Polar Bears in Serious Danger

This is something that I feel strongly about and against palin:

Let's have a Eco-Rating system for ALL products!

With all the concern for the environment, I think it's time for manufacturer's "full disclosure" on how their products effect our world.

Thus, I propose an "Eco-Rating" label that company's should be required to clearly display on their products.

It could be a simple color rating system like so:

Where:

Red = Very harmful to the environment (i.e. does not biodegrade for a thousand years, pollutes ground water in landfills, etc)

Yellow = Somewhat Harmful to the environment (i.e. takes 50 years to biodegrade, uses non-renewable energy, etc)

Green = Very environment friendly (i.e. Safely biodegrades and does not harm ground water in landfills, made with/from renewable energy, etc)

The First color would indicate how environment friendly this product was to Create this product (manufacture/produce it) - This would include factors such as how much pollution was produced to create this product.

The Second color would indicate how environment friendly this product is to Use it - This would include factors such as how much pollution is caused from using this product (i.e. toxic chemicals that end up in our ocean as a result of using a drain cleaner, etc), or how much non-renewable energy is needed to use this product.

The Third color would indicate how environment friendly this product is to Dispose of it - This would include factors such as how long this product takes to bio-degrade (i.e. Styrofoam cups take a very long time to bio-degrade)

Thus a bottle of water might have a "Yellow-Green-Red" rating:

Yellow - because it used non-renewable energy to produce/filter the water

Green - because it does not pollute at all to use it

Red - because the empty plastic bottle takes over a hundred years to biodegrade)

Thus, when you are purchasing a product, lets say at the super-market, you can easily see and purchase the most environment-friendly product for your needs.

This system would expose the often unknown harmful-to-the environment facts that many products manufacturer's don't want you to know and force them to find ways to bring each "stage" (color squares) of a products lifetime into a "Green" color because who wants to but a product knowing it has two red squares, thus meaning this product harms our world significantly?

Camera as Photo Album Tip

If your digital camera has a screen big enough to act as a photo album to show off your pics, then this tip may be helpful to you...

Even if you have a huge memory card in your camera, you still may be only able to store a few hundred images on it, and if you have that many images already on the card, there isn't much room to take a lot of new pics with it.

Well, I came up with an idea that is working very well for me....

1) First, whenever I take pictures, I always archive the full-res images to another media so I will always have access to the original shot.

2) Then, using my camera's browse and "resize" features, I resize all the images in my camera to the lowest resolution - such as 640x480. Even this size is probably higher then the native resolution of the LCD on your camera, so the appearance of the low-res images on the LCD is indistinguishable from that of the original high res files (except if you try to zoom in on any of the low-res ones).

3) My particular camera creates a copy of the original when I resize an image, with the copy being the low res. So, I then delete the hi-res version of the file.

After doing the above steps with all my images, I end up with the ability to store hundreds of low-res pics on the memory card, and becaue they take up only a fraction of the card's memory, I still have a ton of room left on the card to take a ton of new photos and videos!

In summary, by converting all the pics in your camera to low-res, they will now only take up a fraction of memory they once used, so it's then possible to keep hundreds of them in your camera to use your camera as a photo album (because the low-res images look identical to the original hi-res images when viewed on your camera's LCD screen) and still have a ton of room left on the card to take a bunch of new pics/videos. For example, I have a 6MP camera with a 2GB card. I currently have 300 low-res pics on the card, and still have 90% of the card FREE to take another 1000 hi-res pics.

Download Tivo Shows Using A Browser

I thought that you needed Tivo's Desktop software in order to transfer shows from your tivo series II to your windows PC, but apparently not.

My brother has a mac (yeah, I know...) and he showed me that by simply typing in HTTPS://yourtivosip/nowplaying/index.html (The S at the end of the HTTP is important), you can then log into your networked Tivo using "tivo" as the username and your tivo's media access key as the password. You will then be presented with a webpage with download links to all the recorded shows in your tivo. It worked on my Windows XP PC just fine.

Yes, the files will have a .Tivo extension, but apparently there is a mac app out there that will strip the tivo wrapper from what is otherwise an MPG-2 video file, so I wouldn't be surprised if there's a version for PC's.

However, if you have a PC, you can download the Tivo desktop software and it will install a codec that windows media sees. Meaning, that by double clicking on it, it will play in Windows Media Player just fine.

As a bonus, since the .Tivo codec is registered with windows, most programs that handle video will now be able to handle the .tivo format as well. For example, you could use Spb Mobile DVD and specify one of the .Tivo files as the input source and it will easily convert it into an AVI or WMV for your Pocket PC or Smartphone so you can watch your shows while on the go.

Support for Pay-Per-Use Wireless Gadgets

(this post is NOT about pre-paid phones, please read entire post :)

I don't understand why only certain cellphones can work on Pre-Paid phone accounts. The cellphone companies can track the minutes for my "monthly" phone (because they charge me for every one on my monthly plan), they can deactivate my "monthly" phone if I don't pay my bill. So, why couldn't they just as easily deactivate my "monthly" phone when my balance reaches zero? Is it some kind of conspiracy by the cellphone companies, or is there some real technical reason why you can't use any phone with a pre-paid account?

However, even with a pre-paid plan, you are still kinda locked into a type of recurring expense even if you don't use the phone because you have to keep buying new minutes so all of your unused ones don't expire.

By charging any type of a recurring cost, even when you don't use the cell network, in my opinion, severely hampers the feasibility for some really cool gadgets that could use the network.

For example, there are currently a few GPS "Tracking" devices on the market that allow the device to transmit it's location via a cellular network to your PC or to another cellphone. But, because these devices require their own "cellphone" account, there is a monthly fee associated with such an account, which makes using such a device very expensive.

Wouldn't it be cool if there was a way to avoid monthly charges, and only be charged a small fee each time a wireless device actual uses the network? I think it would be VERY cool.

I have a feeling the only real reason there are monthly/recurring charges is to simply to fill the pockets of the cellphone companies. But, like with the issue with certain phones only working with pre-paid accounts, there may be a technical reason why current cellular devices need a monthly account associated with it. If so, then now is the time to voice your desired for a new network that doesn't require monthly fees.

If you haven't heard, the FCC is about to auction off a new spectrum of frequencies to be used for wireless devices such as cellphones. This band of frequencies is currently being used for "analog" over-the-air TV channels. But, soon they will become available due to the FCC's mandate to go "Digital" in the near future which will free-up the space the analog channels used to use. Google, along with the typical cellphone companies will be bidding for these new airwaves.

Since this 700Mhz space is for a brand new network, there currently are no hard-coded rules and protocols yet. So, now is the perfect time to inject a new idea into the first stages of planning. Thus, I propose that the FCC mandate that the new 700 spectrum should, among other things, support "pay-per-use" wireless devices. Meaning, that there will only be a cost when a device actually uses the network - no monthly or recurring fee is needed.

I feel that once the "monthly/recurring" fee is removed from the equation, the possibilities for a new breed of wireless gadgets is limited only by your imagination!

For example, many animals die in "humane" traps because the pest-removal company has no idea if there is an animal in the trap or not, so they tend to only "waste" their time once a week to check the traps - often finding the animal dead due to starvation or exposure - not very humane :( Now imagine a new type of trap that could send an SMS message to the trapper the split second an animal is caught in the trap - and it would only cost the trapper $0.10 to do so! Even if such a trap costs $50 more for this "SMS Transmitter". That cost is quickly negated by the time it saves the trapper from "wasted" trips to empty traps - and it now facilitates a quick retrieval of the animal being alive :)

Another idea could be some sort of "vital monitor" that would send an SMS when the vitals of the person wearing the monitor go outside pre-set limits.

Another example - a vending machine owner won't have to waste a trip to check if one of his machines needs filling up. Instead, the vending machine itself could just send the owner a text message when it's supply is getting low. And it would only cost ten to fifteen cents to do it! No longer are they required to spend $20-$30 for a landline telephone line to serve this purpose.

Another idea I have is for a "vacation home" alarm system that doesn't require a $25/mo land telephone line to notify the alarm company when the alarm is triggered.

Or how about a water and/or temperature sensor for your vacation home that will only cost you ten cents to tell you when the monitor detects water on the floor or too low of temperature!

What about a car alarm that text messages you when your car has been hit or being broken into without having to pay a $20-$40/mo fee for a separate wireless account just for the sms transmitter.

How 'bout a device that you place into rental equipment, so if the renter doesn't pay there bill, you could simply send a special text message to the device and it will prevent the equipment from working. Then when the renter calls you five minutes later to complain, you can accept his credit card number over the phone and send another message to the device to turn it back on ;)

As you can see, if there wasn't any monthly/recurring fee required, all sorts of cool ideas for wireless gadgets now become possible.

The phone companies are probably loving the 10-15 cents they make per text message that all the kids are sending these days. Why would they want to pass on another opportunity to make a bunch more on the messages that these new wireless gadgets will send?

I envision that there would be some type of authority in which you would create a "Wireless Device" account with, similiar to an EZ-PASS account. With this account, you could:

1) "Register" your wireless device's Serial Numbers so the network company knows who to charge when one of those devices use the network.
2) Add money to the account to be available for the network to deduct from when a device uses the network.

Another method could be that when you purchase one of these new "network gadgets", the price for the gadget could include credit to use the network for a "typical" number of times. In my above humane trap example, maybe the $100 price of the trap includes "50" alerts credits, meaning that it can be used out of the box to notify you up to 50 times before you need to open and replenish a "network credit" account.

But, in order for this idea to be realized, it needs to be included in the design of the new 700 spectrum. So, if you like this idea, please post your support for it using the "Comments". Hopefully this thread will get the attention of the FCC or some of the bidders so they can include this new "pay-per-use" model in the design for the new spectrum.

Request to Smartphone Manufacturer's...

Years ago I knew camera phones would be popular - because who wants to carry around two devices when one device could do the job of both?

Then, it was a no-brainer to add the functionality of other "dedicated" gadgets that everyone owns and put it into a phone (most only need software):

• Music player
• Watch
• Alarm Clock
• GPS device
• Pager
• Email
• Web browser
• Play Games
• Movie Player
• Calculator

So, why not add the function of yet another gadget that you use everyday into your phone?

Think about it, what other hand-held device do you use everyday?

....Your TV Remote!

Wouldn't it be cool to not have to search for the TV remote and instead just reach into your pocket and pull out your phone to pick a show on your Tivo? It would also be impossible to loose your phone "remote" because you just have to call it to locate it :)

Yeah, older PDA's did include an IR transceiver in them, and some software developer's even wrote tv remote control software to allow it to function as a tv remote. But, the IR interfaces in those devices were designed to "sync" to other PDA's at very close range (usually just a few inches), so they were impractical to replace your tv's remote (which can operate at 10+ feet). This is why I feel the idea of using your smartphone as a remote control never took off (because the beam was either too weak to be useful, or that the IR was on the side of the device, making it akward to "aim" while reading the buttons). So, natually, as bluetooth took on the role of wireless syncing, manufacturer's started to not include an IR module in their devices.

A complete IR transceiver (with a consumer electronic grade high-output IR LED and IR receiver so it can "learn" the buttons on you remote controls) will only add about $1.00 to the cost of the phone. That's just a fraction of what it cost's to add the camera and music abilities to your phone. So, it could the most cost-effective addition a phone manufacturer could add to their phones.

Adding an consumer-grade IR module to you phone will not just replace the functionality of your remote, it will greatly enhance it too. The color display and touch screen of your phone allow a much more rich user interface that a bunch of dumb buttons could ever hope to offer. Case in point - the Logitech Harmony remote is popular because of it's color display and flexability to create macro's and other "advanced" functionality.

By having the IR hardware built into smartphones, software developers will now have a completely new category to develop apps for. For example, how cool would it be that when your cellphone rings, it automatically transmits the "Pause" code to your Tivo set so you won't have to manually pause it before answering the phone, and then it un-pauses your Tivo when you hang up. Another idea is to add an advanced "Sleep" function that will not only turn off your TV after you fall asleep, but it could also turn off your stereo equipment, and turn them back on to wake you the next morning!

Another idea I had was to place an array of simple IR LED's (the same used to allow video camera's to view in dark) in an exhibit booth or conference hall that will transmit documents or files in a continuous loop. This way, anyone wanting to "grab" a copy of the file or document being discussed would only need to run a "Receive" app on their phone that would receive the file being transmitted. By transmitting the file in a loop, it could "broadcast" the file to multiple phone's simultaneously instead of having to handshake to each device one by one in a time-consuming serial fashion.

Also, since your phone connects to the internet, it's super easy to update the IR codes for new electronic equipment.

These are just some idea's that came to mind. The possibilities for using IR is only limited by the imagination of software developers.

Amazon.com still selling animal fighting material !

Amazon.com is resisting to remove illegal animal fighting materials from it's website!
Being a pet owner myself, I find it very disturbing that Amazon.com has to even think about this issue!

Below is an example of a current book that that are still selling as of 8/24/07!

"The Dog Pit - Or, How To Select, Breed, Train And Manage Fighting Dogs, With Points As To Their Care In Health And Disease - 1888 (History Of Fighting Dogs Series) (History of Fighting Dogs Series) (Paperback)"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1846644488?ie=UTF8&tag= thepoopcomforthe&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative =9325&creativeASIN=1846644488

More details can be found here:
http://www.hsus.org/acf/news/amazoncom_under_fire.html

If you have a moment, please call 206-266-1000 to request Amazon.com to stop selling animal fighting materials. (To call toll-free, dial 866-216-1072 and ask for customer service.)
You can also fill out This Online Form that will send a message to Amazon directly.

How to hear your GPS software through your Bluetooth hands-free carkit

I will elaborate on this post with more details in the future.

But, in a nutshell, my first GPS solution was running CoPilot on my MPX-220 Smartphone. Motorola had a cool "wired" hands-free car kit that worked VERY well and I got for only $20. What's cool about this car-kit was that all I had to do was connect one wire to the bottom of the MPX-220 and it would not only charge the phone while in my car, but all audio coming from the phone would be routed to the car-kit's 3-watt external speaker. I mean *ALL* audio, not just when I was talking on a phone call. This was cool because every time Copilot would announce a verbal direction, I heard it super easy and clear vie the 3-watt speaker, and not from the tiny built-in speaker of the phone.

But, then I got a new Dash Smartphone. Since there were no "wired" car-kits for the dash, I knew I would need to get a bluetooth hands free car-kit. But, I realized from past experience that sound only comes out of bluetooth devices during an actual phone call, and all other audio sounds (like prompt sound noises that an application plays when asking you for input) only come out of the built-in speaker.

Then, I found the solution, BTAudio. It's a small freeware app that when run, will redirect *ALL* audio that is generated from the phone to any attached bluetooth device.

Some issues:
1) The audio redirecting gets turned off (requiring you to rerun the utility) after each phone call or when certain apps that also redirect are run (i.e. Microsoft's Voice Command).
2) Some phones implement their own bluetooth "stack" and don't use Microsoft's bluetooth stack. These "custom stack" phones may not allow BTAudio to redirect the audio. This issue is apparently known by Microsoft and is even mentioned in the "Release Notes" for their Voice Command product, because it too will try to send the TTS voice (to announce an incoming call or received email) to a bluetooth device if one if available.

Why I got a new Bluetooth headset

I just purchased a new Bluetooth headset even though I have two others.

The reason I purchased this one:
http://www.meritline.com/motorla-h300-wireless-bluetooth-bla ck-headset1.html

Is not because it only cost $19.95 with FREE shipping, it's because it runs on a AAA battery. Why would I want something that can't be charged? Because it don't need to charge it. What I mean, is that with all my "chargeable" headsets, I have to either keep it connected to the charger, or have to remember to keep it charged.

But, I wanted a headset that i could keep in the car, so if I drive somewhere and need to use one when I get to where I going, I could just pop it on my ear and I'm good to go.
But, if the headset was rechargeable, the rechargeable battery in such devices usually have a very short "self" life (time the battery will stay charged if sitting on a shelf), usually a few weeks. Thus, the only way to be sure the headset is charged when I need it is to keep it connected to it's charger *in my car* full-time - something that I didn't want to do or deal with.

That's why a headset based on a standard non-rechargeable battery is best for me. First, I never have to remember to keep it charged or keep it connected to a charger. All I need is a few spare AAA batteries in the car that i can swap out anytime the headset dies. Also, since they are AAA batteries, they have a shelf life of months. So, even if I don't use my headset for a few months, the battery level will still be very high.

Thus, a headset that uses regular batteries is a no-brain solution to my needs for a headset I will keep in the car.

Fashionably late...

Well, I finally got around to create a blog!

Even if no one knows it exists, I still get to check it off my ToDo list :)