Who really cares about how this is done. I'm much more interested in what the battery impact of such a useless feature is. Seriously, how often do most people use this feature, such that it would be useful having this run 24/7/365?
Guess what. If you want to talk about what responsible developers do, then you need to consider that they can also do a good job optimizing javascript (shrinking size, reducing library dependence, using cached versions like google., etc). You can just compare a shit-quality javascript developer to what a talented HTML-only developer will do and expect that to have any meaning in the real world. Because guess what...while javascript programming isn't exactly hard, it's quite a bit more difficult than HTML-only development, so businesses will not be inclined to get some very talkented HTML guy to optiize their website. No, instead they'll be inclined to pay even less for some shitty HTML guy so that he can make some crappy ass bloated HTML page that doesn't even take advantage of modern DHTML techniques that minimize the amount of data needed on each reload.
No, lets not do that. It must have whooshed over you....in case you couldn't tell, I was being sarcastic.
And I don't know where you are getting megabytes of JS from. Most sites that I examine tend to have not much more than a megabyte of javascript and/or use something like the google cached version. For those that don't, after the first load they are cached.
So lets look at this horrendously big slashdot you use as an example. Here's this story, with 138 comments currently
First load, no cache Javascript: 794 KB Document: 663 KB Total all files: 2.4 MB
Reload with cache enabled: Javascript: 92 KB Document: 661 KB Total all files: 1.0 MB
How about that....90% of the javascript was loaded from cache. Meanwhile, the content that you want us to continually refresh is almost all uncachable. Now lets see what happens when we go to post a comment:
Click reply button, causing the editor to display: DHTML = 0 KB (entirely client side), No javascript....well, were gonna have to reload that entire page, so we're looking at somewhere in the 600KB to 1MB range.
Preview comment: DHTM = 2.6 KB (wow, that was pretty efficient....and it's only about 1KB on subsequent previews after the initial cache load) No javascript.....about the same as above (wow, not very efficient)
Post that comment: DHTML = 2.2 KB No javascript....do I need to repeat myself here?????
Yep, that's looking SOOOOOOOOOO much better, isn't it.
LOL....yeah, there's not reason not to. Lets just abandon DHTML and go back to full page reloads on every action, not matter how small. It's been so long, I guess I must've forgotten how much I loved all those full page reloads.
It's great that we can now validate the authenticity of these high end handbags. Now you'll never need to wonder whether you are getting ripped off or just legitimately fleeced
You might find this amazing, but there are some stores I go to even today where they don't use UPCs, price stickers, or shelf tags to complete the sale. The cashiers have memorized the prices of hundreds of items and key in the price at the register.
Even at a store like target where everything is very strictly computer controlled, every now and then I get up to the register with an item that has no barcode on it, and they are unable to track it down. The store never says "sorry, I cant sell it to you". They either say "do you know what the price was" and then take me at my word, or they say "How about $x dollars?" .
Yeah, because I'm sure the shop owners will just let the food rot on their shelves rather than figure out some way to sell you the merchandise for some price.
This isn't news. It would be news if they were actively doing it intentionally
That wouldn't be news. We've already seen that. I remember back when I had my iPod touch, I wanted an A/V output cable but they were like $50 for the authorized cables. Found one on eBay for $5 and it worked perfectly fine. Then the update for iOS 4 (I think that's the version) came out and suddenly the cable no longer worked, and the screen displayed a message box saying only authorized cables are supported.
Over the years there have been additional instances of the doing this same thing, though this is the most recent one I can personally attest to since (due to this sort of behavior) that iPod touch was the last apple product I will ever purchase.
Or possibly there's an even easier explanation. When she says she uses 2 different email accounts, are those email accounts both configured on the same phone? Or if different phones, did she ever even send an email from one profile to the other (perhaps intending to send some link/login/whatever to the other account to more easily facilitate configuring the account), thus putting one of her accounts into the address book of the other? If so, then facebook can easily correllate the 2nd address with her primary address when it accesses the contacts (which you give it permission to do). Then when her clients setup their own facebook profile and give it permission to see their address book, it sees the same address in their book. I've noticed that facebook LOVES to show friend-of-a-friend suggestions. TADA!!!!
Well a shed would be a LOT more money than a doorbell. And depending on what it looks like, a lot of communities have restrictions against putting up sheds and stuff like that. So I can certainly see the advantage of a doorbell.
But I'm just not sure who would actually want this. Perhaps if it were for a potentially trusted person, like an apartment complex's doorman (though I'd imagine in a case like that, they'd have a better place to put your package and the doorman can just give it to you as you come back home). I certainly wouldn't want a random delivery driver to have access. And I couldn't imagine the delivery driver would be thrilled with the idea either. If that were my job, the last thing I would want would be access to hundreds of people's houses, because the next time something goes missing, I'm going to be suspect #1.
The only way it would be at all acceptable for them to have access would be if the system were also setup with cameras where when they ring it, someone at another company would be monitoring on the camera in real time to watch that they only step right inside the door, still in view of the camera, and then leave. But of course, that idea introduces an entirely new aspect that makes it even LESS desirable than the original idea.
On what planet is a 4.5 speaker a woofer? What's the max throw on that? $400? They're on crack
On planet earth. The term "woofer" is about frequency range, not volume. But even so, plenty of those compact home theater systems use 4.5" subwoofers and actually do a not-half bad job at it. They make special long throw/high excursion drivers to help deal with the size issue.
Back in the early 90s, I was really into the car audio scene and attended several of those max-spl competitions. As I recall, there was one guy who filled a mini van with probably a few hundred 4.5" or 5" subs, and it was actually pretty damn impressive.
My computer at idle uses about 70 watts. At full load, it uses about 175 watts. Over the course of a year, the cost of that difference is typically at least $100 (several times that in some areas).
But even if you only have your computer running this for an hour a day, what even worse is how much a waste it is. Mining is very intensive. GPU and specialty hardware is sometimes profitable. CPU mining with optimized native code is NOT. CPU mining with something as inefficient as javascript is totally like flushing money down the drain. Sure, it's profitable for the thieves embedding this in banners and extensions because they have no investment in the cost (in the same way that it's profitable for a thief to smash a $100 window to grab the $5 bill you left on you seat). But as a means of "you run this code on your computer and I'll consider it payment", its a gigantic waste. You're better off just saying "paypal me 3 cents and I'll let you use my stuff for a year". Your profit will be about the same off that customer, the customer will save a ton of money, and you won't be destroying the environment in the process.
Putting aside how lame those uses are (seriously, animated poop emoji??? Life changing!!!)...the performance aspect of that isn't really all that impressive. The reason it's able to do that is not because of some insane performance (I actually suspect the performance demands are pretty minor), but because of the fact that they added infrared tracking. It's pretty much what goes on in a Kinect. Using an infrared grid, it's easily able to build a depth map, which in turn is very easy to turn into a 3d model. From there it's just all skinning polygons, with a very low demand for basic feature tracking (and recall, feature tracking has been in things like snapchat for quite some time and works on phones that are many years old).
So yes, other phones might not be able to do it because of the lack of the infrared camera part (so kudos to apple on stuffing a simplified version of a 7 year old kinect in there....and the tech wasn't even new when Kinect did it), but please don't think that's any sort of indication of performance. In fact, I eagerly await somebody getting their hands on it and posting the benchmarks showing just how low CPU utilization is while that feature is being used.
You must not have watched Star Wars. Luke doesn't duel Vader until two movies in, and he loses. Rey not only duels Darth Teenage Angst, she beats him, in a single movie.
Yes, but since TFA was really just bits and pieces of the original trilogy all squished into a single movie, that doesn't really negate the point...Rey's 1-episode-transformation is just Luke's 3-episode-transformation squished into a single movie.
The thing is, googles accounting wasn't all that odd. Whats "odd" is the term of the service agreement colliding with the taxation change. The customer pays up front for a 7 year agreement. However, google is a publicly traded company, which means they have some strict requirements for how they account for and report receivables vs liabilities over the multiyear agreement. For accounting purposes they need to spread that lump some payment out over multiple year. A quick and simple solution is just to give the account a credit balance and continue to debit the account for the course of the contract. It makes perfectly reasonable sense if you don't consider the implications if a tax change somewhere down the road.
I've never tried the mobile.weather.gov so I just checked it out. Yes it has the basic information, but it's not presented nearly as nice as accuweather.
Try to look at the forecast for the next 5 days to see high/low temps. With weather.gov, you need to scroll several screen because the high and low temperatures are each in a big block that takes 1/4 the screen, and your eyes have to wade through the day name, the overall condition name ("mostly sunny", "partly cloudy", etc) and a text description that is mostly redundant (most days it just repeats the overall condition name and the temp in sentence form, with some occasional extra info about chance of rain or whatever). Now try the same in accuweather. Easy. In a single screen I can see 6 whole days of forecast, no scrolling necesary. Further more, because it's in table format I can easily scan down the list of high/low temps without having to wade through any text. The condition graphics are a bit more meaningful. Its easier to see at a glance when rain is likely.
Now lets look at the radar. With the accuweather app it's easy because the common links are always at the top of the screen. On mobile.weather.gov you need to click back to get to the main screen, then scroll down to find the link to radar. Personally I also like the appearance/presentation of accuweather maps infinitely better...it looks nicer, you can zoom in better to see precisely where the rain is (or zoom out to get a better idea of whats a bit further away), and it filter out all the spurious radar blips/noise.
Same thing for hourly forecast...easier to access on accuweather because it's a tab at the top of every screen instead of having to find and drill down into the right block.
Now what if you like to check weather for multiple locations? On mobile.weather.gov you have to go back to the main screen, scroll back to the top, go to a different page to select your other location, then renavigate to what you were trying to check out. On accuweather you click an icon and a panel slides out with all your locations. Pick your new location and your are right back in the screen where you started. No navigation necessary
Finally a feature I love on accuweather....the 120 minute precipitation forecast. I find it very handy. I see nothing even remotely like it on mobile.weather.gov
So yeah, what you've got there is a totally free alternative that gives you most of the info, but it's not nearly as conveniently organized or as feature complete. If you like it, wonderful, but it shouldn't be a surprise that some people prefer the better packaging.
the Perl official documentation contained a Hello, World program in 5 lines that was remotely-exploitable--an obvious flaw if you know some obscure facts about how Perl works that even Larry Wall apparently forgot about
I would love to see that. Got a link? I tried googling but couldn't come up with anything.
Infinitely easier? The claim is that being OUTSIDE is going to be deadly and you think AIR CONDITIONING (which is the context in which electricity was mentioned) is the solution?
in less time than it takes me to open my camera app on my Nexus 5 (and yes, I've got a shortcut on the shortcuts bar...
Protip: hit the power button twice. There's also a shortcut on the lock screen.
Yep, I can double click and have my camera app open and ready to shoot in less time than my point and shoot takes to power on and extend the retractable lens.
No, the face is in focus in both lenses. The Portrait Mode software takes the wide-angle image, selects and deletes the face, which though in focus would be distorted by the wide angle, and drops in the ore natural looking face from the image in the long lens
I don't think it quite works the way you are thinking. You seem to think that a zoom lens and wide angle lens will give you a different perspective on subject. That's not true. It is true that portraits generally look more appealing from a zoom lense than a wide angle, but that's because when choosing one lens over the other, you also adjust your ACTUAL perspective accordingly. If you have a wide angle, your subject is tiny in the frame, so you MOVE way closer to have the fill the shot, and THAT is what changes the perspective and look. On the other hand, when you put a zoom lens on you can't even capture the entire person in the portrait, so you MOVE further away, and once again THAT changes the perspective.
But in the case of a dual lens camera taking both photos at once, they will have the exact same perspective and the subject will look identical in both images***. The only difference is that (assuming equal resolution and quality in both lenses/sensors) the wide angle will have a bigger field of view whlie the telephoto will have more detail in the central portion of the view
***other than any slight differences from optical distortion in the lens, but that's not the same thing as perspective...distortion can be both eliminated through better quality lenses, as well as accurately corrected in software via building a profile of the lens and applying the reverse transformation.
The complained about the price spiking right before prime day. However if you look at that product's history, you can see it also has a history of the price spiking once a month for the last 5 months. Granted all of those spikes were in the $15-$16 range, while the pre-prime-day spike was at $19. So it may have been a bit more extreme, but it's not particularly unusual. And I looked up a lot of things on prime day through camel and I didn't see any suspicious pricing claims on anything I looked up.
I think the story here is more about Jason Jacobs, founder of Remodeez, a small company that is trying to drum up sales for it's footware deoderizer by starting some BS story about Amazon to catapult themselves into national media attention
Slashdot Mirror
Who really cares about how this is done. I'm much more interested in what the battery impact of such a useless feature is. Seriously, how often do most people use this feature, such that it would be useful having this run 24/7/365?
Guess what. If you want to talk about what responsible developers do, then you need to consider that they can also do a good job optimizing javascript (shrinking size, reducing library dependence, using cached versions like google., etc). You can just compare a shit-quality javascript developer to what a talented HTML-only developer will do and expect that to have any meaning in the real world. Because guess what...while javascript programming isn't exactly hard, it's quite a bit more difficult than HTML-only development, so businesses will not be inclined to get some very talkented HTML guy to optiize their website. No, instead they'll be inclined to pay even less for some shitty HTML guy so that he can make some crappy ass bloated HTML page that doesn't even take advantage of modern DHTML techniques that minimize the amount of data needed on each reload.
No, lets not do that. It must have whooshed over you....in case you couldn't tell, I was being sarcastic.
And I don't know where you are getting megabytes of JS from. Most sites that I examine tend to have not much more than a megabyte of javascript and/or use something like the google cached version. For those that don't, after the first load they are cached.
So lets look at this horrendously big slashdot you use as an example. Here's this story, with 138 comments currently
First load, no cache
Javascript: 794 KB
Document: 663 KB
Total all files: 2.4 MB
Reload with cache enabled:
Javascript: 92 KB
Document: 661 KB
Total all files: 1.0 MB
How about that....90% of the javascript was loaded from cache. Meanwhile, the content that you want us to continually refresh is almost all uncachable. Now lets see what happens when we go to post a comment:
Click reply button, causing the editor to display: ....well, were gonna have to reload that entire page, so we're looking at somewhere in the 600KB to 1MB range.
DHTML = 0 KB (entirely client side),
No javascript
Preview comment:
DHTM = 2.6 KB (wow, that was pretty efficient....and it's only about 1KB on subsequent previews after the initial cache load)
No javascript.....about the same as above (wow, not very efficient)
Post that comment:
DHTML = 2.2 KB
No javascript....do I need to repeat myself here?????
Yep, that's looking SOOOOOOOOOO much better, isn't it.
LOL....yeah, there's not reason not to. Lets just abandon DHTML and go back to full page reloads on every action, not matter how small. It's been so long, I guess I must've forgotten how much I loved all those full page reloads.
Uhhh, actually.......66.6% = .666, not 666
It's great that we can now validate the authenticity of these high end handbags. Now you'll never need to wonder whether you are getting ripped off or just legitimately fleeced
You might find this amazing, but there are some stores I go to even today where they don't use UPCs, price stickers, or shelf tags to complete the sale. The cashiers have memorized the prices of hundreds of items and key in the price at the register.
Even at a store like target where everything is very strictly computer controlled, every now and then I get up to the register with an item that has no barcode on it, and they are unable to track it down. The store never says "sorry, I cant sell it to you". They either say "do you know what the price was" and then take me at my word, or they say "How about $x dollars?" .
Yeah, because I'm sure the shop owners will just let the food rot on their shelves rather than figure out some way to sell you the merchandise for some price.
This isn't news. It would be news if they were actively doing it intentionally
That wouldn't be news. We've already seen that. I remember back when I had my iPod touch, I wanted an A/V output cable but they were like $50 for the authorized cables. Found one on eBay for $5 and it worked perfectly fine. Then the update for iOS 4 (I think that's the version) came out and suddenly the cable no longer worked, and the screen displayed a message box saying only authorized cables are supported.
Over the years there have been additional instances of the doing this same thing, though this is the most recent one I can personally attest to since (due to this sort of behavior) that iPod touch was the last apple product I will ever purchase.
Or possibly there's an even easier explanation. When she says she uses 2 different email accounts, are those email accounts both configured on the same phone? Or if different phones, did she ever even send an email from one profile to the other (perhaps intending to send some link/login/whatever to the other account to more easily facilitate configuring the account), thus putting one of her accounts into the address book of the other? If so, then facebook can easily correllate the 2nd address with her primary address when it accesses the contacts (which you give it permission to do). Then when her clients setup their own facebook profile and give it permission to see their address book, it sees the same address in their book. I've noticed that facebook LOVES to show friend-of-a-friend suggestions. TADA!!!!
Well a shed would be a LOT more money than a doorbell. And depending on what it looks like, a lot of communities have restrictions against putting up sheds and stuff like that. So I can certainly see the advantage of a doorbell.
But I'm just not sure who would actually want this. Perhaps if it were for a potentially trusted person, like an apartment complex's doorman (though I'd imagine in a case like that, they'd have a better place to put your package and the doorman can just give it to you as you come back home). I certainly wouldn't want a random delivery driver to have access. And I couldn't imagine the delivery driver would be thrilled with the idea either. If that were my job, the last thing I would want would be access to hundreds of people's houses, because the next time something goes missing, I'm going to be suspect #1.
The only way it would be at all acceptable for them to have access would be if the system were also setup with cameras where when they ring it, someone at another company would be monitoring on the camera in real time to watch that they only step right inside the door, still in view of the camera, and then leave. But of course, that idea introduces an entirely new aspect that makes it even LESS desirable than the original idea.
On what planet is a 4.5 speaker a woofer? What's the max throw on that? $400? They're on crack
On planet earth. The term "woofer" is about frequency range, not volume. But even so, plenty of those compact home theater systems use 4.5" subwoofers and actually do a not-half bad job at it. They make special long throw/high excursion drivers to help deal with the size issue.
Back in the early 90s, I was really into the car audio scene and attended several of those max-spl competitions. As I recall, there was one guy who filled a mini van with probably a few hundred 4.5" or 5" subs, and it was actually pretty damn impressive.
the cost of the electricity is pretty minimal.
My computer at idle uses about 70 watts. At full load, it uses about 175 watts. Over the course of a year, the cost of that difference is typically at least $100 (several times that in some areas).
But even if you only have your computer running this for an hour a day, what even worse is how much a waste it is. Mining is very intensive. GPU and specialty hardware is sometimes profitable. CPU mining with optimized native code is NOT. CPU mining with something as inefficient as javascript is totally like flushing money down the drain. Sure, it's profitable for the thieves embedding this in banners and extensions because they have no investment in the cost (in the same way that it's profitable for a thief to smash a $100 window to grab the $5 bill you left on you seat). But as a means of "you run this code on your computer and I'll consider it payment", its a gigantic waste. You're better off just saying "paypal me 3 cents and I'll let you use my stuff for a year". Your profit will be about the same off that customer, the customer will save a ton of money, and you won't be destroying the environment in the process.
Putting aside how lame those uses are (seriously, animated poop emoji??? Life changing!!!)...the performance aspect of that isn't really all that impressive. The reason it's able to do that is not because of some insane performance (I actually suspect the performance demands are pretty minor), but because of the fact that they added infrared tracking. It's pretty much what goes on in a Kinect. Using an infrared grid, it's easily able to build a depth map, which in turn is very easy to turn into a 3d model. From there it's just all skinning polygons, with a very low demand for basic feature tracking (and recall, feature tracking has been in things like snapchat for quite some time and works on phones that are many years old).
So yes, other phones might not be able to do it because of the lack of the infrared camera part (so kudos to apple on stuffing a simplified version of a 7 year old kinect in there....and the tech wasn't even new when Kinect did it), but please don't think that's any sort of indication of performance. In fact, I eagerly await somebody getting their hands on it and posting the benchmarks showing just how low CPU utilization is while that feature is being used.
You must not have watched Star Wars. Luke doesn't duel Vader until two movies in, and he loses. Rey not only duels Darth Teenage Angst, she beats him, in a single movie.
Yes, but since TFA was really just bits and pieces of the original trilogy all squished into a single movie, that doesn't really negate the point...Rey's 1-episode-transformation is just Luke's 3-episode-transformation squished into a single movie.
The thing is, googles accounting wasn't all that odd. Whats "odd" is the term of the service agreement colliding with the taxation change. The customer pays up front for a 7 year agreement. However, google is a publicly traded company, which means they have some strict requirements for how they account for and report receivables vs liabilities over the multiyear agreement. For accounting purposes they need to spread that lump some payment out over multiple year. A quick and simple solution is just to give the account a credit balance and continue to debit the account for the course of the contract. It makes perfectly reasonable sense if you don't consider the implications if a tax change somewhere down the road.
I've never tried the mobile.weather.gov so I just checked it out. Yes it has the basic information, but it's not presented nearly as nice as accuweather.
Try to look at the forecast for the next 5 days to see high/low temps. With weather.gov, you need to scroll several screen because the high and low temperatures are each in a big block that takes 1/4 the screen, and your eyes have to wade through the day name, the overall condition name ("mostly sunny", "partly cloudy", etc) and a text description that is mostly redundant (most days it just repeats the overall condition name and the temp in sentence form, with some occasional extra info about chance of rain or whatever). Now try the same in accuweather. Easy. In a single screen I can see 6 whole days of forecast, no scrolling necesary. Further more, because it's in table format I can easily scan down the list of high/low temps without having to wade through any text. The condition graphics are a bit more meaningful. Its easier to see at a glance when rain is likely.
Now lets look at the radar. With the accuweather app it's easy because the common links are always at the top of the screen. On mobile.weather.gov you need to click back to get to the main screen, then scroll down to find the link to radar. Personally I also like the appearance/presentation of accuweather maps infinitely better...it looks nicer, you can zoom in better to see precisely where the rain is (or zoom out to get a better idea of whats a bit further away), and it filter out all the spurious radar blips/noise.
Same thing for hourly forecast...easier to access on accuweather because it's a tab at the top of every screen instead of having to find and drill down into the right block.
Now what if you like to check weather for multiple locations? On mobile.weather.gov you have to go back to the main screen, scroll back to the top, go to a different page to select your other location, then renavigate to what you were trying to check out. On accuweather you click an icon and a panel slides out with all your locations. Pick your new location and your are right back in the screen where you started. No navigation necessary
Finally a feature I love on accuweather....the 120 minute precipitation forecast. I find it very handy. I see nothing even remotely like it on mobile.weather.gov
So yeah, what you've got there is a totally free alternative that gives you most of the info, but it's not nearly as conveniently organized or as feature complete. If you like it, wonderful, but it shouldn't be a surprise that some people prefer the better packaging.
I would love to see that. Got a link? I tried googling but couldn't come up with anything.
Yep, I've been using that feature for 3 to 4 years. I did a search and it looks like it was launched in August 2013
https://www.theverge.com/2013/...
REGISTRANT CONTACT
Organization:Google Inc.
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTACT
Organization:Google Inc.
TECHNICAL CONTACT
Organization:Google Inc.
I'm pretty sure your link confirms that their name is Google, and not Googol
Good news. Your HOA cannot legally prevent you from putting up an antenna. If they do they'll be in violation of federal law.
Infinitely easier? The claim is that being OUTSIDE is going to be deadly and you think AIR CONDITIONING (which is the context in which electricity was mentioned) is the solution?
in less time than it takes me to open my camera app on my Nexus 5 (and yes, I've got a shortcut on the shortcuts bar...
Protip: hit the power button twice. There's also a shortcut on the lock screen.
Yep, I can double click and have my camera app open and ready to shoot in less time than my point and shoot takes to power on and extend the retractable lens.
No, the face is in focus in both lenses. The Portrait Mode software takes the wide-angle image, selects and deletes the face, which though in focus would be distorted by the wide angle, and drops in the ore natural looking face from the image in the long lens
I don't think it quite works the way you are thinking. You seem to think that a zoom lens and wide angle lens will give you a different perspective on subject. That's not true. It is true that portraits generally look more appealing from a zoom lense than a wide angle, but that's because when choosing one lens over the other, you also adjust your ACTUAL perspective accordingly. If you have a wide angle, your subject is tiny in the frame, so you MOVE way closer to have the fill the shot, and THAT is what changes the perspective and look. On the other hand, when you put a zoom lens on you can't even capture the entire person in the portrait, so you MOVE further away, and once again THAT changes the perspective.
But in the case of a dual lens camera taking both photos at once, they will have the exact same perspective and the subject will look identical in both images***. The only difference is that (assuming equal resolution and quality in both lenses/sensors) the wide angle will have a bigger field of view whlie the telephoto will have more detail in the central portion of the view
***other than any slight differences from optical distortion in the lens, but that's not the same thing as perspective...distortion can be both eliminated through better quality lenses, as well as accurately corrected in software via building a profile of the lens and applying the reverse transformation.
Indeed, and actually Camel can also be used to show that the complaint in this story is actually mostly a non-issue.
https://camelcamelcamel.com/re...
The complained about the price spiking right before prime day. However if you look at that product's history, you can see it also has a history of the price spiking once a month for the last 5 months. Granted all of those spikes were in the $15-$16 range, while the pre-prime-day spike was at $19. So it may have been a bit more extreme, but it's not particularly unusual. And I looked up a lot of things on prime day through camel and I didn't see any suspicious pricing claims on anything I looked up.
I think the story here is more about Jason Jacobs, founder of Remodeez, a small company that is trying to drum up sales for it's footware deoderizer by starting some BS story about Amazon to catapult themselves into national media attention