Some sound always bounces, and a parametric speaker will never be entirely perfect outside a fully-controlled environment -- but it's not "magical", that's silly. Parametric sound is a real thing and it works, and I see no reason it couldn't work in this situation, though common sense dictates that there are many factors that could make the isolation less than 100%. As for them, they say this in their FAQ:
"Wakē's parametric speaker has a very narrow beam, however the sound it directs at someone can bounce off their cheeks, nose or forehead and create a little sound bleed, although it is many times quieter. "
That's unfortunate... most of the products in the store actually do ship to Canada for a price bump of only a few dollars, which is nice, but looks like this one is US only. Sorry about that!
But judgement about relevance to the topic/thread at hand is in and of itself making a decision about what speech is allowed based on its content, and thus breaks an "absolutist" approach to free speech.
"Modding for some semblance of focus" may or may not meet the definition of censorship, but it is inescapably a violation of "pure" free speech.
Go check out the website if you want. They are a perfectly reputable company, with partnerships with several large blogs. Many, many, many domains for companies large and small are registered using WhoIs Proxies. Attempting to portray that as sketchy is just silly, and feels like a desperate attempt to discredit this campaign by any means, for no obvious reason.
I think you need to recognize the fact that site operators have a wide variety of goals and needs, beyond just appealing to the small segment of the population with such incredibly strict design standards. I think several of your points are good ones, but I also think you are taking them to an absurdly absolutist level that you know perfectly well is unrealistic to expect on the modern internet.
And to clarify: we did not design and build the Techdirt Deals store. It's a partnership program with StackCommerce and the design comes from them. It also seems pretty clean and straightforward to me, hardly a mess of information that must be sifted through. I think you're being unreasonable.
We'll look into it but the best thing I can recommend at the moment is trying the live support on the store itself (it's linked at the bottom)
As for the accounts, unfortunately since this is a partnership setup and the site is operated by StackCommerce, I don't think we'll be able to offer unified logins.
Honestly, while I understand some of your complaints, it does not seem as bad as all that, and seems pretty in-line with the standard for a huge majority of websites for several years now. I too have my issues with some of the trends in modern web design, but it must really suck to use the web if you experience this much rage over every site that doesn't adhere to your strict minimalist design principles, since that's pretty much all of them.
Site looks nice enough to me, and I don't see the grey on grey you are talking about. And between the brief introductory text and the big list of products with prices, I think it's fairly obvious that the page is a store -- what more explanation were you looking for?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bawk bawk: LOL @ Mike whining about what other people do with their property ...
Wasn't the Improbability Drive eventually out-performed by the ship that ran on Bistromathics? Maybe Hollywood Accounting is where we have to look for our FTL technology...
Where? If you're going to point to a four-year-old thread with 159 comments that appears to mostly be you (oh sorry, I mean "someone") going on extensive repetitive rants, it'd help if you pointed us to the exact comment in which you believe Mike claims this.
But... everything is public domain unless society, via its intellectual property laws, says otherwise.
So it's not a question of whether everything "needs" to be public domain -- everything IS, by default. It's a question of when and why anything "needs" to be granted an exception to that natural fact, and taken out of the public domain.
Re: Funniest of week is Techdirt slips and validates intellectual property: "your stuff"!
Took me fifteen minutes to compose this piece long as typical Techdirt post.
Is that why it's completely incoherent, scatterbrained, and doesn't seem to be making any particular point whatsoever? Spend a little longer next time, because honestly I can't follow any of what you just said...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And for making a web-site, Kickstarter rakes off TEN PERCENT!
How am I not "arguing in good faith"?
Let's make this simple: if you're going to suggest KS is "crawling with thieves" then you need to provide some evidence of that. I just don't see it. I've backed lots of projects, and perused & followed many more, and I don't see this infestation you're talking about.
And if it's so easy to come up with a superior service, then why don't you or someone else just do that right now? A moment ago, you said KS was "the only place" -- that seems to me like proof that creating a superior service isn't so easy.
Re: Re: Re: And for making a web-site, Kickstarter rakes off TEN PERCENT!
Do you not see the contradiction inherent in what you say?
In one breath, you say that Kickstarter basically does nothing, is useless, is bad at its job, requires no work, etc. In the next, you say that it's the only way for small creators to get funding and make something a reality.
So, if Kickstarter sucks so much, why is it the only way? Why are there not lots and lots of equally popular alternatives? Why is it so advantageous and unique for creators? If Kickstarter's cut is so ridiculous and unfair, why aren't there a bunch of other sites offering the same service without taking a cut?
Like it or not, Kickstarter provides a really good platform that a lot of people find great to use. I don't see what it is that you think is so poor about what they do. And honestly, it does not seem to be overrun with "scams" — anyone who says that is, at best, lumping together a couple genuine (and rarely successful) attempts at scams with a bunch of other projects that simply failed or didn't go according to plan.
It has been my experience — and it's my guess with the people who immediately start complaining about KS in these comments, including you — that they are primarily motivated by one or two personal disappointments. I've seen the rage that Kickstarter failures bring (I've even succumbed to it on a couple of occasions) but translating it into accusing the whole operation of being a complicit den of thieves seems counterproductive.
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Tech At Home
Re: Wakē
"Wakē's parametric speaker has a very narrow beam, however the sound it directs at someone can bounce off their cheeks, nose or forehead and create a little sound bleed, although it is many times quieter. "
On the post: Daily Deal: KeySmart 2.0 Compact Key Organizer
Re:
On the post: Free Speech, Censorship, Moderation And Community: The Copia Discussion
Re: Spam, business and People
"Modding for some semblance of focus" may or may not meet the definition of censorship, but it is inescapably a violation of "pure" free speech.
On the post: Daily Deal: 72% Off Power Vault 18000mAh Portable Battery Pack
Re:
On the post: Daily Deal: The New Techdirt Deals Store
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who designed this crap?
And to clarify: we did not design and build the Techdirt Deals store. It's a partnership program with StackCommerce and the design comes from them. It also seems pretty clean and straightforward to me, hardly a mess of information that must be sifted through. I think you're being unreasonable.
On the post: Daily Deal: The New Techdirt Deals Store
Re: Broken?
As for the accounts, unfortunately since this is a partnership setup and the site is operated by StackCommerce, I don't think we'll be able to offer unified logins.
On the post: Daily Deal: The New Techdirt Deals Store
Re: Re: Re: Who designed this crap?
On the post: Daily Deal: The New Techdirt Deals Store
Re: Who designed this crap?
On the post: Daily Deal: The New Techdirt Deals Store
Re: Umlimited
On the post: Daily Deal: The New Techdirt Deals Store
Re:
On the post: Elon Musk Says SpaceX Photos Are Now Fully Public Domain
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bawk bawk: LOL @ Mike whining about what other people do with their property ...
On the post: Elon Musk Says SpaceX Photos Are Now Fully Public Domain
Re: Re: Bawk bawk: LOL @ Mike whining about what other people do with their property ...
What "property" is covered by copyright?
On the post: Elon Musk Says SpaceX Photos Are Now Fully Public Domain
Re: Re: Digital versus Physical goods.
Where? If you're going to point to a four-year-old thread with 159 comments that appears to mostly be you (oh sorry, I mean "someone") going on extensive repetitive rants, it'd help if you pointed us to the exact comment in which you believe Mike claims this.
On the post: Elon Musk Says SpaceX Photos Are Now Fully Public Domain
Re:
So it's not a question of whether everything "needs" to be public domain -- everything IS, by default. It's a question of when and why anything "needs" to be granted an exception to that natural fact, and taken out of the public domain.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Funniest of week is Techdirt slips and validates intellectual property: "your stuff"!
Is that why it's completely incoherent, scatterbrained, and doesn't seem to be making any particular point whatsoever? Spend a little longer next time, because honestly I can't follow any of what you just said...
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Tinkerer Tech
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And for making a web-site, Kickstarter rakes off TEN PERCENT!
Let's make this simple: if you're going to suggest KS is "crawling with thieves" then you need to provide some evidence of that. I just don't see it. I've backed lots of projects, and perused & followed many more, and I don't see this infestation you're talking about.
And if it's so easy to come up with a superior service, then why don't you or someone else just do that right now? A moment ago, you said KS was "the only place" -- that seems to me like proof that creating a superior service isn't so easy.
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Tinkerer Tech
Re: Re: Re: And for making a web-site, Kickstarter rakes off TEN PERCENT!
In one breath, you say that Kickstarter basically does nothing, is useless, is bad at its job, requires no work, etc. In the next, you say that it's the only way for small creators to get funding and make something a reality.
So, if Kickstarter sucks so much, why is it the only way? Why are there not lots and lots of equally popular alternatives? Why is it so advantageous and unique for creators? If Kickstarter's cut is so ridiculous and unfair, why aren't there a bunch of other sites offering the same service without taking a cut?
Like it or not, Kickstarter provides a really good platform that a lot of people find great to use. I don't see what it is that you think is so poor about what they do. And honestly, it does not seem to be overrun with "scams" — anyone who says that is, at best, lumping together a couple genuine (and rarely successful) attempts at scams with a bunch of other projects that simply failed or didn't go according to plan.
It has been my experience — and it's my guess with the people who immediately start complaining about KS in these comments, including you — that they are primarily motivated by one or two personal disappointments. I've seen the rage that Kickstarter failures bring (I've even succumbed to it on a couple of occasions) but translating it into accusing the whole operation of being a complicit den of thieves seems counterproductive.
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Tinkerer Tech
Re: And for making a web-site, Kickstarter rakes off TEN PERCENT!
On the post: Years Of Brainwashing The Public Into Thinking Everything Creative Must Be 'Owned' Has Led To This New Mess
Re: Re: Good News
On the post: Years Of Brainwashing The Public Into Thinking Everything Creative Must Be 'Owned' Has Led To This New Mess
Re: Thin end of the wedge
Next >>