the way that they keep emphasizing it's low energy consumption without pointing out the fact that your freezer has used up a lot more energy making the ice cold in the first place!

    2. Re:air cooler by eck011219 · · Score: 1

      Indeed -- good point.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  78. Best Tech Scam I've heard of recently by starrsoft · · Score: 1
    This:

    An anonymous reader suggests that there is a convoluted but possibly cheaper route to an new, unlocked iPhone.

    Very recently. Notice the linksynergy links that must be used, or it won't work.

    --
    Read my blog: HansMast.com
  79. Water Powered Cars by paploo · · Score: 1

    The laws of thermodynamics prevent a car from ever running on JUST water. Nevertheless, a wide range of intelligent people seem to be falling for all the reports of this being done.

    All the water powered tech I've seen has always required another expendable component (usually either electricity or a chemical reaction) to work. This part of the equation is NOT free.

  80. Re:Careful with the word "scam". Scam scam scam. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    Well.. the important question in breaking down the pricing is whether or not the fees are separable.

    You can buy a car without paying for registration OR insurance. But you can't drive it on public roads. Further, those fees don't even go to Toyota. Their part of the transaction is done when then give you the car. So in that case, the holistic approach isn't warranted.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  81. I always liked... by yroJJory · · Score: 1

    Internet-ready modems.

    --
    Jory
  82. Re:What's the best tech scam you've heard of latel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if you go to Wal-Mart, they have boxes for 45-50 dollars, in Florida anyway.
    Using the coupon + buying 2 packs of gum = 10.49 for me.

  83. Re:possession by zogger · · Score: 1

    I don't think this will be like the first great depression. People won't put up with mass moving to the camps or to government camp/work projects like they did before as the last dregs of their wealth gets confiscated and put into already wealthy people's hands. They did that once, a second time..not so sure it will fly this go around, we are more sophisticated now and more paranoid of motives and more able to get information. It's not just a small handful of newspaper owners and radio station owners they have to compromise, like they did last time to push propaganda.. They are already panicking (as well they should) over a paltry few million looming bankruptcies and houses being repoed, tens of millions in a borked economy with no way out and full complete despair facing people, living out on the street..not gonna happen. They've cooked the books on phony low-ball numbers inflation and phony unemployment stats as much as they can, they are running out of lies and excuses to cover for their sheer greed and arrogance ands stupidity. And the US was getting *very* close to mass internal revolt (against predatory capitalism mostly) by the time their bankers ww2 was run up the flagpole and used as a mass distraction. When you have the same big banks and the same multinationals and the same martini swilling cocktail partying at the yacht club people all involved in profiting from a war, it wasn't an accident, it was done on purpose.

        We have way too many ways to get information out now, and people will be noticing who's fault is what. This last administration has just completely destroyed any sort of trust that the people have in government for telling the truth, the executive branch or congress, lowest approval ratings ever, lowest trust ratings ever, etc., they realize now it is all mostly an illusion to perpetuate the top 1% wealthy people at the expense of everyone else. I know there are still a lot of grassroots activists who cling to the outmoded belief that "this time" their pet big R or D candidate, "once they get in", will change things for the better, but those people come with a full belly of cult brand koolaid, they'll be the last ones to really see what is going on. Everyone else, who isn't a full time cult political party activist, is already starting to see it. and I guess..just a gues... you have to be around for a lot of election cycles to realize that past a pure intellectual level. You have to have lived it to see that D or R it doesn't make a bit oif difference, they are just two criminal political gangs in a jobs and skimming operation, they share the spils of owning government. No one who isn't in on and it and isn't a full member and adherent of that "system" ever makes it into the top ranks. Heck, I used to know before he died a *very* high ranking d party leader, I will not identify him, but he would get a little gassed on scotch and start laughing about it to me when we had informal talks/conversations, how much they sucker in the rubes to stay powerful. The term is "useful idiots" and it applies to both parties.

      I think the government using their flag waving hessians along with their black suited economic spokesmodels murmuring soothing words will try a few more various schemes to both cork up dissent and also to try and "fix" the economy, but will not succeed, because not only have they screwed over their own people, they took a lot of powerful foreigners to the cleaners as well, and those folks are pissed off now and trying to slide away for support of the US and the fedbuck as much as possible in a loss-cutting way..

      I worry the most about a rather involved and destructive false flag operation though, and I wouldn't put it past them for one second to not already have such plans sitting on the shelf, or to implement them when they deem it necessary.

  84. Wireless fm xmiters that work on your fm car by gearloos · · Score: 1

    Well, not a scam "per se" but they claim to work, and all I've tried do not. Like Xm radio (any newer one-not the old ones that actually work well) or my new TomTom 930 gps. I know the FCC has crippled these devices so it isn't the companies fault but the fact remains, they all claim they have wireless fm. They do, but only if you live 200 miles from a metropolis and put torroids on the power AND have a place to mount less than 4 feet from your antenna. They lead you to believe that you just plug it in, tune to a free station, and you have great hands free phone, xm, mp3, whatever. Not True.

    --
    "Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
  85. Any books on this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are there any book on the new digital TV technologies that people can suggest?

  86. re: That can happen, but still .... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Rather than buying a costly extended warranty, I generally do some research for smaller shops that would be willing to do repairs on a "greater than 1 year old but less than 3 year old" laptop.

    In my area, I've found that the small ones come and go, but at any given time, you can find at least ONE reputable computer tech. working out of his home or small business who sources parts from eBay, and does repairs inexpensively on Apple or other notebooks.

    (EG. Yes, Apple will charge and arm and a leg for a logic board. But there's always somebody out there who just dropped their same model of laptop, smashed the screen, and decided they'd rather just sell it for parts value than get it repaired. Voila, there's the logic board you need for well under $100 in most cases!)

    If the laptop in question is 3+ years old, it's almost a sure bet you're best off just replacing it when it breaks. (Faster, better stuff is out there by then.)

  87. Best scams ever! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Best tech scams ever!

    Do you like tech?

    Do you like scams?

    Then you will love "Best tech scams ever!"

    All tech all scams, Best tech scams ever!

    Just mail us your credit card number and you will receive your copy of "Best tech scams ever!" soon!

  88. Geeksquad... by bwcbwc · · Score: 1

    The subject says it all.

    --
    We are the 198 proof..
  89. Riddle me this - by Geminii · · Score: 1

    Why would you want to pay for a warranty on a product which is free? If it breaks, you just get another one. In fact, why not go get twenty of these things at the outset Just In Case?