Cav's Place

Whenever I happen to glance through an offer or just browse through an on-line shop, I am painfully reminded of how little choice there is. It matters little whether we’re talking about tyranny of the majority or the manufacturers impose this themselves, the result is the same. I’m talking about the fact that the vast majority of electronics are black. For me that’s a huge problem because I can’t stand black, so my options are severely limited, but the greater issue is that there’s no choice for anyone. It seems nothing has changed since Henry Ford‘s famous “so long as it is black”…
It actually seems quite strange… A lot of brands do care about the design of their products and try to make them stand out in one way or another, yet they overlook what likely is the design element that’s easiest to change, namely the color. Cheaper models are regular black and expensive models are shiny black, like that’s all there is, no other paint is available. And that shiny black doesn’t even have the advantage of making dirt less noticeable anymore, since it’s actually easier to stain than bright white, any touch leaving obvious fingerprints on the product.

Trying to think about it objectively, Henry Ford’s statement does make sense when it comes to cheap products. Painting all of them the same way certainly reduces production costs, and if black paint dries faster then it seems like the best choice. Consumers who look for very cheap products will be happy that they save a little more money, and when the price is your main concern you don’t complain too much about the design. So, yes, it might be understandable when it comes to budget products, but not for anything else!
On the other hand, if the manufacturers resort to black simply because it seems to be what most people want, it’s certainly not right. Most people are not all people, so you can’t take away the choice. Not to mention that, if you do that, it tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. When the vast majority of products are black, it makes sense that most people are going to buy black products, don’t you think? Inertia and herd mentality also come into play, people saying they want black items simply because that’s what seems to be “cool” and that’s how the really nice products are anyway.

Either way, you can’t justify this flood of black for anything other than budget products. I’m saying budget products because I like this system which is being used recently to classify certain products into budget (or value), mainstream, performance and enthusiast categories. It seems far better than the old one, which only used three categories, so I’ll use it to explain what I’d like to see when it comes to anything that doesn’t fit into the budget category.
Mainstream products should at least allow for some limited amount of choice when it comes to color. Two options are of course the minimum, but there should be three whenever possible. The choices should be as different as possible, the most obvious example being black, white and some “crazy” color like bright pink. That should give people some small amount of control over their immediate environment without significant costs for the manufacturers.
Performance products, on the other hand, should offer people significantly more choice. There could be more colors or the same three color choices could be combined with two or three different design models, allowing people to mix and match and giving them even more control. The different designs could imply some noticeable costs, so it might not be that easy to implement, but the larger color palette shouldn’t be much of a problem, especially considering that performance products are not cheap to begin with, so any difference would be hardly noticeable.
As for enthusiast products, the amount of available options could be even greater. This is not mandatory, as the number of options I said should be available for performance products is enough to offer the consumer a reasonable amount of control, but people who are interested in such products do tend to want the very best in all aspects, so it certainly couldn’t hurt. Costs shouldn’t be much of a problem either, since the impact would be very small when you consider the price of most enthusiast products.

I’m just asking for some choices, which seems like a rather simple request… Actually, what I said above could be a second step, the first being making sure that manufacturers at least have a fair number of products of different colors in their offer. So, in the beginning, they could still release each product in a single color, but make sure that not all (or even most) of their products are the same color. That seems very simple and could be quite useful for a time, as long as they’d alternate said colors and not have a few product families entirely in one color.

You could say that I’m just blowing a pet peeve way out of proportion, but I think this is a real problem. Yes, it is a personal issue because I’d like to still be able to choose items based on performance and reliability without having black or any dark or “crazy” colors in my room, but the lack of choice is always a big problem for all. That’s because the lack of choice makes people think even less when they’re thinking far too little as it is. Of course, those in positions of authority tend to like the others much better when their brains are turned off, which just shows how things fit together…
It really doesn’t seem like I’m asking for too much… And that’s quite an event, because I’m usually asking for major changes in order to solve very serious problems, so it would be nice if somebody would take note of the fact that I was more than reasonable this time and only wrote about changes which could easily happen…

April Fools’ Day… What does having a day during which people are encouraged to lie and make fun of each other say about our society? As if humans wouldn’t be lying and having fun at others’ expense the rest of the time as well…
Just take a moment to think about it. We are celebrating lies; celebrating playing tricks on others! People are being told to be dishonest and manipulative because it’s fun and “cool”! News could be fake, people you trust could put you in weird situations… I don’t care how it started or long it has been going on, it’s just wrong and shouldn’t happen anymore!

Yes, people have every right to do anything they want, including being dishonest and manipulative, but only as long as all those involved know and approve of what’s going on. A group of friends could spend the day trying to play tricks on each other if they want to, that won’t be a problem, but what is a problem is that it’s not “fun” if the other is aware of what’s going on, is it? The whole point seems to be to find people who really believe that what you say is real and who would be the most affected by it… But, you see, it stops being fun as soon as somebody gets hurt. And since the whole point seems to be to hurt others in some way, including embarrassing, angering or saddening them, it simply should not happen.
What’s more, when it goes past the individual level and you start seeing respected news sources publishing fake stories, the potential for hurting people becomes extremely high, especially when such news often take advantage of people’s desires and hopes, telling them that something they have been wishing for has just happened. How do you think those who initially believe such announcements feel once they are told they were just a joke?

I have to ask, is it fun when you get depressed? Do you enjoy feeling used, or cheated, or taken for a fool? If not, then why do it to others? Why take part in this farce? Why would it be different if it’s this one day instead of any other? Is “tradition” enough to turn off your reasoning? Are you just a sheep following the herd?
Actually, the vast majority of people would have to answer “yes” to those last two questions, if they were willing to be honest for a change… Which leads us to a major problem of our society, but that’s not the topic of this post. Here, I’m just trying to show how wrong having such a day is. The fact that people care far more about how things are and were than about how they should be, about right and wrong, is another issue for another time.

I choose to “celebrate” this April Fools’ Day by fighting for truth, honesty and trustworthiness. Not expecting anyone to agree with me, but hardly anybody ever does and that never stopped me before.
Try to be honest and dependable every day of the year… Far too few are those things any day of the year…

Last year I was saying that I’d have felt better if Earth Hour would have happened a day later, because I was doing it the “hardcore” way, turning off and unplugging everything in my room, and that’d have meant missing the first 30 minutes of an important match and I’d have been able to say I really gave something up for the cause. This year it works out just like that, turning everything off meaning I’ll lose the first half of a crucial match for our national team.
I’m turning everything off because the lights in my room are off the vast majority of the time anyway, so it wouldn’t really mean anything otherwise. After all, since we’re talking about one hour per year, you should do something really special to make it count. Turning off the lights when they’re not really needed and not leaving electronics in stand-by is something we should all do every day…

And that’s the real point of this post. Sure, it might be “cool” to turn off your lights for one hour and claim you’re helping the environment, but it’s hardly relevant. A year has 8760 (or 8784) hours, so how you act during the other 8759 (or 8783) is what truly matters.
You see these suggestions everywhere, which means that, just as it is with pretty much everything when it comes to the environment, everybody who cares already knows and anybody who doesn’t, won’t. But I guess a little reminder can’t really hurt. It could perhaps annoy, but when did that ever stop me from doing anything?

Don’t leave the lights on in a room nobody’s in, or even in a room somebody is in when they’re not really needed. Also, since LED lighting is not quite powerful enough yet and very expensive either way, switch to CFLs and don’t install more than needed. In order to use them most efficiently, keep in mind that CFLs tend to need up to five minutes to reach their maximum brightness, that they don’t work well outdoors, in too hot or humid spaces or when fully enclosed, and that their lifespan is severely shortened if they are switched on and off too quickly, needing up to ten minutes to “settle” in one state or the other. Also, don’t sacrifice quality for price. The cheaper models tend to be less bright, last less and contain more mercury than the more expensive ones, and mercury is the main problem when it comes to CFLs. While true that they contain extremely small amounts of it, you should still be very careful not to break one, and know how to clean up properly in case it happens. Also, while dumping them in the landfill will release less mercury into the environment than their lower power consumption saved during their lifespan, it should still be avoided. Certain companies collect used CFLs for proper disposal, large stores are even required to do so in some places, so you should make use of those services.
Turn off the TV, radio and any other appliances when you’re no longer using them. Turning off such a device implies actually walking up to it and pressing the button, not putting it in stand-by from the remote. Even better, you should unplug such devices, therefore also avoiding any power losses which might occur even when the device is turned off. Alternatively, you could plug them into power strips which can be turned off, or perhaps “smart” ones, which turn themselves off. That way you can avoid unnecessary power use without needing to unplug everything each time. Also, when it comes to computers, you might need to leave the computer constantly on for one reason or another, but there’s no need to leave the monitor, speakers or other peripherals on while you’re not actually using them. Keep in mind that some UPSs keep charging even when they’re turned off, so those must be unplugged whenever you don’t want that to happen. The same applies to chargers and power converters of any kind, such as those for laptops or mobile phones.
Don’t use appliances which require electricity if you can do something without them. For example, hang your clothes out to dry instead of using a dryer, and definitely fight against any regulations which some cities are enacting in order to forbid people from doing so! Also, don’t use electricity for cooking or heating when other means are available. The efficiency of such devices is pretty awful, meaning that, considering how most electricity is generated today, you’d most likely be better off using more traditional methods of cooking and heating, by burning natural gas. That’s not a good thing to do, but unless you get all of your power from completely “green” sources, it’s better that way, for now. And still on this topic, keep in mind that cooling devices, such as refrigerators and air conditioners, require the most power. Keep them in the best possible condition and learn ways to use them more efficiently. I for one strongly advise against using air conditioners unless the temperatures are truly extreme, and even then you should help them in any way possible, such as making sure all windows are closed and covered in such a way as to repel as much of the heat as possible.
But perhaps the most important thing to do, if we’re to change anything, is to make your purchases speak for you. Be informed and look for the most efficient appliances and components. Also, don’t buy things that are significantly more powerful than you need. If you can’t find something that offers you the features you need without using up unreasonable amounts of electricity, complain about it, refuse to buy the “hungry” version and demand a more efficient one. If enough people would let their purchases speak for them in such a way, manufacturers would be forced to adapt and create more and more efficient products, which can only be a good thing for us all, not to mention the planet as a whole.

As for this Earth Hour, stay inside, with the lights and as many devices and appliances as possible turned off. If you go out, the city or the places you’ll go to will most likely need to provide lights, meaning you didn’t accomplish much of anything. Instead, if you stay in and enjoy the darkness and, hopefully, the silence, the experience could be very beneficial. Alternatively, for those who have partners, it would be the perfect moment to have sex, possibly under candlelight, away from distractions and without being in a hurry. Very few things, if any, could be better than that, so enjoy this Earth Hour and, if possible, make it your hour as well…

I usually like updating programs. Bugs get fixed, new features get added, sounds pretty good. Completely new versions, however, often tend to be more trouble than they’re worth. I have previously written about changes that are not worth adapting to, so I won’t go into that again. I only want to write about a few recent updates I’ve performed and crashes I’ve experienced. Only venting, perhaps.

I’ve been using BitDefender since version 7. It was shortly before the launch of version 8, so I didn’t use BitDefender 7 for long, but it seemed nice enough. Then I got along so well with BitDefender 8 that I intended to actually buy BitDefender 9 when it launched. I couldn’t do that because it was around the time Andra left, so there was nobody to actually purchase it and I just used a pirated version of it. Later, after I got thrown back here, I had other things on my mind than to start using a piece of software legally, so I delayed it until the start of 2007, when I finally bought BitDefender 10. That was a bad choice, as they had removed some functionality that I liked and it generally kept crashing and causing all sorts of problems, culminating with blue screens when I was on DC++ and in the middle of fast transfers each way. The talks with their technical support people didn’t solve anything, but it did seem that my reports were used for the next version, as installing BitDefender 2008 as soon as it launched did solve my problems. It still had some minor issues, but those were mainly caused by the fact that my computer was too slow at the time.
Then I built this new computer and installed Vista on it. BitDefender 2008 didn’t seem to like that too much, since it was crashing regularly. Actually, it was crashing after almost 25 hours of running each time. So there were some new e-mail messages exchanged, but once again there was no solution until BitDefender 2009 was launched. Installing it solved the crashes, but created some other rather annoying problems. It kept stealing the focus 30 minutes after an update, and it did it twice each time, a few seconds apart. I asked what’s going on, they said they know of the problem and it will be fixed in the first major update, but it’s still happening even now, though less often. Another annoying issue is that sometimes the advanced settings screen simply becomes inaccessible, which means you can’t access anything if you have it set to go directly to that screen when you click the taskbar icon. The only solution is still to reboot and hope it works again after that.
Still, they’ve outdone themselves yesterday, when a BitDefender update which required a reboot managed to crash Vista. It’s the first blue screen I see since I have this computer, and it’ll be a year old three weeks from now. BitDefender 2009 usually causes issues when there are updates which require a reboot, but the issues used to be limited to itself, crashing instead of turning itself off nicely and giving some errors about being unable to read some temporary files, sometimes even on the “shutting down” screen. This time, however, I imagine they must be “proud” of themselves. As for me… I’m trying to work with them and find a solution one more time, which might be the last time. My license expires three and a half months from now, and if things will stay like this I’ll start looking for other products to replace it with. I don’t like the idea, I’ve gotten used to it, but I’m also fed up with all the issues it keeps having lately.

On the other hand, it seems that some programs don’t exactly play nice with Gigabyte‘s Dynamic Energy Saver software. None actually “says” anything about it, but I did experience a couple of “hard” reboots, as in the computer turning itself off and then back on a moment later, as if the reset button had been pressed. They happened when another program was trying to access certain more sensitive areas, so I assume there was some conflict between it and DESA and that caused the CPU to be left without power for a moment. (I said DESA because I have upgraded to the “advanced” version some time ago, after updating the BIOS as well.)

Moving on, since I have just went back to playing it these days, I want to yell at the “helpful” people on the BioWare forums, who know that Neverwinter Nights keeps causing Vista to reset the video card and therefore crash the game, but basically say that “if the game crashes under Vista, get rid of Vista”. Why thank you kindly, you ass!
I have narrowed down the cause to some weird thing the OpenGL driver, which Neverwinter Nights uses, does when there are transparent characters on the screen, such as when the player is under the effect of some sort of concealment, but I can’t do anything about it. Thankfully, considering the amount of time I spend concealed in one way or another, it doesn’t always happen. But it’s still very annoying when it does, especially when loading a saved game where the character is concealed causes the video card to be reset immediately, making that saved game unusable. It only happened with one saved game so far, and I have saved in that situation many times, but it’s still a problem.

Finally, I have just installed Internet Explorer 8 and I’m not happy with it. Yes, it does seem to have some nice features and the smoother look is appreciated, but my contact with the bad parts of it came only a few minutes after installation, when I tried testing some pages and noticed that it treats CSS as illogically as Firefox does. That might be because it conforms to certain “web standards”, but when the standards are wrong you fight to change them, not change yourself to suit them. Also, there seem to be a few other problems, one of which I’m noticing just now because each autosave causes the edit box to scroll up many lines.

With the start of the new season, one which will feature massive regulation changes, right around the corner, I thought I should post my suggestions for this competition. I did send a long e-mail with some of them to a site about three years ago and received a reply saying that it had been forwarded to the FIA. I don’t know if that happened and I’m sure it didn’t matter either way, but since I thought about all of this, and also made some changes during these three years, I might as well make it all public.

The obvious problem of Formula One is that most races aren’t exciting to watch. The aerodynamics might be largely to blame for that, since a car loses power and becomes harder to drive when it’s close behind another, but regulations also play a part in it. When you don’t allow aggressive driving and pretty much say that a driver should let himself be overtaken when an obviously faster car is right behind him, you don’t leave much room for interesting “battles”. The width of the cars could also be a factor, not to mention the fact that they’re so easy to damage, which tends to favor defensive driving.
The current rule changes might do something to reduce the negative effect a car has on the one right behind it, but they do nothing about all the other parts of this problem. What’s more, the wider front wings seem to increase the risk of damage and therefore force drivers to avoid “battles” even more. I wonder why couldn’t they just reduce the width of the cars while they were at it, since it’s obvious that it’s easier to overtake a narrower car. And I also don’t agree with limiting the number of times a movable segment can be moved during a lap. If you allow such elements, you might as well let the drivers make the best use of them, which might include repeated changes while trying to either overtake or stay ahead. That could have made for some very interesting moments, with the drivers having to split their attention between the track, the other driver and these new controls.
Then there are the regulations which prevent any form of dangerous driving. You can’t exactly have a thrilling “duel” between two drivers while each of them drives safely! There should be some imposed measures which would make the bodywork sturdier and able to withstand certain impacts which might happen during such heated moments without requiring immediate repairs. Then drivers should be allowed to drive more aggressively, actively block, try to force their opponents into making mistakes, or attempt to pass where there’s no room for the maneuver to see if their opponent is going to swerve and let them through. Of course you shouldn’t allow deliberate attempts to damage another car or actually pushing an opponent off the track, but that’s something completely different. I also think that lapped drivers should be allowed to carry on with their own race instead of being forced to let the faster cars through. Of course they shouldn’t actively block, but they shouldn’t have to lose time and possibly even positions, if they’re currently fighting for one, just because a faster car is about to lap them. Finding a way past them without forcing them to slow down and move aside should be the job of the faster car’s driver! And lapped drivers should also be allowed to take back those laps by passing those who lapped them, if they’re able to, and in this situation they should be allowed to use any means permitted to a driver who’d be on the same lap as the one he’s trying to pass.
Another method of increasing the number of “battles” on the track would be increasing the number of times the safety car shows up and decreasing the number of times yellow flags are waved, since the safety car allows drivers to get closer together while yellow flags don’t allow them to pass each other while driving through that specific area. This would mean that some events which currently require yellow flags would require the appearance of the safety car, even if only for a lap or two, while others would no longer require any restrictions at all. Still, at least I’m glad they realized that pit lane restrictions while the safety car is on the track were a very bad idea.
Bringing barriers close to the track once again could also make racing more interesting, since mistakes would result in drivers having to pull out of the race more often and that would make the results more unpredictable. On the other hand, while rain certainly makes a race far more interesting than any regulations ever could, I firmly oppose the idea of sprinkling the track during the race, as I heard it was suggested, simply because water is a precious resource and we must not waste it like this.

A second problem would appear to be the costs associated with Formula One. The thing is that Formula One is supposed to be an “elite” sport; it’s not supposed to be easily accessible or affordable! And, truth be told, if one team is willing to spend 100 million dollars per season to gain one tenth of a second per lap over their rivals, they will gain that tenth of a second and they will win, it’s as simple as that. So attempts to limit the expenses of the top teams are most likely doomed to failure, and detrimental to the sport if somehow they’d be successful. Yes, I’m firmly against all the measures aimed at solving this “problem”, even considering the current economic situation… Especially when these measures include standardized components and freezing development.
But it is true that there should be a way for teams with reduced financial resources to compete… Standardized components could have a place here, with the FIA deciding to let the teams develop their own parts if they are able to do so but also ensuring a supply of standardized components to the teams who couldn’t afford to develop their own. The performance of those standardized components should allow the teams who use them to score a decent number of points, and hopefully even an occasional podium finish, but if they ever allow them to fight for the title it means there’s a problem somewhere. If those components would prove to deliver an unsatisfactory level of performance, there could be certain rule changes in order to still allow the teams who use them to earn points, such as reduced weight limits and improved aerodynamics.
Still, the worst part of reducing costs is that it limits development. Formula One should be all about development and constantly improving performance! I agree that most developments should have some relevance in the “real world”, but that certainly isn’t going to happen if you limit or even freeze them! Instead of constantly reducing the engine capacity in order to keep performance relatively constant, as it used to happen, or freezing its development, as it happens now, the engines should be severely restricted once and then the teams should be allowed to develop them based on those specifications for many years to come, until they’d manage to regain the performance they used to have. The efficiency of the resulting engines would be very useful for regular cars as well…
Speaking of efficiency, fuel efficiency should be a major concern for Formula One. Of course, developing better hybrid technologies or even switching to electric cars would be a great idea, but the FIA could start moving in that direction by restricting the amount of fuel a car can use during a race. Banning refueling during the race could have some effects, since the less efficient cars would be heavier at the start of the race, but actually limiting the amount of fuel each car has available for each race would be even better. This limit could start from the average consumption of the last season and then be reduced at the start of each following season, and perhaps there could even be certain advantages granted to the teams who wouldn’t use all the fuel they’d be allowed to use. This would force teams to make engines be as efficient as possible, which is certainly very useful in the “real world”.

There might be a few other things, but these are the most important… As with everything, it’s just an idea, feel free to give me a better one if you think you can…