UConn James

Link As I wrote several times during the campaign last year, despite the adamant assertions from several regular posters here.... Using a song in a commercial --- and arguably in a campaign appearance that is being videotaped --- w/o permission from the artist is not only unethical (by misrepresenting who the singer supports), it is illegal. Just sad that a lot of people who write and should know the laws don't have the first clue as to their application. (By the by, one of my biggest beefs w/ Sotomayor is her total misunderstanding of what copyright law is and who it is meant to protect --- from her judgment in the NYT vs their freelancers, that appeals and the SC overturned and basically called her a moron). Intellectual property laws need proper enforcement in a country with a great many people trying to make a living from their work. The McCain camp did this with several songs/artists, including Heart's "Barracuda" that introduced Sarah Palin. Not to pick on them solely; other pols have done it too. Just wanted to make this clear for everyone ahead of the next cycle.

Metamucil kicked in.

It is useful for quantifiable numbers. It's one thing to say that "Cell phones cause distractions that cause accidents. Everyone knows that." Quite another for them being directly attributed in police reports to 240,000 car accidents per annum in the last year that data is available. Especially when their use/involvement in the accident isn't always noted, and especially when they estimate that the number of cell phone drivers at any specific time has approximately doubled since that data was collected in 2002.

Ralph never thought about the connection of being selected in the 50th anniversary of the AFL and on reflection, he thinks it's special. Whew! That's a load off!

A lot of 'How's it feel to be in the HOF?' fluff, so far. I seriously doubt that my question sees NFL.com ether.

Along the lines of trying to visualize the other person and what they're saying, and I would suppose there's a part of of our brain that is devoted to deciphering "body language" and other non-lingual cues when we can't see the other person. You don't have to visualize someone who's right there in the car. Well, this was only a scientific study on the issue, and the suppression of it, conducted by the Nat'l Highway agency. But, it is a valid point. It would be best for states to enact their own laws. But the salient fact of this story was that US Congresscritters pressured the dept to not release the study's findings to the states. Seems odd that info would be intentionally withheld that would give said states something to base policy on.

Just sent a Q on exactly that.

OK. I saw an earlier version on the same website. What you quoted is from a writethru.

Per the article, even though the woman is claiming sexual assault, that appears to be unrelated to the complaint contained in the civil suit. Again, she is claiming defamation, not a bodily harm.

For things that affect only the stupid user/doer, I tend to agree. This is not one of those areas. They look down from the road for 5 seconds to type, "GO'G 2 C HP. U N?" and the next thing they know their bumper is merged with your trunk. blzrul, studies show that hands-free devices aren't much/any safer. It's not necessarily the physical part of holding a phone to the ear that causes the distraction, it's in the brain's processing the conversation and response. This processing slows reaction time to the equivalent of having a .08 BAC. LA, I'm just not sure about that. Conversation in the car is distracting to some degree. But conversation through the medium of a phone likely increases the distraction level by an order of magnitude. A former CT Public Safety Commissioner (the chief of the state police) lives in my uncle's neighborhood and said he saw less of a problem with speeding (to a certain limit ~ 75-80) than with tailgating/close weaving through traffic like it's NASCAR and cellphone/texting. And this was when cellphones weren't quite as ubiquitous as they are now. People just seem immune to realizing what can happen in even 1/2 second on the road. If the call is important enough, pull to the side of the road. If it's not important enough to do that, it can wait until you get where you're going. Or if someone is with you, let them talk.

Excellent!

If this were a criminal case being actively investigated by a DA, I think it would be just about the same. Very different situation, very different facts of the case. BTW, she's not suing for sexual assault; the allegation is defamation. Which is ironic in that she's already defamed him more (in $ terms) than he could ever defame her.

Link Ask any police officer you know who does traffic duty and they will tell you that cell phone driving/texting is the root cause of a plurality of the accidents they investigate. CT adopted laws a couple of years ago banning cell phone use while driving. Still see it all the time. Nothing makes people want to give up telling all and sundry what they're doing, where they're going, what color they're going to paint their nails, etc. At this point, it may be too ingrained in the culture for any kind of evidence or law to have any kind of impact.

The bolded part of your statement is about the only thing I can agree with. I'm not going to sit here and say with 100 percent certainty this is a fabrication. Women do get sexually assaulted, even by wealthy celebrities. That said, the legal system in this country is WAY messed up when anybody can file any kind of lawsuit and if they're proven wrong or baseless, there is virtually no consequence to screwing up someone else's life other than a loss of a little time and perhaps a few thousand $ for a lawyer. Civil court is a mainstay of those who know that by making enough noise they can get a several thousand dollar settlement to "just go away" b/c one story in the media, even if completely untrue, can mean losing millions, and b/c it's it's far less than a person/company would have to pay their lawyers. If I were BR and I knew I were innocent, I would be looking into suing her for defamation and slander. But, then again, that just creates more stories.

And even for Vinatieri, even after Indy paid him a boatload, was it this year or last that he had a string of games where he looked just terrible. Kicker is a much more difficult position for an average joe to understand what went wrong on a miss. And there's so much that goes into the kick. Probably the most import is the snapper. Not for nothing that RL's average jumped when Dorenbos was dropped and first-rate Mike Schneck was brought in, and that there were problems when the FO let the green Dan Neil take over, who flubbed two snaps in one game --- IIRC, it was that same Cleveland game everybody is harping on. Moorman is one of the best holders in the game, and he and Lindell work together very well. Notice how that's the usual response. 'Just sign someone else.' I want a name. And the problem with signing inexperienced kickers is that you don't know what you're going to get. If you make a move based on one preseason, be ready for it to backfire once the big boys play full-time and the pressure cooker increases. Every year, they bring a guy or two into camp. Mostly it's to not wear out the starting kicker's leg. Partly, it's to give an audition in the case of finding a phenom or a safety valve in case of an injury during the season. The fact that league-wide there is rarely an 'open competition' for kicker during camps might tell you something. But for the 'Off with his head!' crowd, it won't tell them much. Bobby April has gone on record that 'booting it out of the endzone' is not what he expects or wants. One of his biggest praises of Lindell is the exacting placement of the ball on KOs based on the coverage assignment. And let's not forget Lindell on off-sides kicks --- remember that game where he kicked and recovered the ball? RL may not have fooled that actor on the "Lie to Me" commercials, but he sure sold the Seahags on it in Week 1 last year.

Bobby April, as far as we know, has made zero overtures to Russ et al. to find a replacement. In fact, the only thing April has done is beam that he has Lindell for placement of the ball on kickoffs (Remember how we've had the #1 ST in the league several times recently? Yeah. He's a part of that), and he's not that bad on FGs either. Had some misses last year. It happens. But he's also playing in some nasty conditions. Bring a lot of the warm weather kickers up to B-lo and watch their numbers tank... plus they'd be useless in STs and all the gadget stuff that April likes to do. Bottom line --- if Bobby April is good with Lindell, I'm good with Lindell.

Hmm... I think I just found my nephew's Christmas present. From some pics of the interior pages on Amazon, that looks awesome.

No, indeed. As I wrote, the FCC wrote a presser around the time of the transition re: use of DTS repeater towers in affected areas. Your location seems like a prime example where it could be used. This is a B&E article from 2005 on the topic. Then again --- and I don't intend this to be mean-spirited (I'm fairly rural myself, as much as you can get in NE) --- Olean is like "the ass end of nowhere," especially as digital OTA goes. It's questionable which TV market (DMA) the area belongs to to make a DTS request --- Nothing seems to qualify in PA. Erie? Buffalo? Both of those markets likely don't have stations very much able ($) or interested (again, $; failing a strong devotion to the public service) to get that area into the digital fold of things... without some kind of help from the FCC/federal government that forced the switch. I think this story might be worth the OTH checking it out. Perhaps contact the congresscritter and Buffalo & Erie station managers. Find out if the govt owns / accesses any towers that might be suitable for a DTS (they need not be as tall as the large antenna farm towers) and whether they would allow broadcasters to install transmitters. Might be a dead end, but it would be worthwhile for the newspaper to at least ask.

Pirates of the Caribbean?!?! Yeah, there's that. I recognize what he's done. I'm also someone who thinks a lot of Mr. Wilson's meddling with the team caused many of the problems. But his stone hasn't been carved yet. I will reserve gratitude only if he does his best to ensure that the team stays in Buffalo (I'm cool with the 1 game/year in Toronto continuing, if necessary). The way he's gone about it, it's like he found a rare, precious jewel but when it was time to do the deed, instead of passing it down, he sells it, leaving no legacy, no 'inheritance' so to speak. Just a really old house to pay to maintain... or demolish. If the team does relocate after Ralph passes, from the other side of the ocean, you might see that he bled a region dry. A man worthy of honor in the community makes preparations rather than foment uncertainty. Sure, after he's gone things can go to hell a thousand different ways, but it's an irresponsible man who doesn't at least try to set something up for his works to continue. TO didn't deserve a token key. But any way it cuts, Ralph doesn't deserve a key. On one hand, if he lets whatever happen happen, he'll be a step above Art Modell in my esteem; on the other, if there is a more clandestine plan in the works and he has done his part to ensure the Bills remain in Buffalo, then he will deserve a 50-foot statue. It's still Ralph's choice to determine how he will be remembered.

A much better web site to use for this is www.tvfool.com. It annoyed me to no end that Antennaweb was the one all of those conversion messages were hawking. It's a piece of sh-- and it tells you just about nothing. TVfool gives you so much more info, more nearly accurate potential channel listings, dB requirements, magnetic or compass readings toward the towers, etc. You may well be one of the affected populations, from what I remember of how far out in the environs you are. DTV reception is limited to the curvature of the earth, ~ 60 miles (good tropo can extend this, but it doesn't happen often). That sucks for the woman who bought antenna and boxes.... But having been in Army comm., she really should have known about the 60-mile limit, and to have done her homework before buying it. For the small number of people who are now totally w/o TV reception due to the change (and who got channels previously), I think there should be some federal assistance for cable/sat --- at least for installation costs, or paying for the bare-bones cable service for a set time period. Note that this should still come out of the $19B Congress picked up by selling access to the public's airwaves. Or, it would show a great public service example for the DMA stations of the region to build or get access to a DTS repeater tower (does the govt own a tower in the region?) to extend coverage into the affected area. From what I read, it won't be high-def but it would be a digital signal. You might pass this note on to the reporter and maybe generate some pressure so your area's citizens aren't left in the dark or be forced to shell out hard-earned for pay TV just to get a picture on their tubes.

For your next mission, if you choose to accept it, you are to infiltrate Gillette Stadium, obtain videographic evidence of Bill Belichick sacrificing stray kittens to Satan, and whack Tom Brady's other knee. Zero residual presence. Good luck. This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds. . . . . . ===Pfffttt===

Is it properly grounded? I only say that b/c back when I was young, we had a satellite service (OTA-only now and happier for it!), problems arose frequently. Bad weather or not (but in bad weather it was unwatchable). Come to find out years later that the tech grounded it to the copper house water pipes. Unfortunately, these pipes switched to plastic before they went outside. No real ground. It was just an assumption made during the install that I think is what screwed it the whole time we had it. They kept blaming trees that were 200' away, when it would have been best to go over the install thoroughly and ask questions. Other than that, it may be a matter like Mike above of aligning the dish better, or troll the sat forums for your specific problem. G' luck.

Nice to see you, Tgreg. We've really missed your input here. Are you still LOST-pure? In the comparison that Lindelof made, if Locke = Snape, then Hurley = Harry Potter. I believe that JKR said that she originally planned to have Ron die; and she only finally changed her mind during the writing of the final book. Continuing the analogy, Charlie = Ron. Watching "Through the Looking Glass" still gets me. Charlie was/is such a great character. Another thought I've been having recently, regarding the energy/electromagnetism, the voices, etc. And I got around to it, what is the electromagnetism inherent on the island (and presumably at other spots around the world, according to Issac, the healer who Rose went to)? Well, first, let me expound.... We are energy. Our bodies are electric (thank you, Walt Whitman, ye knew not how right you were) from our heartbeats to the +s and -s of the sodium-potassium pump that basically charges all of our cells. Our neurons fire electrical messages to our brains. Reading what some of the whispers were (thanks for that link DrDank), some of them said "sis" in the ones with Shannon after Boone had died. It's like the energy of the dead is still there, it's flowing. In the 'LOST is a Game' theory, it could be like... the players who've finished their game still being able to watch and act on the current players --- kind of like how in LIFE after you finish and their are still players playing, you can still spin the wheel --- I believe they call it playing the lottery. Anyway, think of it... Ghosthunters in the real world use EMF equipment to detect ghosts. The wellspring of the electromagnetic energy in the Swan could come from those who've died on the island (or it could be a larger group than that) and are still present in an undercurrent beneath the surface. Run this by Miles' gift. He can somehow read the electromagnetic energy of the dead to communicate with them. Hurley, among others, can see the electromagnetic energy take form. Locke/Locke's body was a receptor of the electromagnetic energy of the MIB. It might also help explain Richard, and even Jacob, living so long, the extraordinary healing powers, etc. It is pure energy healing them (especially, it seems, for Locke) and keeping them alive, up to a certain threshold. Dead is dead, as Ben said, but then again, dead does not mean the end of the game or the end of energy. I've been thinking about this for a while now, stringing together some deeply philosophical ideas I've had for a long time after taking chemistry, biology/botany, and throwing in some Shakespeare, Vonnegut, Asimov and Kafka.... and finally decided to share b/c more and more it addresses the most basic property of the island --- its energy. Lindelof a while ago said that there will be some things we never find out about the island, but that some of the questions people often ask are almost self-same to things that aren't given answers in other works. As he made the case, no one really asks What is the nature of the Force in Star Wars? It just is; perhaps a real explanation isn't even possible. You just have to take some things as they're presented.

There's a site called "LOST Spoilers" that's a good read during the hiatus. Right now they're posting some clips and snips of Cuse and Lindelof, and what some of the actors are saying. One interesting tidbit: And a Michael Emerson (Ben) snip: You know, I was just thinking a moment the other day (I know. I shouldn't do that). In terms of the whole "LOST is a game" theory.... The title of the series is 'Lost,' not 'Won.' Just something to think about.