More Firepower fun

More fancy footwork from the good folk of Firepower (previously).

Oh, and Firepower's chief executive apparently had something to do, at least peripherally, with the AWB's delectable handing over of $AU290 million in humanitarian funds to Saddam Hussein, to use for his own no doubt very philanthropic purposes. Lots of other people paid these kickbacks as well, in order to get their slice of the pre-Gulf-War-2 Iraq pie. But thanks to AWB Limited, we Aussies were the single biggest contributor.

This has, therefore, been something of a scandal down here in Oz-land, despite the government's insistence that it didn't happen and was no big deal anyway and had nothing to do with them and they didn't know about it and even though they did know about it there was nothing they could do.

(Back in June last year, by the way, the Sydney Morning Herald were suckered by Firepower's tall tales about death threats from oil interests over Firepower's amazing, and amazingly untested, fuel saving products. So they're probably a bit annoyed now.)

And now, more lies

Thanks to a reader, I now know the solution to all of the world's energy problems!

Well, actually I don't, because I didn't watch the whole thing.

I watched a few minutes, though, because you have to wait that long before the talking head gets around to saying the name of the company. But then there it is - "Better World Technologies", your gateway to the long-running scams of Dennis Lee.

Even the people who believe these kinds of stories don't believe Dennis, since he's been promising real working free-energy machines to people who stump up money to reserve one for at least the last ten years. He has, of course, not delivered. But he's taken a lot more deposits.

Anybody's welcome, no matter how close they are to the breadline. Basic "sign up" fees are five to twenty bucks US - well within the reach of people poor enough that electricity bills are a problem for them.

It is, of course, usually easier to take money from the poor than from the rich. Poor people are less educated, less connected, more desperate, and what're they gonna do about it, anyway - hire a lawyer?

You just have to be the kind of guy who can stomach making a living that way.

(See also the end of this column.)

Aspiring scammer seeks similar

I just received this via e-mail:

Dear Sir/Madam,
We are a Spanish company and we would be interested in your Batterylife AG for its sale and distribution in Spain and Portugal.
In the first buy, we are interested in 500 or 1000 pcs.
Please, be contacted by me in soporte@anunciae.com
Thank you very much for your attention.
Alvaro Fernandez-Arroyo
Anunciae.com

It's kind of like when that Nigerian dude wanted to buy CPUs from me that I made up for a joke. Only the Batterylife Activator actually exists. It's just that it, you know, doesn't work, as a quite superficial reading of my review would reveal.

Alvaro is, alas, not only asking the wrong guy to sell him worthless battery enhancing stickers, but also kind of late to the party. The Batterylife Activator no longer appears to be on sale.

I'm also happy to say that Batterylife AG, in general, appear to 'ave run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible, even though that means all of those convincing university test results they promised to send me back in 2005 will now, I fear, never arrive.

Their German and Australian sites are both now toast. Archive.org reckons the main site stopped responding to hails in April, 2006.

(The good folk at BatMax still appear to be selling their superficially identical product, though.)

This archived copy of the batterylife.com.au page not only links to my review - which might perhaps have something to do with why they went out of business - but also still allows you to download a video clip from the "Sunrise" show on Channel 7 here in Australia. In it, you can witness the magnificence that is Peter Blasina, The Man Who Recommends Everything And Is, As A Result, Much Better Off Than Me, Or Indeed Than He Himself Was Back When I Knew Him And He Was Running A Video Camera Magazine With Some Sort Of Journalistic Integrity.

Peter is, of course, heartily recommending the Batterylife stickers, on behalf of batterylife.com.au and another outfit that's now gone.

I hope their cheque cleared before they went broke, Pete!

Well, whaddaya know

A few readers have just pointed out this Sydney Morning Herald feature to me, regarding the "Firepower" company mentioned in this letters column.

Astoundingly enough, it turns out that people who sell magic gasoline improving pills may be a little bit dishonest.

Fancy that!

(Don't miss the sidebar in which it is revealed that Firepower's special unique amazing main product is actually exactly the same as something called the Power Pill FE-3, which in turn is alleged to be made by a very plausible outfit called UBiee. Anyone want to lay odds on whether Firepower/UBiee will end up going the same way as the similarly revolutionary entrepreneurs at Bioperformance?)

Magic computer glasses

Coincidentally, two people just e-mailed me about two different kinds of glasses that're meant to make using a computer a less eyestrain-y experience.

First, the ones that might work. Second, the... other ones.

At the inventively-named EyeFatigue.com, you'll find $US24.95 specs that are, essentially, reading glasses. Mild lenses that make it easier for your eyes to focus close, and which will probably give you a headache if you wear them at other times.

This seems sensible enough to me; computer use is pretty close work, and focussing close for a long period of time, even if your eyesight is perfect, will indeed give you eyestrain. Glasses that turn your long focus into close focus can help, here, once you adapt to the fact that your eyes feel as if you're looking further away than you are.

The Eye Fatigue site also reassures me with its lack of pseudoscientific bulldust, and firm instructions to actually get a proper prescription - with separate measurements for each eye - before ordering, if you know what's good for you.

I Am Not An Optometrist; there may be something horribly wrong with this that I haven't thought of. But it doesn't look too freaky to me. Close-work glasses are generally useful things, and these look like well-thought-out ones to me.

Now, on to the fun ones.

I got a letter as follows:

I recently came across a web post by an elderly gentleman complaining of "frequent conjunctivitis, dry eyes, hard crystals in the inner corners, etc" when he uses his computer that go away when he goes on holiday. Looking around the web he found MelaOptix glasses from the Melanin Vision Center as a possible cure to the problem.

Are they on the level or is it another case of fuel line magnets, cure every disease in the world pills, or wooden volume knobs that make your stereo sound 10X better?

Lastly, he also posed this question:

"Is an LCD screen free from "bad" radiation, that is high-energy (HEV) sight-damaging stuff, in comparison with CRT?"

Could you comment?

Rob

My first guess was that the gentleman's problem was happening simply because he's focussing his old eyes on something close for long periods of time, probably blinking less, and possibly also looking upward a bit (dust in the eyes, more evaporation from their surface), or into a breeze.

(And the gentleman may go on holiday to somewhere with higher humidity than his computer room, too.)

People can become very uncomfortable without noticing while performing any engrossing task, and computer use definitely qualifies. Many people have suddenly realised, while playing a game, that they're freezing cold, very hungry, and desperately need to pee. Staring until your eyes are bloodshot is the same sort of deal.

Many people also set their monitors too bright. Modern screens, especially LCDs, have very high maximum brightness which is only necessary if you're competing with a brightly-lit room. Your monitor should, ideally, be no brighter than a sheet of paper in your lap.

For many consumer monitors, maximum contrast and zero brightness is a good setting. If you do that, and can then (just) see all of the gradations in one of those black-to-white gradients, you're pretty much done. If the darker colours blend together, you'll need to tweak the brightness up a bit.

Monitor calibration can get a lot fancier than that, but Contrast 100, Brightness 0 often gets you more than half way there.

(Oh, and set the refresh rate properly, too.)

My considered opinion of the MelaOptix glasses is that they're a bunch of bollocks. The only thing they don't do is the one thing that could actually help - aiding close focus. All of their other features are pointless, at best.

"Melanin" is a term that covers several pigments, not just the biological one they want you to think they're talking about. Even if they're actually bothering to put biological melanin in their glasses, though, there's no reason to suppose it does anything special.

Yes, orange-ish lenses can make things seem a lot clearer, especially in glary outdoor situations where stopping a lot of blue light will help young eyes see, let alone old ones. That's why ski goggles are so often orange. But there's nothing magic about any particular exact flavour of brown-orange pigment, no matter what those Blue Blockers infomercials say.

The Eye Protection Factor the Melanin Vision Center mention is, as far as I know, just talking about ultraviolet light. Given that (a) even cheap sunglasses these days commonly have very good UV blocking and (b) computer monitors produce no UV (they've got narrowband red, green and blue phosphors - that's it...), I believe the Melanin Vision Center are being deliberately misleading about the qualities of their products.

Since computer monitors already allow you to change their brightness and (unless you've got a rather old one) colour temperature, though, anything sunglasses could do for you can also be done with the monitor controls. And turning the screen brightness down makes CRTs live longer, too.

There is no reason for normal humans to wear sunglasses indoors unless, of course, they're doing it to look cool.

Regarding "bad" high energy visible radiation - neither LCDs nor CRTs emit such radiation. The broadest definition of HEV includes everything down to 530nm wavelength, which is green, so technically the green and blue phosphors do emit that kind of HEV, I suppose. But they ain't nothin' compared with the blue sky, which is not generally regarded as all that terrifying.

Some old CRTs genuinely do emit quite a bit of never-proven-to-be-harmful radio frequency energy, but they emit it from the back of the casing where the high voltage stuff is, not from the front. Old monitors, and some other gear like laser printers, also produce significant ozone, which is bad for your lungs if it's concentrated enough that you can smell it - but which is only even slightly worrying, in real world terms, if you're chronically exposed, like the poor dude with three laser printers blowing warm air into his cubicle.

If CRTs were made out of ordinary glass, they'd also emit a lovely drizzle of soft X-rays. To stop that, they're made from leaded glass, which eats all of that radiation.

You can still get a nifty static electricity crackle from a CRT monitor, which alarms some people. But that is also perfectly harmless.

So, in conclusion: Properly calibrated prescription reading glasses? Possibly useful for computer users. Cheap off-the-shelf drugstore reading glasses? Quite possibly much better than nothing, for people who have trouble with close work.

Goofy melanin shades that claim to protect you from radiation that monitors don't even emit? Save your money.

(It should also be noted that the melanin glasses cost more than three times as much as the non-fraudulent ones...)

The Things People Will Believe: Two Connected Aspects

Thanks to my previous musings on bogus fuel and energy gadgets (and additives, and more...), I attract more letters about such things.

Most recently, a correspondent has brought the Hydrodrive Electronic Converter to my attention. He did, to his credit, say that it sounded "completely bogus" to him, but he still asked me "Does it really actually do anything?"

I confess that I did not spend a lot of time examining the Electronic Converter page.

That's because it looks like a perfectly typical long crackpot rant (not helped by the fact that it's a freeservers.com page; like Geocities before them, Freeservers are an absolute wellspring of groundbreaking physics...). I see no reason to even start trying to unravel what the hell all that multicoloured capitalised marqueed-and-blink-tag text is trying to say.

It is not, of course, impossible that the person responsible could have actually come up with a revolutionary device to do... whatever it is this device is supposed to do. It is also not impossible that Elvis is still alive and, thanks to some magnificent plastic surgery, currently serving as the leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

I consider these two possibilities to be similarly likely, and I also wonder why on earth anybody would even bother asking someone else about it.

Is there anything, anything at all, about that gadget that suggests that it has any value at all? Am I missing something? Or is this just like the Unanswerables that plague Barbara and David, as the world's e-mail-forwarding-aunties keep asking them whether that little boy really does need a new body to replace his burlap bag filled with leaves?

I've noticed that one of the common features of many of these kinds of sites is a page proudly displaying completely ridiculous "awards", which the crackpots responsible cannot tell from real ones.

A fine example of this phenomenon may be found at the justly famous site of the Atom Chip Corporation. Their URLs have shifted around since I last wrote about them (end of this column), but their proudly displayed Bogus Prize That Looks Exactly Like An Academy Award, I Mean, How Obvious Can You Get, Jeez, is still on display. It's now here.

Srinivasan Gopalakrishnan, the fellow responsible for the Hydrodrive Electronic Converter, lists on his personal page a similar, if smaller, collection of awards. He does actually seem to have invented some real things before he came up with the Converter, so I dare say the patent and such lower on the page may be for genuinely useful things (though a patent does not actually mean the patented idea has value; it's not the patent office's job to figure that out).

But the second thing on that page is a letter congratulating Srinivasan for having made it through the rigorous qualification procedures for the American Biographical Institute's frightfully prestigious "International Directory of Distinguished Leadership".

Unfortunately, the ABI's IDoDL - like their rather popular Man of the Year nomination, which Srinivasan reprints next - is one of those bogus Who's Who scams, kin to the expensive Forums and poetry collections whose only real purpose is to extract money from the people listed, invited or published.

(After that, Srinivasan has another similar certificate from an Indian outfit with no Web site that I'll betcha is just as fake, though less successful.)

I was, at first, amused to find someone who's apparently proud to have attracted the attention of both the American Biographical Institute and the International Biographical Centre of Cambridge, England (so "Centre" is not actually misspelled, you twit). But my smile faded as I discovered that pretty much anybody who falls for one of them seems likely to fall for the other.

Apparently Wikipedia is not as well known as I thought. But people are about as dumb as I thought.

Yes, I have received letters from these kinds of scammers, too. Not for years, though. There's nothing like being nominated as one of the World's Most Super-Smart And Really Cool Ultra-Professional Top Executives, Wow, You're Like James Bond And Warren Buffett Rolled Into One, You Are when you're 22 years old and, in my case, living with your mum, to tip you off to the scam.

(I might have been younger. I don't remember exactly. I was licking frogs pretty often back then.)

Balderdash of the day

I've just had digestion of my Christmas lunch interrupted by discovery of the Nordost VIDAR, a "cable conditioning" device.

You plug audio cables into it and it, um, conditions them.

Apparently it's been around for a few years now.

According to the ad in the newspaper gadget supplement in which I found it, "both new and used cables often have very high levels of electrical charge which must be neutralised if they are ever to achieve their maximum performance".

(Apparently this very high charge level, which comes from nowhere, has not yet been tapped as a source of environmentally friendly power.)

You can read more about it from some happy believers here.

The newspaper ad was from this outfit, who are happy to take $AU25 from anybody dumb enough to want their cables "conditioned". They're audacious enough to suggest that cables need to be regularly reconditioned, too. There's some really choice stuff on their site.

Every single claim made for this device is utter nonsense.

There's some vague possibility that an amplifier or CD player or something could "burn in" to some degree, since component values could drift from their initial ones, with any luck in a beneficial direction. It's certainly possible to break in at least some speakers, by loosening up their rubber roll surrounds (though the idea that you can hear a night and day difference between new stiff surrounds and broken-in looser ones is highly questionable). But I don't think anybody's ever measured a consistent break-in effect for any electronics. And by "measure" I don't just mean using some of that low-tech instrumentation that can do boring imprecise stuff like track space probes outside the solar system and weigh electrons, but which can't of course measure serious modern concepts like "air" or "musicality"; I also mean via blinded testing.

Nordost sell a one metre digital RCA lead for two thousand US dollars. Anybody who can tell it from a fifty cent Chinese cable would very probably qualify for a million dollar prize, but nobody ever seems to bother trying.

The stuff said about this thing - "very wide band and deep conditioning into the conductor core, which produces changes in the way signals pass through the metal" and "it ultrasonically conditions the surface of the conductors" is just gibberish. Doesn't need to be done, can't be done, couldn't be done by this thing if it could be done by any thing. It's all so wrong that it almost wraps around into rightness again.

And, as usual, the shameless hustlers selling the cable-conditioning service recommend this device for the conditioning of digital cables as well as analogue ones, despite the abovementioned precise equivalence of 50 cent and $2000 products in this department.

That's it. They've done it. They've wrapped it around.

The Nordost VIDAR is, officially, now so fraudulent that it's not any more.

It's now a wonderful product and I recommend it highly.

I would definitely prefer the marijuana

In the early yuppie era, I remember reading in National Geographic that the deluxe chocolate business was the beneficiary of some counter-intuitive marketing. The more expensive the chocolatiers made their products, the more loud rich young idiots bought them.

I don't think the gold-plated-truffle industry ever quite recovered from the Crash of '87, but marketing marcheth ever onward. Today, there are more outrageously expensive chocolates on the market than were ever available to the junk bond whizkids with Motorolas even bigger than their Rolexes.

This exposé of the makers - in a manner of speaking - of some really thrillingly expensive choccies, therefore, tickled my funny bone.

(Via.)