Howzabout you start by changing both the title and text to correctly state that it's Charles Carreon the private citizen who happens to be a lawyer who is suing The Oatmeal, and not Charles Carreon the lawyer acting on behalf of client FunnyJunk? TFA does not report that FunnyJunk is suing Inman, whether that happens eventually or not. Hell, I didn't even have to read your summary or TFA to know the title was misleading.
Boy, you musta had one helluva drunken debauched weekend. I've never seen you produce text this incoherent and just plain wrong here before (though I'm sure someone else who has been obsessively scrutinizing you for years will now pop in and correct me with Slashdot citations).
I don't think his goal is to get others to repeat the term; I don't think he's depending upon that at all. Notice that he's not merely mentioning the name, he associates a URL with EVERY SINGLE mention of it. I think doing that, buried in seemingly legitimate text at a highly ranked site(s) (Slashdot ain't the only place he's doing this) and the effect that has on Google and Bing is his goal. Simply mentioning the name alone probably does little if anything. Doesn't it water-down the effectiveness of his SEO goal when I deliberately associate the term with an undesirable URL? That was my goal, not to play his game but to rain it out.
MyCleanPC is a horrid piece of fraudulent software that infected my parents' computer and caused their house to burn down with them in it. MyCleanPC is fraudware that should be investigated by the FTC, FBI, and Department of Justice. I recommend that you never even visit the MyCleanPC website. I recommend that if you made the mistake of installing MyCleanPC that you take the infected computer outside and beat it with a hammer until the pieces left are each small enough to fit in a thimble. Do not recommend MyCleanPC to anyone you know unless you want them to hate you.
It sounds like maybe Microsoft's internal priesthood have finally gained a firm upper hand and are now letting their identity delusions fully dictate pricing decisions. So is this Windows for The Faithful now, and paying up to own a copy is really a tithe to the Church of Redmond? Yeah... I think I'll stick with secularism. When Windows 7 runs off the rails I hope I'll finally be prepped to make the switch to something else. I'll be damned if I'm doing Unity, but I'm sure as hell not doin' Metro either!
I did some rummaging and refreshed my memory: the Realistics I have are AKG K250 cans. Perhaps I can refurb the cushions. They didn't cause trouble when I first bought them, so the pain is caused now by (a) dilapidated cushions and/or (b) my ears continuing to grow and just getting too Dumbo-like to fit. It's probably (b), because all the other circumaural set I've bought were painful right from the start. *sigh* I guess I need to train myself to be able to flap these suckers so I can get some practical benefit from them.
I have some Realistic branded cans from the early 90s that were (are) actually a fairly legendary AKG model rebranded. It must be pretty common. Maybe in some instances there's differences in materials used, but in the Realistic case AFAIK they're identical aside from the aluminum badge on the cups.
Those Koss are actually quite different: diaphragm size. The Philips ones - okay, looking for a model number finally - model SHS3200 have a much smaller earbud-class diaphragm. I might find a larger "earhook" style like yours comfortable, but I'm very wary they'd hurt as much as regular cans.
The 240Ms looks a lot like the Realistic-branded cans that I bought in the early 90s, with a single active and six passive diaphragms. I loved those cans and still do, but I can't wear them now for any length of time because of physical pain to my ears.
I bought a nice pair of AKG earbuds a couple years ago. AKG has a reputation for quality, and many years before I'd bought a Realistic-branded set of AKG circumaural headphones that were awesome. Alas I couldn't enjoy them any more because they caused me physical pain, from pressure and bruising of cartilage, because my ears had grown too large (ears keep growing)... or something. I'd bought several other circumaural brands, thinking I could find one that didn't hurt, but they ALL caused pain after perhaps a half hour. So in desperation I bought the earbuds.
They had really great sound, excellent response, but I couldn't use them: any jaw or body movement, or vibration or movement of the attached cords, was strongly audible. This vibrational noise(?) was so strong it made enjoyment of the intended audio impossible. I seem to have the symptoms of what is called hyperacusis, so perhaps that extra sensitivity is the cause for me. Do earbuds cause the same problem for most other people? I haven't seen widespread complaints, and their wild popularity seems to suggest otherwise.
My last sonic line of defense has been the discovery of a Philips-branded earphone that isn't an earbud but rather hooks loosely over the outside of the ear and rests just "at" the ear canal, rather than inside it. They're not the greatest audio quality, BUT they cause me no physical pain at all and so can be worn for extended periods without the conscious distraction of pain. I have two sets now, and will probably wind up buying more as backups just in case Philips decides to stop production.
TFA, at least, doesn't even mention segmented sleep or how that might alter this alleged dynamic. Since there seems to be irrefutable evidence that the Industrial Age is the specific cause of this change in our sleep patterns and a prescriptive (if subconscious) effort to pigeonhole our sleep into one neat temporal compartment, why do these supposed experts continue to promote the Industrial Age myth of a single eight-hour sleep cycle? Why don't they consider the possibility that it might be our efforts as a civilization to force our sleep patterns into a single tightly regimented box that is causing the increased risk of stroke and other problems?
Now your argument has devolved to bullshit. You certainly do hate consumers, don't you? Do you work in an Apple store? You're not what I'd classify as impartial.
You haven't considered other motivations here. What's the principle motivation for an owner of one of these locked-down devices to modify it? Obviously, it's because the device as sold has shortcomings that (a) weren't obvious at the time of sale and (b) are so galling as to be intolerable. There will be "overclocker" mentality edge cases where the motivation is simply to push an envelope, but that is not the motivation of the majority that would do it.
Now, given that a measurable fraction of consumers are being driven to do this, it begs the further question: why did the manufacturers fail to anticipate this and design the device to accommodate these people? Assuming the manufacturer was in fact aware and deliberately chose to limit the design, is the lock-down then intended specifically to thwart the likely result that some people would want to correct the shortcomings?
This issue is more complex than your argument implies, and the motivations of the manufacturers not necessarily nearly so noble as you suggest. In at least some of these cases the 'evil' goes way beyond simply not wanting to be stuck with cleaning up a consumer's mess. Cory Doctorow has publicized a "war on general purpose computing", and this is a part of it. The "cloud" and "app stores" are other facets of that war.
This is bullshit. A reasoned argument could be made that it's anything but non-obvious, and even if such a patent has reason to exist it shouldn't belong to Apple, it should belong to the guy who crafted the first wedge shaped keyboard. The reason why any laptop is shaped like a wedge is the EXACT same reason that keyboards would be shaped like a wedge: typing ergonomics.
Of course the performance bump had nothing at all to do with you removing all your TrueCrypted porn and finally freeing up more than 1% of the drive....
It's both. Handy, huh? Teaching kids about horticulture and how things grow has a synergy with science ed and general appreciation for science, and showing kids how chemical reactions can blow stuff up is a nice demonstration. Of course I was also jabbing at the stereotype mentality of parents who choose to homeschool.:-)
They don't look cheap nor cheesy to me. The buttons in the demos simply don't look like keys on a keyboard, which is apparently the comparison you are making. The buttons demonstrated may not be the only form they can take. Tactus has a photo of a "remote" that appears to have squared angular buttons. Regardless, you are dismissing the primary reason for having the pseudo-buttons in favor of a rather shallow and pretentious one based on appearance. The purpose of the buttons isn't to look slick, it's to provide the otherwise absent tactile response.
It's entertainingly foolish that people and companies are still forking over wads of cash for these phony patches of cyber-real-estate. The presence of Google and other search engines essentially negates the value of needing or having a domain that is directly descriptive of the endeavor, not completely but substantially. If the various search engines' crawlers can regularly find your site and its motive is well defined, regardless of whether the domain name reflects that, then your site will appear at or near the top of the rankings. I suppose whoever owns that perfectly descriptive domain might appear above you if their motive is just as well defined otherwise, but is it worth the continued obsession with domains? All it would take to completely negate the value of domains would be for search engines to deprecate the descriptive significance of them in their search algorithms.
Slashdot Mirror
Howzabout you start by changing both the title and text to correctly state that it's Charles Carreon the private citizen who happens to be a lawyer who is suing The Oatmeal, and not Charles Carreon the lawyer acting on behalf of client FunnyJunk? TFA does not report that FunnyJunk is suing Inman, whether that happens eventually or not. Hell, I didn't even have to read your summary or TFA to know the title was misleading.
Boy, you musta had one helluva drunken debauched weekend. I've never seen you produce text this incoherent and just plain wrong here before (though I'm sure someone else who has been obsessively scrutinizing you for years will now pop in and correct me with Slashdot citations).
Damn, beat me to it....
I don't think his goal is to get others to repeat the term; I don't think he's depending upon that at all. Notice that he's not merely mentioning the name, he associates a URL with EVERY SINGLE mention of it. I think doing that, buried in seemingly legitimate text at a highly ranked site(s) (Slashdot ain't the only place he's doing this) and the effect that has on Google and Bing is his goal. Simply mentioning the name alone probably does little if anything. Doesn't it water-down the effectiveness of his SEO goal when I deliberately associate the term with an undesirable URL? That was my goal, not to play his game but to rain it out.
MyCleanPC is a horrid piece of fraudulent software that infected my parents' computer and caused their house to burn down with them in it. MyCleanPC is fraudware that should be investigated by the FTC, FBI, and Department of Justice. I recommend that you never even visit the MyCleanPC website. I recommend that if you made the mistake of installing MyCleanPC that you take the infected computer outside and beat it with a hammer until the pieces left are each small enough to fit in a thimble. Do not recommend MyCleanPC to anyone you know unless you want them to hate you.
The wires are transparent conductive polymer traces on the backside of the glass, silly! Are you new here?
It sounds like maybe Microsoft's internal priesthood have finally gained a firm upper hand and are now letting their identity delusions fully dictate pricing decisions. So is this Windows for The Faithful now, and paying up to own a copy is really a tithe to the Church of Redmond? Yeah... I think I'll stick with secularism. When Windows 7 runs off the rails I hope I'll finally be prepped to make the switch to something else. I'll be damned if I'm doing Unity, but I'm sure as hell not doin' Metro either!
I did some rummaging and refreshed my memory: the Realistics I have are AKG K250 cans. Perhaps I can refurb the cushions. They didn't cause trouble when I first bought them, so the pain is caused now by (a) dilapidated cushions and/or (b) my ears continuing to grow and just getting too Dumbo-like to fit. It's probably (b), because all the other circumaural set I've bought were painful right from the start. *sigh* I guess I need to train myself to be able to flap these suckers so I can get some practical benefit from them.
I have some Realistic branded cans from the early 90s that were (are) actually a fairly legendary AKG model rebranded. It must be pretty common. Maybe in some instances there's differences in materials used, but in the Realistic case AFAIK they're identical aside from the aluminum badge on the cups.
Those Koss are actually quite different: diaphragm size. The Philips ones - okay, looking for a model number finally - model SHS3200 have a much smaller earbud-class diaphragm. I might find a larger "earhook" style like yours comfortable, but I'm very wary they'd hurt as much as regular cans.
The Kicker HP541 seems to be identical to the $23 Monoprice 8323. It looks to be a re-brand, but that's a huge price drop.
The 240Ms looks a lot like the Realistic-branded cans that I bought in the early 90s, with a single active and six passive diaphragms. I loved those cans and still do, but I can't wear them now for any length of time because of physical pain to my ears.
I bought a nice pair of AKG earbuds a couple years ago. AKG has a reputation for quality, and many years before I'd bought a Realistic-branded set of AKG circumaural headphones that were awesome. Alas I couldn't enjoy them any more because they caused me physical pain, from pressure and bruising of cartilage, because my ears had grown too large (ears keep growing)... or something. I'd bought several other circumaural brands, thinking I could find one that didn't hurt, but they ALL caused pain after perhaps a half hour. So in desperation I bought the earbuds.
They had really great sound, excellent response, but I couldn't use them: any jaw or body movement, or vibration or movement of the attached cords, was strongly audible. This vibrational noise(?) was so strong it made enjoyment of the intended audio impossible. I seem to have the symptoms of what is called hyperacusis, so perhaps that extra sensitivity is the cause for me. Do earbuds cause the same problem for most other people? I haven't seen widespread complaints, and their wild popularity seems to suggest otherwise.
My last sonic line of defense has been the discovery of a Philips-branded earphone that isn't an earbud but rather hooks loosely over the outside of the ear and rests just "at" the ear canal, rather than inside it. They're not the greatest audio quality, BUT they cause me no physical pain at all and so can be worn for extended periods without the conscious distraction of pain. I have two sets now, and will probably wind up buying more as backups just in case Philips decides to stop production.
Anyone need a barely used set of AKG earbuds...?
TFA, at least, doesn't even mention segmented sleep or how that might alter this alleged dynamic. Since there seems to be irrefutable evidence that the Industrial Age is the specific cause of this change in our sleep patterns and a prescriptive (if subconscious) effort to pigeonhole our sleep into one neat temporal compartment, why do these supposed experts continue to promote the Industrial Age myth of a single eight-hour sleep cycle? Why don't they consider the possibility that it might be our efforts as a civilization to force our sleep patterns into a single tightly regimented box that is causing the increased risk of stroke and other problems?
air doesn't give feedback when struck.
Tell that to all the guys who practice air guitar!
Now your argument has devolved to bullshit. You certainly do hate consumers, don't you? Do you work in an Apple store? You're not what I'd classify as impartial.
You haven't considered other motivations here. What's the principle motivation for an owner of one of these locked-down devices to modify it? Obviously, it's because the device as sold has shortcomings that (a) weren't obvious at the time of sale and (b) are so galling as to be intolerable. There will be "overclocker" mentality edge cases where the motivation is simply to push an envelope, but that is not the motivation of the majority that would do it.
Now, given that a measurable fraction of consumers are being driven to do this, it begs the further question: why did the manufacturers fail to anticipate this and design the device to accommodate these people? Assuming the manufacturer was in fact aware and deliberately chose to limit the design, is the lock-down then intended specifically to thwart the likely result that some people would want to correct the shortcomings?
This issue is more complex than your argument implies, and the motivations of the manufacturers not necessarily nearly so noble as you suggest. In at least some of these cases the 'evil' goes way beyond simply not wanting to be stuck with cleaning up a consumer's mess. Cory Doctorow has publicized a "war on general purpose computing", and this is a part of it. The "cloud" and "app stores" are other facets of that war.
This is bullshit. A reasoned argument could be made that it's anything but non-obvious, and even if such a patent has reason to exist it shouldn't belong to Apple, it should belong to the guy who crafted the first wedge shaped keyboard. The reason why any laptop is shaped like a wedge is the EXACT same reason that keyboards would be shaped like a wedge: typing ergonomics.
With eyes blurry from insomnia the title appeared to be "London Tube Steaks Finally Get Wi-Fi". That woke me up.
Of course the performance bump had nothing at all to do with you removing all your TrueCrypted porn and finally freeing up more than 1% of the drive....
Yeah, that's the ticket.
It's both. Handy, huh? Teaching kids about horticulture and how things grow has a synergy with science ed and general appreciation for science, and showing kids how chemical reactions can blow stuff up is a nice demonstration. Of course I was also jabbing at the stereotype mentality of parents who choose to homeschool. :-)
Teach them what can be made with fertilizer.
From a continental bullshit-powered basement computer!
FTFY
They don't look cheap nor cheesy to me. The buttons in the demos simply don't look like keys on a keyboard, which is apparently the comparison you are making. The buttons demonstrated may not be the only form they can take. Tactus has a photo of a "remote" that appears to have squared angular buttons. Regardless, you are dismissing the primary reason for having the pseudo-buttons in favor of a rather shallow and pretentious one based on appearance. The purpose of the buttons isn't to look slick, it's to provide the otherwise absent tactile response.
It's entertainingly foolish that people and companies are still forking over wads of cash for these phony patches of cyber-real-estate. The presence of Google and other search engines essentially negates the value of needing or having a domain that is directly descriptive of the endeavor, not completely but substantially. If the various search engines' crawlers can regularly find your site and its motive is well defined, regardless of whether the domain name reflects that, then your site will appear at or near the top of the rankings. I suppose whoever owns that perfectly descriptive domain might appear above you if their motive is just as well defined otherwise, but is it worth the continued obsession with domains? All it would take to completely negate the value of domains would be for search engines to deprecate the descriptive significance of them in their search algorithms.