Thanks. It seems like everyone saying this is stupid because it's easy is just focusing on the basic science-lesson version of electroplating, which is fine if you want to coat a penny in zinc or whatever -- but is not going to succeed at getting nice, even coatings of chosen thicknesses on complex objects. I'm pretty sure that when you pay the big bucks to a professional electroplater, they aren't just dunking all your stuff in some tupperware with a nail and a battery then walking away.
I'm aware that it's not impossible to do it yourself, but from what I've read and heard from people, it's extremely difficult to get good results that way. It's also messy and complex, and there are a lot of facets to working with different metals and base materials and so on. Professional electroplating, on the other hand, is done in large machines that allow a lot of precise control of the process. A device like this that is halfway between, enabling more professional-level control while still fitting on a tabletop is, as far as I can tell, entirely new.
(look at the rest of the forum -- it's ALL rss autoposts, a bunch from TorrentFreak too. The mental image of you digging through the deep pages of Google and weaving wild conspiracy theories around the stupid automated sites that pop up down there is, I must admit, hilarious to me.)
Are you honestly so oblivious that you didn't notice how all of those "forum posts" are actually the complete text of techdirt blog posts -- each one tagged with a feedburner RSS source link, and clearly being copied by a scraper?
I'm actually way out in front of most for wishing to hang lawyers and tax the hell out of the rich.
This is what baffles me. You insist you have a strong populist, anti-corporate leaning -- and yet you vehemently, angrily defend one of the most blatantly pro-corporate, anti-public laws in our entire modern economy. I strongly suspect that your supposedly radical political views are actually just residue from some boisterous high-school phase you went through, while the simple truth is that the idea of the world changing at all actually terrifies you.
If you've actually been shopping for battery packs recently -- reading reviews and looking closer at the specs and comparing prices -- you'd agree that this is a very good price and significantly lower than usual. Your ability to find one cheaper pack on Amazon (a pack with quite a lot of 1-star reviews complaining it doesn't actually carry 50k mAh) does not change that fact.
You say "sorry to be the village contrarian" but, sorry, that's not true at all. You are not sorrry. You are gleeful about it. You show up on every Daily Deals post and try as hard as you possibly can to find a way to tear it down and complain about it, even when all you can come up with are pretty flimsy complaints. It appears to me to be your new hobby, not something you are sorry about.
Re: IZON camera contains a number of security holes
To clarify: that issue was found in the earlier version of the camera, which was replaced by the View and another model in 2014.
That being said, I'm unable to find anything directly confirming that the security issues have been fixed -- but I'm also unable to find any complaints or security discussions more recent than 2013 and discussing the newer models. My guess would be that the holes have been patched, but I'm uncertain. Take that as you will.
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. "
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.