"Charlie (Colorado)
August 20th, 2009 at 9:09 am

Spiking hammer for building railroads. The pointy end is for making a pilot hole, then you drive the spike wih the flat end."

Ding. My dad and grandad worked railroads. Charlie's right.

"zavatone
August 13th, 2009 at 8:52 am

No fan of that pit bull video. When a pitbull snaps, it snaps and there is nothing you can do about it."

Not a fan of people who hold tightly onto stereotypes and old wives tales about pitbulls "snapping", especially since this is a term used to refer to WILD breeds being kept as pets... such as wolves.

Pitbulls do not "snap" any more than German Shepherds, Rotties, Chihuahuas, Jack Russells and any of your various ill treated dogs. That's the distinction. The Pitbull Terrier has been domesticated for a very long time. Their fault is not in their aggression, but in their exceptionally eager to please attitudes. This is why people say blame the owners, not the pits. Pits are the jocks of the dog world. Strong, exceptionally agile and full of stamina. But they're also the sweetest, most smothering lovedogs I've ever known.

Please stop being ignorant and blanketing a whole breed with the horror stories you see on the media. Just as ignorant as relying on one person's bad incident on the road with a person of another race and fearing that you have to lock the door every time you see "one of them."

"Adelheid
August 10th, 2009 at 5:31 pm

My pop switched to digital from analog and complains that everything sounds tinny and hollow. Sure hes got bluetooth, but hed rather have rich tone."

Have him go back to the audiologist and have them readjust the profiles in the digital hearing aides. Most come with at least 2 or 3. Mine came with 4. I had the same initial complaints, but most of my issues actually revolved around the "features" of the digital hearing aides that made it very difficult for me to use it in general. Namely, sound limiting, compression, limited volume range, distortion due to clipping and EQing. I had my audiologist disable everything... turning the hearing aide into a dumb amplifier... and then adjusting the EQ so that the extreme high end had a cut and the lower end had a slight boost. Sounds almost exactly the same as my old analogue hearing aide did. The differences is that the digital will simply cut out if volume is too loud (clipping) but at least now sounds don't continue to become distorted at higher volumes (giving me the option to reduce the volume myself). I also had the audiologist increase the volume dial range from 12db to 36db. While I cannot have near complete silence by turning the dial completely down (and letting my natural hearing take over while using the earmold as safety earplug)... it's down low enough where it's not a problem anyway.

It WILL take about 2 or 3 visits to get things fixed right. Best advice I can give you and your pop is to have him write down what issues he has with what circumstances. Example: Someone slams a door, it sounds like a delayed noise where the actual slam sounds lower than the echo that follows it. This is a classic example of sound limiting. It reduced the volume of the peak noise (door slam) leaving you only hearing the echo of the noise in the room.

My specific issue with the tinniness and hollow sounding digital sound was due to frequency stepped variable compression. If he prefers the older analogue sound, have the audiologist disable the digital 'features' and it may help. Compression is useful, but in hearing aide capacity, it makes the sound inconsistent... instead of helping you to reduce loud background noises, it changes how foreground noises sound in different circumstances. In the end, it's personal preference. I prefer the "dumb amplifier" method of using my hearing aide rather than having a digital one with features changing things to "help" me. (When really it makes things in other circumstances harder to understand.)

All that said, I have a major problem with the article. It sounds more like a press release where the author wrote down everything told to him/her as fact. Example:

"They also interfere with frequencies used by mobile and fixed phones and often emit high-pitched whistling sounds. But the newer processors, costing about $6000 each, shut out background noise, giving users up to 25 per cent better hearing, and can be attached directly to MP3 music players or wireless headsets for talking on the phone, Cochlears territory manager, Katrina Martin, said."

That high pitched whistling sound is not interference. It is proximity feedback due to most hearing aides being attached to an ear mold with an air vent. You close the area between the microphone (on top of the aide) with the speaker (in the ear), you increase likeliness of feedback. (Just like in ANY case where you're at a concert and a mic gets too close to any speaker.) Feedback reduction on digital hearing aides helps this problem... but this issue is NOT due to interference.

"Newer processors" giving you the same features digital hearing aides have had for years. Even my el-cheapo digital (About $950 new, which is really about as cheap as they get while still being qualifiable hearing aides) has these features. It also allows for direct input via a "shoe" that attaches to the bottom of the unit. The process of attaching it exposes terminals that can be used for inputs. Hearing aides also have what's called teleconductor pickups. Now THIS actually does involve interference.

TCoil, as it's often called, allows the hearing aide to pick up whatever emits radio frequencies. That includes speakers in the earpiece of a telephone. When a hearing aide is switched to TCoil mode, it will only pick up RF. When it was analogue or now digital, I did not get high pitched squealing by using a phone to my ear. This has been a standard feature of hearing aides for DECADES. (Even going back to the 70's when I was first fitted for them) So yes, it also does have drawbacks... my aide will also pick up 60 cycle hum prevalent in power wires. It's not terribly loud or distracting unless, maybe... you go near a power substation or walk in a city and walk across big batches of powerwires underground. (Kind of like a sixth sense. ;)

What actual interference hearing aides WILL pick up from cellphones is mostly due to GSM modulation. Ever leave a cellphone near a computer speaker and heard the dut-dut-dut, dut-dut-dut-BLURRRRGHHHHHHHH noise before a phone call came in? That's interference. Unfortunately, GSM allows for much more than hearing aides can tolerate... and it has only been until the last 2 years before models have been built with hearing aide compatibility. (Usually involving better shielding on the ear side of the phone) CDMA in the US (Sprint and Verizon, for example) does not have this issue.

Another form of listening that many people with hearing aides will do... is to use tcoil mode to listen to CD players or MP3 players. It's as simple as putting an earbud (or headphone) next to the middle, upper part of the hearing aide itself and switching it to TCoil mode. Because an earbud or headphone has a coil of wires behind the diaphragm... it emits RF as well as audible sounds (due to the diaphragm moving). Using TCoil mode to pick up an earbud wedged behind my aide allows me to listen to only the sounds coming from that earbud... So this feature being touted by the article is anything but new.

For those wondering, the Chicago logo is based on city landmarks. The orange three tier streak is the shilouette of the Sears Tower. The 6 pointed star is on the city flag and the division in the blue streaks with the bottom point of the star represents the two arms of the that run through chicago and merge together at various points before they connect to the lake. I'd have to say Chicago and Tokyo's are the two best... Rio and Madrid's being a little too cartoony for my tastes. I'd have to give the edge to Chicago for the sleek and simple design, though. Tokyo's still seems a bit too busy.

Dear Deborah and Wayne,

Local regulations prevented us from advertising the special features of the Squirrel Underpants. These undergarments for your rodents are specially designed to impress the female of the species by using a classic method known as 'tucking in a sock'... Only our friendly critters have their own "sock" built in. Instruct, or gently assist, your squirrel in fitting in these undergarments by tucking his tail forward and then positioning the remainder in an appropriately squirrelish phallic shape. Your lucky stud squirrel will take to this amusing human practice soon enough, but he'll thank you for it.

Most Sincerely,
The Neatorama Staff.

Until I read #10, I imagined this was a test payload. Like everyone keeps saying, a giant lawn dart... to be used for dropping mock bombs and seeing where they land for accuracy.

"ted: Are all paranormal sightings this stupid?"

Yes.

Strange. Sorry for the double post, folks. My browser crashed after the first time and ctrl-f5 didn't display the post once I reloaded this page. *grumble* Yay for paste buffers.

Photoshop. The shadow for each plug goes directly down, despite the angled nature of the shot. The shadows are also the same size for every plug, despite two being obviously a bit bigger. (The warts.) There is also no depth to the shadows at all. (Especially behind the TV.

Installing an outlet by itself doesn't consume power, so having this setup (with nothing plugged in) wouldn't increase your power bill... but certainly would decrease structural stability of the house... as each outlet in your home is anchored to a wall stud behind the sheetrock. In order to have that configuration (and knowing the size of the outlet boxes), the studs would have to be less than half the width (traditionally a 2x4) while being massively perforated by nails (several for each outlet)... not to mention the wires running through. So yeah, not only is it impractical, expensive to implement... it's also nearly structurally impossible.

They DO make junction box like arrangements that have several outlets condensed inside a small area that would fit within two studs of a standard framed house, though...

"seefish3
June 30th, 2009 at 8:59 am

Join me in banning all new Lucas products until Howard the Duck is available for private ownership!"

It is. You couldn't take 5 seconds to search google for "Howard the Duck DVD Amazon"? $7.99.

Photoshop. The shadow for each plug goes directly down, despite the angled nature of the shot. The shadows are also the same size for every plug, despite two being obviously a bit bigger. (The warts.)

Installing an outlet by itself doesn't consume power, so having this setup (with nothing plugged in) wouldn't increase your power bill... but certainly would decrease structural stability of the house... as each outlet in your home is anchored to a wall stud behind the sheetrock. In order to have that configuration (and knowing the size of the outlet boxes), the studs would have to be less than half the width (traditionally a 2x4) while being massively perforated by nails (several for each outlet)... not to mention the wires running through. So yeah, not only is it impractical, expensive to implement... it's also nearly structurally impossible.

They DO make junction box like arrangements that have several outlets condensed inside a small area that would fit within two studs of a standard framed house, though...

"ted
June 30th, 2009 at 5:39 pm

The scuba diver one was best. I dont like how that site hijacked my history. That doesnt make me want to visit there again - dumbasses."

Uh, there's nothing on the site that hijacks your history. Put the bong down and install some antivirus software.

PS: The scuba diving one is CGI, it was part of a commercial. It's not real.

154,995 people die every day.

An average of 1 death per 0.0093 minutes.

I would say even 30% is a lowball number, of those who have died, who have contributed far more to society than a celeb. Sure, it may not be newsworthy because nobody knew them... but these are regular folks like the rest of us. You know them as well as you would know the person next door, the friend of a friend, the guy you had a fine time talking to at the auto show... as opposed to a celeb and their on screen persona, every bit as fake as the industry from which they came from.

"Stacey: the artist who did this woman should be ashamed of such bad work, and if not the public should pressure the shaming of this artist, who is nothing more than bad graffiti tagger to the human soul. Whether or not this woman agreed or not is besides the point, because every civaL society has lemon laws and grace periods before contracts are binding, Dr’s also can be sued for malpractice on otherwise complaisant patiants if they do a bad jobs. Tattoos artists should not be exempt from prosecution for the abuse of their so called willing customers who regret such permanent contracts to advertise the artists graffiti for life."

Wow. That was a whole lot of crazy in a little paragraph.

The work itself is actually quite good. The blacks are very solid, not patchy. The lines are crisp and consistent. Honestly, based on that, I'd welcome the artist who did that kind of work... on facial tissue at that! (it's quite difficult compared to other parts of the body)... to do work on me. He clearly has control over the needle and the skill of an experienced tattoo artist.

You should like the kind of person who wants to demonize the whole concept of tattoos for nothing other than your personal distaste for them. (I'm sure you have other excuses to rationalize your bigotry, but I'll just leave it at that)

But please, if you're going to criticize tattoos and the work put into them, don't pontificate on points that you clearly have no knowledge of or experience to speak on.

The other thing you should understand is that in a "civaL" [sic], people have the full freedom to express themselves, even in ways that you would disagree with. It's called "free will." If I am unable to exercise my free will, my desires for what I want to do with my life, to my body and all that it entails... then I wouldn't be living in a CIVIL society.

Someone responding badly to your tattoos, complete with remarks: A nice screening method to separate people you want to be around from those who are shallow, judgemental, unaccepting of other worldviews, myopic, snobby, overly concerned with what other people think and making sure other people know what they think when they don't approve, and the list can go on.

There's a lot of good, interesting tattoo work out there and majority of the folks who have put thought into them have a story to tell about each. Most people I know who have gotten tattoos relate similarly to them as I do: Rather than something to show off, it's a personal scrapbook about our lives.

I agree that there are people out there who see a piece of flash on the wall and want to get it done because 'it looks neat'... those people, also, seem to moan loudest about other people having tattoos out of some guilt/regret response from there.

Be mindful of how strongly you react to tattoos. It says more about you than it says about the person you're reacting at.