Firepower threaten to sue me!

I just received this:

Dear Dan,

You are an idiot.

I suggest before you make claims regarding a product, you complete all
your research correctly. Maybe you should try a product before you talk
about it.

I have attached a summary of our results.

You can remove your defamatory statements regarding our product within the
next 48 hours and post an apology and reference our results or we will
commence legal action immediately.

--
Kind Regards,

Stephen Moss
Chief Executive Officer
Firepower International

Kind regards, indeed!

You can currently see fresh-faced young Stephen on buyfirepowerpill.com, to which firepowerinternational.com redirects. He's placing "the first Firepower Pill in his 2007 Rolls Royce Phantom LWB", which only a mean person would suggest he might just have rented for the day.

(And wait a minute - "the first Firepower Pill"? They've only now gotten around to making one?)

The press release on the front page of buyfirepowerpill.com also says a study by the University of New South Wales supports their claims about their fuel pills. I presume this is the same one they talked about before when they alluded to one Dr Stephen Hall of that institution, but you will of course still not find the slightest hint anywhere on any Firepower site, or anywhere else I can find for that matter, as to how the supposed study was performed, and what the results were.

What data Firepower have chosen to publish shows, as far as I can see, only that a Firepower pill possibly added slightly more than one per cent to the combustion energy of sixty litres of petrol. And that study's not, of course, been replicated. Whoopee. They have a long list of other claims, mainly of enormous fuel economy gains in unscientific tests, but the plural of anecdote is not data; even if every one of those testimonials is from by someone who truly and honestly believes it, it's far too easy to fool yourself if you don't control the test properly. Literally hundreds of fuel treatment pills, potions and gadgets have come and gone over the decades, all backed by the same sorts of anecdotes and all found to be worthless when - or if - tested properly.

If you're one bloke in a garage, you can't be expected to come up with high quality tests. But Firepower have the money to do proper tests - lots of them. And yet, not only do they still rest comfortably on a big old pile of anecdotes (most of which are from hard-to-trace people in places like Oman, Russia and the Philippines), but they have even previously admitted that when they said, for instance, that tests were done "by Volvo", what they actually meant was they were done on Volvo trucks by... someone.

All this aside, I'd be thinking Firepower would be more interested in suing Fairfax Media, publishers of the Sydney Morning Herald and Melbourne Age, since all of my Firepower-related blog posts [well, up until Stephen kicked this ant-hill, anyway...] simply link to and talk about the series of Herald stories on the company and its many colourful characters and connections.

Firepower do actually say they were indeed taking the Herald to court... in May last year. But nothing seems to have come of that. All of the Herald articles remain up on the Web.

So let's recap, shall we?

According to the Herald:

Rise of a man with a magic mystery pill (with a sidebar about the not-very-impressive, and not-recently-improved, evidence Firepower provide to support their claims, and the strange similarity of their fuel pill to another one.)

Austrade doles out to secretive firm.

Firepower-AWB inquiry link.

Firepower link to dead dictator and former spy (in which they admit they are "unable to produce some of the promised independent tests that showed its supposedly miracle products extend fuel efficiency.")

Still waiting for the proof behind the spruik.

Magic pills, religious links, Russian death threats, big sports sponsorships.

Mothball additive in tanks gives fuel for thought.

Firepower boss feeling the heat.

I don't have to tell any of you what'll happen if Mr Moss actually follows through with a lawsuit and gets me to stop, um, accurately describing something that I read on other Web pages that're all still very much up, but clearly Stephen is new to this whole Intarweb thing and needs to have the situation explained to him.

If, Stephen, you'd like about a thousand more blogs to start linking to those Herald articles, go ahead and try to stop me doing it. Because that's what'll happen, even if you win a defamation case against me. Which, itself, is far from certain.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of you little monkeys were tapping away at your own blog posts already.

And yes - Stephen did indeed attach the "results" he mentions in his e-mail. I talk about them, in tedious detail, here.

Only trust psychics who look like Michael Bolton

Behold, the courageous journalists of Australian tabloid TV show Today Tonight, repackaging another show's story following up with "their colleagues at the BBC" to protect consumers from phony psychics!

Hurrah!

Oh, wait.

Today Tonight seem to regard psychics as a kind of tradesman, to be applauded if they're competent and reasonably priced, and caught and shamed if they're not.

The difference between psychics and regular tradesmen, of course, is that nobody has demonstrated that any of these builders have ever, in the whole of human history, actually managed to construct a house.

I wonder how Today Tonight (and their partners in foolishness on another network, A Current Affair) decide whether a given cancer-curer, psychic or investment genius is going to be presented as 100% kosher, or chased down an alley by a camera crew.

I've got some ideas.

Posted in Scams. 1 Comment »

Plane porn

If you find yourself in danger of being excessively productive, I highly recommend visiting airliners.net and clicking one of the "Most Popular" links.

Every now and then, the most popular pics of the last X days will turn out to be particularly notable.

I just checked out the "last 7 days" listing, and found B-29 wreckage on a glacier in Alaska, the Caspian Sea Monster, an F-16 playing chicken with a tanker, a Hind heading off to kill someone, a very dramatic shot of an F-14's tailpipe, Concordski (previously mentioned in passing here) in repose, the first Qantas A380 still in primer, a fantastic view of the devices with which the TU-95 tortures its crew, a skeletal Sabre, a UFO and another one, one mighty Blackburn Beverley, and a ridiculously luxurious toilet.

More perpetual motion - with video this time!

A couple of people have forwarded this article to me, about a fellow called Thane Heins who seems to be claiming (in essence) that he's made a motor with better than 100% efficiency.

I, of course, will believe it when I see it. And I don't expect to ever see it.

But the hook in the article is that Professor Markus Zahn of MIT was impressed - or at least confused - by the demonstration.

There's no real information about what actually happened in the demonstration, though. The closest they come to telling you is saying "He holds a permanent magnet a few centimetres away from the driveshaft of an electric motor, and the magnetic field it creates causes the motor to accelerate."

Well, yeah. Of course it does.

If you put stronger magnets in a permanent magnet motor, it'll give you more power from a given voltage. And consume more current. Its efficiency will probably actually drop.

And you certainly can demonstrate this effect by moving a powerful magnet close to a motor, such that the field from the external magnet supplements the field from the magnets inside the motor.

Behold, My Very First Metacafe Video, demonstrating the phenomenon with an unsuspecting motor and a honkin' great magnet:


Over-unity Motor Demonstration... Not!

Note the current and voltage displays on the power supply that's running the motor. The voltage stays where I set it (when it's not being pushed around by back EMF when the motor slows down), but the current - and thus the consumed power - spikes massively when I'm "supplementing" the motor's own magnetic field.

You can do this same thing more efficiently if you replace a permanent magnet motor's internal magnets with more powerful versions. But a field is a field; the motor doesn't much care where the field comes from.

This is why, for instance, there are restricted model car and aircraft racing leagues that only let you use cheap ferrite-magnet motors. I remember a friend telling me about a dude whose plane was faster than everyone else's and nobody could quite figure it out, until they noticed that the "magnetic latch" on his battery bay, right under the motor, contained the most powerful rare earth magnet ever used for such an application.

I hope there's something more to Thane Heins' discovery than this, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if all he's done is embroidered on the idea by, say, switching electromagnetic coils outside a permanent magnet motor to put the field supplementation where it'll do the most good at each point in the motor's rotation. Which also won't give you any more efficiency than a number of existent motor designs.

Here's Thane himself, explaining his invention:

I don't know enough about this stuff to know whether what he says makes any sense at all, but I suspect he's asking back EMF to do things that it won't actually do.

Avoiding Freaking Out: A Primer

Every now and then, someone asks me for serious life advice.

Sometimes this doesn't work out too well, like when I suggested to a woman who wanted to know how to stop her neighbours from beaming mind control rays through her walls that she might perhaps not be perceiving the world in an entirely accurate way.

(She immediately realised that I, like most other people in the world, was in cahoots with her neighbours.)

Sometimes, though, my advice works out quite well.

The following correspondent found me, a couple of years ago, because of my old page about nitrous oxide. She said that what I told her helped a lot.

So maybe it'll help someone else.

I went in for elective surgery yesterday and had a really bad experience with nitrous oxide. They gave it me to relax while they were doing my IV. I had visions of dying and questioned whether to give up or not. There was some sort of phrase that kept going through my head the entire time. Right after they put in the IV, I jumped up and pulled it out and threw the mask off because I felt I was "crossing over" (dying).

Have you ever heard of this happening? I can't get these visions out of my head!

Well, a hospital is not the best place to take psychoactive drugs, and just before surgery is not the time when you're in the coolest and grooviest state of mind. So it's not surprising that you had a bad trip.

What happens when you take nitrous is, for most people, not anything like what happens when you take a "real", long-term hallucinogenic drug. It's more like rather suddenly mixing up dream-state and awake-state in your mind, so you can start dreaming with your eyes open for a little while, then come back to reality when the nitrous wears off, only a minute or two after you stop breathing it.

And, just as you can have horrible nightmares if you fall asleep at a stressful time, you can have a similarly horrible nitrous dream. (I'm surprised more people don't try to kill their dentists.)

But relax - a dream is all that it is.

One thing that's very important for people to realise when they take psychoactive drugs (for pleasure, or whatever) is that when everything goes all weird, that's what's meant to happen. It can be difficult to remember this when your brain's been scrambled by something really powerful (ask your local Robitussin fiend, if you can get his attention...). But this is not the case for most psychoactive compounds - most of them don't turn you into someone completely different.

So you just have to mellow out and realise that if you're seeing giant poisonous ninja lobsters coming out of the rubber walls and leaping at your throat, that's because you're on drugs.

Try to enjoy it.

If you can't enjoy it, just hang in there and endure it.

For something like nitrous that doesn't last long, you don't have to endure a whole lot.

If you're now troubled by recurring thoughts that you didn't have before, or if you start having hallucinations when you haven't taken any drugs, then get thyself to a doctor, pronto.

If you're only troubled by the memory of what happened to you in the hospital, though, then you're just freaked out by a bad event. If you've never had a bad trip before, your first one is likely to be memorably nasty. Similarly, you'd probably be troubled by the memory of being in a car crash. That, in itself, is nothing to be concerned about unless it really starts becoming an obsession and screwing up your life. Like any other bad experience, it'll fade in time.

Incidentally, I think experiences like this can make you a significantly more sensible person. This isn't because I've got some hippy-trippy idea about you connecting with the universe. It's just good to know that it really doesn't take much for your perception of the world, and your thought processes, to be changed in profound ways.

Every day, someone who's been straight as a die all their life, never touched the wacky weed, I'm high on life, blah blah blah, has a hallucination for some reason (stress, fever, food poisoning, sleep paralysis...) and decides that he or she has definitely just been talked to by God, or aliens, or ghosts, or whatever. They quit their job, they write some darn wooly-headed book, they annoy all of their friends - all because they'd never had their mind thrown for a loop before.

I'm not telling you to go out and drop acid for a year (a friend's very... experienced... father once told me that you actually need to set aside about a decade if you decide to get into LSD...). I'm just saying that if, at some point in the future, you find yourself thinking that Everything You Know Is Wrong and you've had some profound connection with the universe that's not available to normal mortals, it might be a good idea to remember that time when you freaked out in the hospital, and see if God feels like talking to you tomorrow, as well.

(If He does, by the way, try to remember that it might just be schizophrenia.)

I hope you feel better soon.

Hot glue, garden hose and iron filings: Only $195!

From a reader:

$150 [I think the list price is actually $US195!] audiophile cable revealed to be a piece of crap!

Audiophile power plug

I actually knew they were made of house wiring like that before (someone found out in 2002, but was ignored).

Here's one of the many, many audiophiles who thought this PC sounded better than something else (if you read through the later pages in that thread, you can find more).

This is funny.

Yep, that thing's made from string and baling wire.

But it doesn't matter.

I mean, look at the charmingly hand-made Nautilus Master Technology power cable page - which is full of weird and wonderful electron-movers based on technologies unknown to science - and they tell you right up front about the standard electronics-store components and unremarkable wire in the Power Three (or Power 3; they can't quite decide what it's called).

OK, the feline-assisted autopsy on the cable makes clear that it doesn't really have "4 layers of shielding"; it's got four layers of insulation if you count the braid on the outside and the garden hose (!) on the inside, but insulation and shielding are quite different things.

But did Nautilus say specifically that they were talking about boring old electrical shielding, which everybody knows is pointless for a power cable feeding any kind of remotely-well-designed power supply?

No! This is VIBRATION shielding, and LIGHT shielding, and homeopathic reiki aura shielding, of course!

And then there's "Level 1 Dynamic Filtering", "ProTecX Treatment" and "Cryogenic Treatment", all of which are I'm sure enormously important yet, regrettably, completely unquantifiable and undetectable in blinded tests, but which I suppose had something to do with the iron filings hiding inside the cable. (Which, if one were uncharitable, one might think were just in there to make it impressively heavy.)

And yes, many customers are immensely impressed by all this, using all of the usual wine-taster-ish adjectives. And they absolutely will not be told that it's possible that the people working on supercomputers, atom smashers and communication satellites might possibly have noticed all of these readily audible differences that come from replacing a simple wire that isn't even in the signal path... if those differences were really there.

Human ears can only barely discern a 1dB level change, yet technical hardware with literally billions of times the sensitivity to a wide variety of signal characteristics that human ears can't detect at all will not respond differently in any way if you replace a normal $3 IEC lead with a $2000 "audiophile" one. Well, provided you can keep the thing connected - the more impressive audiophile power cords, apparently including this Nautilus one, tend to be so heavy that they unplug themselves.

Nonetheless, every one of these guys (I presume there's a woman or two in the fringe audiophile ranks, but I've never seen concrete evidence of one) believes himself to be the only human on the face of the earth who was born with the same IEEE-calibrated broadband admissible-in-court hearing system that was fitted to Commander Data.

Oddly enough, the fringe audiophiles never seem to have trotted over to a hearing test lab to see if the psychoacoustic tricks that work on... everyone... work on them too. But they're still sure that power cords with three split conductors inside a big crinkly plastic condom (which, incidentally, are probably technically illegal to sell for electrical-code reasons...) are very impressive, and absolutely not actually as relevant to audio system performance as spinning rims are to racing-car lap times.

It's unfair to tar every hi-fi hobbyist with the nutty audiophile brush; there are many audiophiles who remain within the bounds of empirical reality, or at least don't hand over thousands of dollars to every company with a shiny talisman to sell.

But this does not change the fact that you don't get to say something that contradicts a long list of well-accepted scientific facts without backing it up with proper empirical evidence. Unblinded listening tests - often even with caveats about how the cable needed to "break in" for hours or even weeks before revealing its true beauty, completely ignoring the fact that people change their response to sounds over mere minutes - do not make the cut.

I have, thus far, reviewed three devices whose stated methods of operation imply a major upheaval in basic science. The EMPower Modulator, Batterylife Activator and Wine Clip all have vocal proponents who haven't actually tested them properly.

I did test them properly, and I found they didn't work.

I bet my aunt called in the hit

From a Hungarian mail server whose security is presumably not all it might be:

Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 17:41:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: BE MORE CAREFUL
From: "BE MORE CAREFUL" <restinpeac@yahoo.com>
To: undisclosed-recipients:;

I am very sorry for you, is a pity that this is how your life is going to
end as soon as you don't comply. As you can see there is no need of
introducing myself to you because I don't have any business with you, my
duty as I am mailing you now is just to KILL you and I have to do it as I
have already been paid for that.

Someone you call a friend wants you Dead by all means, and the person have
spent a lot of money on this, the person also came to us and told me that
he want you dead and he provided us with your name ,picture and other
necessary information's we needed about you. So I sent my boys to track
you down and they have carried out the necessary investigation needed for
the operation on you, and they have done that but I told them not to kill
you that I will like to contact you and see if your life is Important to
you or not since their findings shows that you are innocent.

I called my client back and ask him of you email address which I didn't
tell him what I wanted to do with it and he gave it to me and I am using
it to contact you now. As I am writing to you now my men are monitoring
you and they are telling me everything about you.

Now do you want to LIVE OR DIE? As someone has paid us to kill you. Get
back to me now if you are ready to pay some fees to spare your life,
$30,000 is all you need to spend You will first of all pay $15,000 then I
will send the tape to you and when the tape get to you, you will pay the
remaining $15,000. If you are not ready for my help, then I will carry on
with my job straight-up.

WARNING: DO NOT THINK OF CONTACTING THE POLICE OR EVEN TELL ANYONE BECAUSE
I WILL KNOW.REMEMBER, SOMEONE WHO KNOWS YOU VERY WELL WANT YOU DEAD! I
WILL EXTEND IT TO YOUR FAMILY, INCASE I NOTICE SOMETHING FUNNY.

DO NOT COME OUT ONCE IT IS 7:PM UNTIL I MAKE OUT TIME TO SEE YOU AND GIVE
YOU THE TAPE OF MY DISCUSSION WITH THE PERSON WHO WANT YOU DEAD THEN YOU
CAN USE IT TO TAKE ANY LEGAL ACTION. GOOD LUCK AS I AWAIT YOUR REPLY TO
THIS E-MAIL CONTACT

Name:william Agent
E-mail: william1111@live.com

These messages have been around for a while, but I don't think I've ever received one before. Plenty of ordinary Nigerian scams, but not the death-threat type.

Quick advice for those receiving mysterious messages promising wealth or making menaces: Search for a string out of the message, to see if lots of other people have received the exact same thing.

Are those people all now rich, or dead, or whatever else the message promises?

(Hint: They won't be.)

You may forego the above steps if you yourself have received 28 copies of whatever the message is, all nominally from completely different people but all strangely similar otherwise.

"My wife, my children, and the nation of Romania."

YouTube comments should, of course, be ignored at all times. But the few comments for this video are works of incandescent genius compared with the usual collection.

One commenter, however, says "90,000 taxed out of 100,000. That wasn't a joke. One of the things that drove Reagan into the Republican party."

That commenter probably said that because he (or she) does not understand income tax brackets.

Income tax brackets seem to be one of those concepts that just slither out of people's mental grasp, like daylight saving time and aeroplanes on conveyor belts.

Another leading indicator of this misunderstanding is when someone expresses the opinion that making more money, so that you move into a higher tax bracket, means you'll have less money to take home than you would if you'd stuck with your lower income.

The simplest kind of progressive tax does indeed work this way, and imposing such a tax on income would indeed be crazy unless there were about a million tax brackets for incomes between $1 and $1,000,000. If the tax on income to $5000 is 20% but it shifts to 40% when you make $5000.01, you'll lose a lot of money if you get a raise from $5000 to $5100.

What actually happens, though, is that each bracket's tax rate only applies for the money you earn within that bracket.

So if you make $10,000 a year, and the country where you live has a $0-to-$5000 20% tax bracket and a $5000.01-to-$10,000 40% tax bracket, you'll pay a total of $3000 in tax.

The above sketch is from 1961, when the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was still in force in the USA; it ran from '54 to '63. At that time, the top US tax rate was 91%.

But that only applied to the portion of your income above $200,000 a year. $200,000 in 1961 dollars would be worth an easy 1.4 million bucks today, and was worth even more in comparison to the average wage.

Which isn't to say that 90%-plus isn't a pretty hilarious top tax rate, but it's not as if some hardworking surgeon making $100,000 was taking home less money than a lazy plumber on fifteen grand.

In fact, the take-home pay of a person making $100,000 in 1961 in the USA, with no deductions, was $32,680. They would pay $67,320, not $90,000, in tax.

A 67.32% total tax rate still isn't anything to sneeze at. But it ain't 90%, either.