No, fake as in the blog that posted it photoshopped the original ad as ran in magazines. As in this article is a hit piece. RL did not photoshop it, whoever submitted it to photoshop disasters photoshopped it as an attack on Ralph Lauren. That's not fair use.
Yes, that runs afoul of the regulations. Specifically listed as an example, are magazines who receive sponsorship (ads) or free samples. Even with no explicit request for preferential treatment, there is the understanding that they are paying you money, and if you start giving them bad reviews, they will take that money elsewhere. The regulations say that if it's a review, as in an actual review, then you have to disclose any sponsorships or freebies. If the game you reviewed was given to you to review for free, even without the explicit statement that it better be good, then you have to say so. The key is an undisclosed conflict of interest. AMD gave me a free shirt just for going to their site, once. I don't have to disclose that whenever I mention that I use a Radeon Card. Because there's no conflict of interest, I'm not under the impression that they're watching my Slashdot account, and will give me more shirts if I talk their stuff up.
No, you don't need anything. The rules apply if you are posting a sponsored endorsement, only. Example: Nintendo sends some shovelware to a gaming magazine. The magazine has to have a note that the games they're reviewing were provided free of charge. They tend to do so anyways. Tom's Hardware makes it clear that their cards and chips are all sent to them for free. In this case, it applies even if Nintendo makes no note that they want a positive review. It's implied that if they give bad reviews, they might not receive more swag. Plus, getting it for free makes you like it more. I thought Doom3 was OK, but had I bought it for $80 on release, I would have given it 1/10. If you're not a dedicated review site, it has to be a bit more explicit than that. If Nintendo sent DS systems to random people, and those people went around posting how awesome the DS is, that would be fine, because Nintendo didn't ask them to do it, and has no way of knowing if they are doing it. They only need to disclose if they're being paid to do it explicitly, as in they go in, Nintento checks up on their blogs and tweets and Amazon.com reviews, etc. THen they have to disclose. If they are getting paid/gifted with no expectation of a good word, and no review, that's fine. It would never happen though, because who gives people money for nothing, just hoping they'll "get the picture" and start astroturfing. And yeah, it requires judgment, because the "agreement" might be under the table.
Anyways, with that in mind, your wife would have to be explicitly paid by the friend, in order to put the link there. Since it's not a review, and your wife is not reviewing free samples of the product/service, it must be an explicit sponsorship. It's all about conflict of interest. Absent an understanding that your wife won't get a Christmas gift unless her link using sufficiently glowing language, there's nothing wrong with it.
I can tell you right now my wife will neither remove the link, nor post a disclaimer.
Good luck with that, FTC! I pity the agent who has to deal with her over this issue. It'll be the most painful 11 grand ever collected.
Hmmm, can't be that good of a friend, if your wife would fight with such tenacity, to avoid calling her a friend publicly;)
They don't allow anybody to sync. What they "allow" by not specifically forbidding, is access to the iTunes library. You can read playlists and such from it. If you want to sync, you need to write your own software to do it, which some companies have. However, only non-DRMd files can be transfered in this way. If you have a song you bought on iTunes that is DRM'd, you cannot sync it except through iTunes, which will only connect to Apple hardware.
No, all new *peripherals* have to have 64 bit drivers or they can't say they will work with Windows 7, because they WON'T work with all versions of Windows 7...
Perhaps you didn't read the summary, where it says it is used by mixing it in with a standard chemo drug? They only briefly say that maybe it could also be used as a preventative treatment. The big thing was a dramatic increase to the effectiveness of chemotherapy.
It doesn't have to be a monopoly. It just has to make an exclusive dealing situation arise that would substantially harm the competition in the area. For example, if AMD made it so their ATI cards only work with AMD CPUs, that is anti-competitive. Even though neither ATI cards nor AMD CPUs are even the dominant seller, let alone monopolies. Because the decision to buy an ATI card would force you into buying an AMD chip, and so would substantially alter sales of said CPUs. On the other hand, this wouldn't alter sales of ATI cards at all, because who on earth would decide to spend twice as much money, when they can just get an NVidia and have it do both at nearly the same speed. If they were set on having two cards, they could SLI two NVidias and be faster than any other solution, too. Anyways, this is all "allegedly". Even if this is actually happening, it's more likely a bug in their drivers, since they didn't expect people to put an ATI card in for the primary display, and then an nVidia to sit there idling and using a couple of its clock cycles on physics every once in a while.
Some cardiologists think somewhat the same thing, that without the pulse, blood can't reach the organs. But they're heart guys, of course they think the heart is the most important thing in the world. And they're not basing it on science, they're basing it on "Seems to me that..." The circulatory specialists, on the other hand, say that's untrue, blood flows just fine through all the vessels regardless of whether its a pulsed pressure, or constant pressure. At least, they're saying that they're not seeing any organ damage from oxygen starvation in any of their animal trials. As to your other point, it's not supposed to be better than a real heart, or even as good as a real heart. It's supposed to be better than sitting on life-support waiting on a transplant, not getting one in time (or not being allowed on the transplant list at all), and dying.
My highschool called it "Infotechnology," and didn't teach MS crap, it taught programming (if pascal) and HTML. The course that taught about Word and Excel and Powerpoint was called "Keyboarding and Business Computing."
Look, this is benchmarking. You need to know your lingo. Take 3D benchmarking. Even though most monitors will have your FPS capped at 60 Hz, if one card gives you 250 FPS and the other only gave you 240 FPS, you say that the new card "absolutely destroys the competition," for example. Anything even partially outside the error bars translates into at least a "solid thrashing."
Re:People are getting fatter from diet foods?
on
The Fresca Rebellion
·
· Score: 1
Does soda stimulate the appetite?
Yes, RTFA. Diet pop tastes sweet, your body thinks you just slammed back 1 L of pure sugar water, so it makes a bunch of insulin to break down all those sugars. But they never arrive, since it was artificial sweetener you tastes. All that insulin quickly translates into a hunger for sugars and starch. So yes, it makes you reach for that bag of chips.
The wonderful thing about artificial sweetener is that it's sweet. The thing about your body is, it's not magic. It tastes sweet, it starts up insulin production in anticipation of all that sugar you just guzzled. But, there's pretty much no sugar for it to break down. That's a bad thing to happen, high insulin levels with 0 sugar in your system. Your body doesn't like that. It's why you should never have a diet pop on its own. That part I knew from years and years ago. The new research I just saw recently, is that repeated abuse of your insulin in this way makes your body learn that sweetness isn't a good indicator of sugar level. In other words, your body starts making you eat more, because just because it tastes like high energy food, your body doesn't know anymore, so just eat eat eat, to be sure. But that's rats. The thing about people is that we are introspective. We know how much we eat, without relying on our body to tell us. So yeah, if you're thinking about it, you won't eat any more. If you're not, you'll be like "Man I'm still hungry, better have another slice."
Using an apostrophe to pluralize a number, acronym, or capital letter is a style choice, and perfectly acceptable, even if some people dislike it. Using an apostrophe to pluralize a lower case letter is mandatory, as is using it to pluralize capital letters in certain situations. For example "As are the highest grade" is flat out wrong, because it's confusing and also stupid. I dislike using "As" instead of "A's" anywhere, because it still looks bad, even if the capitalization isn't really ambigious when it isn't at the start of a sentence. Similarly, it is never acceptable to say "Mind your ps and qs." "ISP's" is acceptable, even if you don't like it. Especially in modern times, where people have started putting lower case letters into acronyms "GImP" for example. Without an apostrphe, you cannot distinguish from an acrynym ending in a lower case s, and one where the s is pluralizing it! Finally, "In the 1990's" instead of "In the 1990s" is also an acceptable style choice, and not incorrect.
My Katana has a menu option "Do not roam into foreign countries". Sounds like the iPhone is extremely stupid and roams to the nearest tower, even if it can still get a non-roaming signal. Don't blame AT&T, unless they made Apple make it behave that way...Funny story, if you're near the breakwater in Victoria, BC, it'll often think you're in Seattle, and you'll get a text message "Welcome to the USA!" a nice helpful reminder that you are under surveillance:) Too bad it's wrong and I didn't actually cross the damn border...
I guess you never let a piece of white bread around long enough for it to get moldy. Try taking it out of the plastic bag and putting it in a dark place... Fungus eat basically anything with carbohydrates. There are some nutritionists who think whole grain wheat is bad for you and that it induces rickets in growing children by neutralizing necessary nutrients. Leavened bread also is usually enriched with folic acid while whole grain bread is not. I personally think whole grain bread tastes terrible, gives me stomachache, and do not care a damn about whole grains. Wheat has been genetically selected by mankind since the dawn of agriculture. It is hardly "natural". It is better to eat it than to starve though.
You must have severely misheard. Rickets are caused by Vitamin D deficiency. Being obssessed with macrobiotics can cause it. Not because whole wheat flour destroys Vitamin D. That's the stupidist thing I've ever heard, it has more of every kind of vitamin, and just as much vitamin D, and doesn't magically nuke vitamins. Absurd. No, it's because people into that bullshit hate milk (government fortified with vitamin D) and meat and eggs (only major natural sources), and they slather on sunscreen and don't let their kids in the sun at all, even with sunscreen (only way your body can make it is UV light). And worst case scenario, they, like you, think wheat is bad for you, so they stay the hell away from wheat, which doesn't contain vitamin D naturally, but like milk, is rammed full of it by government mandates. Same problem with people obsessed over sea-salt. It's not iodized, and if they're not eating anything salted with iodized salt, they're in deep trouble, especially if they're eating food grown in iodine poor soils.
As for leavened...yeah, yeast adds folic acid to your bread. What the hell does that have to do with white bread? Nothing. Unleavened bread is a brick, because it doesn't RISE, it's not used for the same things, it sucks to make a sandwich with. Plus, most of the folic acid comes from the fact that millers are required to fortify cereals and grains with folic acid anyways, so even unleavened bread contains almost as much as leavened bread.
In closing...whole wheat flour is better in every single way, and contains way more nutrients, and certainly doesn't have magical powers to make vitamins blow up.
Did you read the summary? They are telling kids it is illegal to put a CD and play it when friends are over, because your friends don't have a license, so that is stealing.
You're also forgetting that sore joints CAN be treated by realigning said joints. Obviously, stretching and cracking your back can potentially cure back problems, depending on why exactly your back was sore. And yeah, duh, its way better than a pain pill, in the same way as pulling the rusted nail out of your foot is better than taking a pill, for certain nail-stepping-on related forms of foot pain. You seem to misunderstand what these charlitans claim. They claim it cures everything. In the UK where nothing prevents fraudulent advertisements, they claim that a proper spine realignment will cure AIDS or cancer. They're fraudsters. Meanwhile, though people HATE scientists with a passion, actual tests put it at mostly bullshit, but better than acupuncture. Naturally, you can't do a double blind test, you kinda know if you're being adjusted or taking a sugar pill, and even if you get a doctor to give you a fake adjustment just by pulling and stretching, that's only single blind;)
Any good LED bulb should dim fine. They don't have to be designed for it, they just have to not be crappy. A diode only lets electricity flow in one direction through it. So, an LED needs DC juice. You can just plug in AC, but it will only be lit up when the AC power is flowing the correct way, otherwise its not lit up. So, the simplest solution is a diode rectifier. You take your "positive" and "negative" wire, and attach two normal diodes to them, both with their current flow pointed to the "in" side of your LED bulb. Then you do the same thing again with two more normal didoes pointing "out" from the "out" end of the LED bulb. There. No short because diodes are one-way streets. When AC is flowing one way, a complete circuit going the right way through the load. When it reverses, still a complete circuit, going the right way through the load. Four sufficiently rated non-light-emitting diodes are dirt cheap, and double the brightness of your bulb. But, AC is a sine wave. Most of the time you won't have "full power" through your rectifier. That will make it pulse. Better than the flickering you get without a rectifier, but still not as solid as you'd want. So, throw some capacitors at that bitch. Now you have the same average brightness, but its much more steady. I can't imagine it adds an appreciable amount to the cost of the device, but it makes the light output outstandingly superior.
The long and the short is: Dimmers work by chopping off chunks of the AC sine wave. CFL ballasts hate that with a passion, they want a steady juice supply. Incandescents don't care. It makes them flicker, but since there is a big time delay between cutting power, and the filament not glowing anymore, it's not noticeable. A crappy LED would flicker like a mofo when dimmed. An LED with a diode rectifier would flicker also, but twice as fast so it would be less noticeable. An LED with a diode rectifier plus capacitor wouldn't flicker at all. Or at least, wouldn't flicker until its turned down really low and the capacitors fully discharge between AC peaks. Win/win. Demand capacitors for all your LED needs.
White LEDs are actually blue/ultraviolet LEDs that have a white phosphor coating, sort of like in a fluorescent tube. Just because a green LED on a keyboard doesn't fade, doesn't mean that the phosphor coating works similarly.
I'll second this observation. My CAPS is the brightest, SCROLL is the darkest, NUM in the middle. And they're close, its nowhere near "twice" as bright. This NUMLOCK has been on for years straight I figure. The difference in brightness is more than likely caused more by the fact that the "A" lets more light through than the "9" for the numlock, and both let well more in than the little down arrow for the scroll lock.
Slashdot Mirror
No, fake as in the blog that posted it photoshopped the original ad as ran in magazines. As in this article is a hit piece. RL did not photoshop it, whoever submitted it to photoshop disasters photoshopped it as an attack on Ralph Lauren. That's not fair use.
Yes, that runs afoul of the regulations. Specifically listed as an example, are magazines who receive sponsorship (ads) or free samples. Even with no explicit request for preferential treatment, there is the understanding that they are paying you money, and if you start giving them bad reviews, they will take that money elsewhere. The regulations say that if it's a review, as in an actual review, then you have to disclose any sponsorships or freebies. If the game you reviewed was given to you to review for free, even without the explicit statement that it better be good, then you have to say so. The key is an undisclosed conflict of interest. AMD gave me a free shirt just for going to their site, once. I don't have to disclose that whenever I mention that I use a Radeon Card. Because there's no conflict of interest, I'm not under the impression that they're watching my Slashdot account, and will give me more shirts if I talk their stuff up.
No, you don't need anything. The rules apply if you are posting a sponsored endorsement, only. Example: Nintendo sends some shovelware to a gaming magazine. The magazine has to have a note that the games they're reviewing were provided free of charge. They tend to do so anyways. Tom's Hardware makes it clear that their cards and chips are all sent to them for free. In this case, it applies even if Nintendo makes no note that they want a positive review. It's implied that if they give bad reviews, they might not receive more swag. Plus, getting it for free makes you like it more. I thought Doom3 was OK, but had I bought it for $80 on release, I would have given it 1/10. If you're not a dedicated review site, it has to be a bit more explicit than that. If Nintendo sent DS systems to random people, and those people went around posting how awesome the DS is, that would be fine, because Nintendo didn't ask them to do it, and has no way of knowing if they are doing it. They only need to disclose if they're being paid to do it explicitly, as in they go in, Nintento checks up on their blogs and tweets and Amazon.com reviews, etc. THen they have to disclose. If they are getting paid/gifted with no expectation of a good word, and no review, that's fine. It would never happen though, because who gives people money for nothing, just hoping they'll "get the picture" and start astroturfing. And yeah, it requires judgment, because the "agreement" might be under the table.
Anyways, with that in mind, your wife would have to be explicitly paid by the friend, in order to put the link there. Since it's not a review, and your wife is not reviewing free samples of the product/service, it must be an explicit sponsorship. It's all about conflict of interest. Absent an understanding that your wife won't get a Christmas gift unless her link using sufficiently glowing language, there's nothing wrong with it.
Hmmm, can't be that good of a friend, if your wife would fight with such tenacity, to avoid calling her a friend publicly ;)
They don't allow anybody to sync. What they "allow" by not specifically forbidding, is access to the iTunes library. You can read playlists and such from it. If you want to sync, you need to write your own software to do it, which some companies have. However, only non-DRMd files can be transfered in this way. If you have a song you bought on iTunes that is DRM'd, you cannot sync it except through iTunes, which will only connect to Apple hardware.
No, all new *peripherals* have to have 64 bit drivers or they can't say they will work with Windows 7, because they WON'T work with all versions of Windows 7...
Perhaps you didn't read the summary, where it says it is used by mixing it in with a standard chemo drug? They only briefly say that maybe it could also be used as a preventative treatment. The big thing was a dramatic increase to the effectiveness of chemotherapy.
I'm not sure people have a good feel of how hot 2600 K is, either ;)
It doesn't have to be a monopoly. It just has to make an exclusive dealing situation arise that would substantially harm the competition in the area. For example, if AMD made it so their ATI cards only work with AMD CPUs, that is anti-competitive. Even though neither ATI cards nor AMD CPUs are even the dominant seller, let alone monopolies. Because the decision to buy an ATI card would force you into buying an AMD chip, and so would substantially alter sales of said CPUs. On the other hand, this wouldn't alter sales of ATI cards at all, because who on earth would decide to spend twice as much money, when they can just get an NVidia and have it do both at nearly the same speed. If they were set on having two cards, they could SLI two NVidias and be faster than any other solution, too. Anyways, this is all "allegedly". Even if this is actually happening, it's more likely a bug in their drivers, since they didn't expect people to put an ATI card in for the primary display, and then an nVidia to sit there idling and using a couple of its clock cycles on physics every once in a while.
Some cardiologists think somewhat the same thing, that without the pulse, blood can't reach the organs. But they're heart guys, of course they think the heart is the most important thing in the world. And they're not basing it on science, they're basing it on "Seems to me that..." The circulatory specialists, on the other hand, say that's untrue, blood flows just fine through all the vessels regardless of whether its a pulsed pressure, or constant pressure. At least, they're saying that they're not seeing any organ damage from oxygen starvation in any of their animal trials. As to your other point, it's not supposed to be better than a real heart, or even as good as a real heart. It's supposed to be better than sitting on life-support waiting on a transplant, not getting one in time (or not being allowed on the transplant list at all), and dying.
"A new high efficiency solar panel? That's great, but why not just use cold fusion?"
My highschool called it "Infotechnology," and didn't teach MS crap, it taught programming (if pascal) and HTML. The course that taught about Word and Excel and Powerpoint was called "Keyboarding and Business Computing."
What happens if your phone dies but you forgot the charger at home? ;)
Just write it on a sticky note and stick it to your monitor. Problem solved!
Look, this is benchmarking. You need to know your lingo. Take 3D benchmarking. Even though most monitors will have your FPS capped at 60 Hz, if one card gives you 250 FPS and the other only gave you 240 FPS, you say that the new card "absolutely destroys the competition," for example. Anything even partially outside the error bars translates into at least a "solid thrashing."
Yes, RTFA. Diet pop tastes sweet, your body thinks you just slammed back 1 L of pure sugar water, so it makes a bunch of insulin to break down all those sugars. But they never arrive, since it was artificial sweetener you tastes. All that insulin quickly translates into a hunger for sugars and starch. So yes, it makes you reach for that bag of chips.
The wonderful thing about artificial sweetener is that it's sweet. The thing about your body is, it's not magic. It tastes sweet, it starts up insulin production in anticipation of all that sugar you just guzzled. But, there's pretty much no sugar for it to break down. That's a bad thing to happen, high insulin levels with 0 sugar in your system. Your body doesn't like that. It's why you should never have a diet pop on its own. That part I knew from years and years ago. The new research I just saw recently, is that repeated abuse of your insulin in this way makes your body learn that sweetness isn't a good indicator of sugar level. In other words, your body starts making you eat more, because just because it tastes like high energy food, your body doesn't know anymore, so just eat eat eat, to be sure. But that's rats. The thing about people is that we are introspective. We know how much we eat, without relying on our body to tell us. So yeah, if you're thinking about it, you won't eat any more. If you're not, you'll be like "Man I'm still hungry, better have another slice."
Using an apostrophe to pluralize a number, acronym, or capital letter is a style choice, and perfectly acceptable, even if some people dislike it. Using an apostrophe to pluralize a lower case letter is mandatory, as is using it to pluralize capital letters in certain situations. For example "As are the highest grade" is flat out wrong, because it's confusing and also stupid. I dislike using "As" instead of "A's" anywhere, because it still looks bad, even if the capitalization isn't really ambigious when it isn't at the start of a sentence. Similarly, it is never acceptable to say "Mind your ps and qs." "ISP's" is acceptable, even if you don't like it. Especially in modern times, where people have started putting lower case letters into acronyms "GImP" for example. Without an apostrphe, you cannot distinguish from an acrynym ending in a lower case s, and one where the s is pluralizing it! Finally, "In the 1990's" instead of "In the 1990s" is also an acceptable style choice, and not incorrect.
My Katana has a menu option "Do not roam into foreign countries". Sounds like the iPhone is extremely stupid and roams to the nearest tower, even if it can still get a non-roaming signal. Don't blame AT&T, unless they made Apple make it behave that way...Funny story, if you're near the breakwater in Victoria, BC, it'll often think you're in Seattle, and you'll get a text message "Welcome to the USA!" a nice helpful reminder that you are under surveillance :) Too bad it's wrong and I didn't actually cross the damn border...
You must have severely misheard. Rickets are caused by Vitamin D deficiency. Being obssessed with macrobiotics can cause it. Not because whole wheat flour destroys Vitamin D. That's the stupidist thing I've ever heard, it has more of every kind of vitamin, and just as much vitamin D, and doesn't magically nuke vitamins. Absurd. No, it's because people into that bullshit hate milk (government fortified with vitamin D) and meat and eggs (only major natural sources), and they slather on sunscreen and don't let their kids in the sun at all, even with sunscreen (only way your body can make it is UV light). And worst case scenario, they, like you, think wheat is bad for you, so they stay the hell away from wheat, which doesn't contain vitamin D naturally, but like milk, is rammed full of it by government mandates. Same problem with people obsessed over sea-salt. It's not iodized, and if they're not eating anything salted with iodized salt, they're in deep trouble, especially if they're eating food grown in iodine poor soils.
As for leavened...yeah, yeast adds folic acid to your bread. What the hell does that have to do with white bread? Nothing. Unleavened bread is a brick, because it doesn't RISE, it's not used for the same things, it sucks to make a sandwich with. Plus, most of the folic acid comes from the fact that millers are required to fortify cereals and grains with folic acid anyways, so even unleavened bread contains almost as much as leavened bread.
In closing...whole wheat flour is better in every single way, and contains way more nutrients, and certainly doesn't have magical powers to make vitamins blow up.
Did you read the summary? They are telling kids it is illegal to put a CD and play it when friends are over, because your friends don't have a license, so that is stealing.
Watch out for CARS...a zebra crossing is what Americans would call a "crosswalk." White stripes painted on black road, ergo, zebra crossing.
You're also forgetting that sore joints CAN be treated by realigning said joints. Obviously, stretching and cracking your back can potentially cure back problems, depending on why exactly your back was sore. And yeah, duh, its way better than a pain pill, in the same way as pulling the rusted nail out of your foot is better than taking a pill, for certain nail-stepping-on related forms of foot pain. You seem to misunderstand what these charlitans claim. They claim it cures everything. In the UK where nothing prevents fraudulent advertisements, they claim that a proper spine realignment will cure AIDS or cancer. They're fraudsters. Meanwhile, though people HATE scientists with a passion, actual tests put it at mostly bullshit, but better than acupuncture. Naturally, you can't do a double blind test, you kinda know if you're being adjusted or taking a sugar pill, and even if you get a doctor to give you a fake adjustment just by pulling and stretching, that's only single blind ;)
Any good LED bulb should dim fine. They don't have to be designed for it, they just have to not be crappy. A diode only lets electricity flow in one direction through it. So, an LED needs DC juice. You can just plug in AC, but it will only be lit up when the AC power is flowing the correct way, otherwise its not lit up. So, the simplest solution is a diode rectifier. You take your "positive" and "negative" wire, and attach two normal diodes to them, both with their current flow pointed to the "in" side of your LED bulb. Then you do the same thing again with two more normal didoes pointing "out" from the "out" end of the LED bulb. There. No short because diodes are one-way streets. When AC is flowing one way, a complete circuit going the right way through the load. When it reverses, still a complete circuit, going the right way through the load. Four sufficiently rated non-light-emitting diodes are dirt cheap, and double the brightness of your bulb. But, AC is a sine wave. Most of the time you won't have "full power" through your rectifier. That will make it pulse. Better than the flickering you get without a rectifier, but still not as solid as you'd want. So, throw some capacitors at that bitch. Now you have the same average brightness, but its much more steady. I can't imagine it adds an appreciable amount to the cost of the device, but it makes the light output outstandingly superior.
The long and the short is: Dimmers work by chopping off chunks of the AC sine wave. CFL ballasts hate that with a passion, they want a steady juice supply. Incandescents don't care. It makes them flicker, but since there is a big time delay between cutting power, and the filament not glowing anymore, it's not noticeable. A crappy LED would flicker like a mofo when dimmed. An LED with a diode rectifier would flicker also, but twice as fast so it would be less noticeable. An LED with a diode rectifier plus capacitor wouldn't flicker at all. Or at least, wouldn't flicker until its turned down really low and the capacitors fully discharge between AC peaks. Win/win. Demand capacitors for all your LED needs.
White LEDs are actually blue/ultraviolet LEDs that have a white phosphor coating, sort of like in a fluorescent tube. Just because a green LED on a keyboard doesn't fade, doesn't mean that the phosphor coating works similarly.
I'll second this observation. My CAPS is the brightest, SCROLL is the darkest, NUM in the middle. And they're close, its nowhere near "twice" as bright. This NUMLOCK has been on for years straight I figure. The difference in brightness is more than likely caused more by the fact that the "A" lets more light through than the "9" for the numlock, and both let well more in than the little down arrow for the scroll lock.