Electricity touts
Paul Dormer
changes in fuel prices over the past few years is that it had stopped
representatives from electricity companies coming round the door touting
for business.
Used to be that electricity supply was a state monopoly and there was
only one company in any area. Then came privatisation and a number of
companies can now compete to sell you electricity. And every few weeks,
someone would knock on the door (or ring the doorbell in my case) often
not actually mentioning that they weren't representing the company you're
actually with (with the name changes, it was sometimes hard to keep up)
and pressure you into signing with them thinking you were only changing
something with your current company.
But for some years, this stopped. Until today. It was therefore ironic
that I'd just last week got my quarterly bill from my existing company
and it was my lowest bill for two years. Mind you, I don't think I'd
sign up for anything at the door now even if they said they'd pay me to
take their electricity.
David Friedman
p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
> One advantage of the recent economic situation, and especially the
> changes in fuel prices over the past few years is that it had stopped
> representatives from electricity companies coming round the door touting
> for business.
>
At a slight tangent ... .
I've had two people show up at my door in recent weeks, wanting me to
hire them to do something substantial--once to do home repairs, once
tree trimming and associated work. In the first case I checked on the
firm online and concluded that the positive reviews were
bogus--sufficiently positive and generic to be almost certainly written
by the firm--and the negative reviews were not.
In the second case I found nothing relevant online, asked for phone
numbers of people in my area whom they had worked for, was given a
bunch, called several of the people up, got generally favorable reports.
Our yard now looks quite a lot better than it did two weeks ago.
It struck me as an interesting example, in miniature, of how one
(imperfectly) solves the problem of imperfect information in such
transactions.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
David Loewe, Jr.
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
>
>> One advantage of the recent economic situation, and especially the
>> changes in fuel prices over the past few years is that it had stopped
>> representatives from electricity companies coming round the door touting
>> for business.
>>
>
>At a slight tangent ... .
>
>I've had two people show up at my door in recent weeks, wanting me to
>hire them to do something substantial--once to do home repairs, once
>tree trimming and associated work. In the first case I checked on the
>firm online and concluded that the positive reviews were
>bogus--sufficiently positive and generic to be almost certainly written
>by the firm--and the negative reviews were not.
>
>In the second case I found nothing relevant online, asked for phone
>numbers of people in my area whom they had worked for, was given a
>bunch, called several of the people up, got generally favorable reports.
Did it occur to you that perhaps he only gave you the numbers of known
happy customers?
>Our yard now looks quite a lot better than it did two weeks ago.
>
>It struck me as an interesting example, in miniature, of how one
>(imperfectly) solves the problem of imperfect information in such
>transactions.
--
"The dead remember our indifference.
The dead remember our silence."
President James Marshall "Air Force One"
David Friedman
"David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:48:12 -0800, David Friedman
> <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>
> > p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
> >
> >> One advantage of the recent economic situation, and especially the
> >> changes in fuel prices over the past few years is that it had stopped
> >> representatives from electricity companies coming round the door touting
> >> for business.
> >>
> >
> >At a slight tangent ... .
> >
> >I've had two people show up at my door in recent weeks, wanting me to
> >hire them to do something substantial--once to do home repairs, once
> >tree trimming and associated work. In the first case I checked on the
> >firm online and concluded that the positive reviews were
> >bogus--sufficiently positive and generic to be almost certainly written
> >by the firm--and the negative reviews were not.
> >
> >In the second case I found nothing relevant online, asked for phone
> >numbers of people in my area whom they had worked for, was given a
> >bunch, called several of the people up, got generally favorable reports.
>
> Did it occur to you that perhaps he only gave you the numbers of known
> happy customers?
I assume he only gave me the numbers of customers he thought were happy.
But talking to happy customers provides information.
David V. Loewe, Jr
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:48:12 -0800, David Friedman
>> <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>> >At a slight tangent ... .
>> >
>> >I've had two people show up at my door in recent weeks, wanting me to
>> >hire them to do something substantial--once to do home repairs, once
>> >tree trimming and associated work. In the first case I checked on the
>> >firm online and concluded that the positive reviews were
>> >bogus--sufficiently positive and generic to be almost certainly written
>> >by the firm--and the negative reviews were not.
>> >
>> >In the second case I found nothing relevant online, asked for phone
>> >numbers of people in my area whom they had worked for, was given a
>> >bunch, called several of the people up, got generally favorable reports.
>>
>> Did it occur to you that perhaps he only gave you the numbers of known
>> happy customers?
>
>I assume he only gave me the numbers of customers he thought were happy.
>But talking to happy customers provides information.
Okay.
--
"Listen to the tide slowly turning
Wash all our heartaches away
We're part of the fire that is burning
And from the ashes we can build another day"
David J. Hayward
Dave Whiley
>
> But for some years, this stopped. Until today. It was therefore ironic
> that I'd just last week got my quarterly bill from my existing company
> and it was my lowest bill for two years. Mind you, I don't think I'd
> sign up for anything at the door now even if they said they'd pay me to
> take their electricity.
I've always found the thing that makes it easiest to say "no" to these
people is that, seemingly without exception, they turn up at the most
inconvenient moment imaginable, so that I'm already in a thoroughly
grumpy frame of mind before they even start their pitch. Most go as
soon as they're asked politely.
The ones who are really annoying are those who must wait all of five
seconds before deciding that, because the door hasn't been opened,
no-one's going to answer it. On many occasions I've gone to the door to
find that there's no-one there, but it's obvious that other houses are
being worked by a door-to-door sales team.
I grew out of ringing the doorbell and running away when I was still a
small boy.
--
Dave
not-me should be djw001 and there's no need for any wossname
Keith F. Lynch
> "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Did it occur to you that perhaps he only gave you the numbers of
>> known happy customers?
> I assume he only gave me the numbers of customers he thought were
> happy. But talking to happy customers provides information.
Indeed. When applying for a job, I only give people I think will say
good things about me as references. I don't think that's dishonest.
(Actually, I can't think of any bosses who would have anything bad to
say about me. But if I did, I wouldn't list them as references.)
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Keith F. Lynch
> One advantage of the recent economic situation, and especially
> the changes in fuel prices over the past few years is that it had
> stopped representatives from electricity companies coming round the
> door touting for business.
You don't have a "no solicitors" sign on your door?
> Used to be that electricity supply was a state monopoly and there
> was only one company in any area. Then came privatisation and a
> number of companies can now compete to sell you electricity.
Same here. But none ever came door to door.
I find door-to-door sales obnoxious. If someone tries to sell me
something that way, that will guarantee that I will avoid that brand.
What does electricity cost there? Here, it's supposedly 8.12 cents
per kilowatt hour, but that's the asterisked price. The actual price,
with mandatory taxes, surcharges, and fees, is more than twice that:
17 cents per kilowatt hour.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> Paul Dormer <p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:
>> One advantage of the recent economic situation, and especially
>> the changes in fuel prices over the past few years is that it had
>> stopped representatives from electricity companies coming round the
>> door touting for business.
>
> You don't have a "no solicitors" sign on your door?
>
>> Used to be that electricity supply was a state monopoly and there
>> was only one company in any area. Then came privatisation and a
>> number of companies can now compete to sell you electricity.
>
> Same here. But none ever came door to door.
>
> I find door-to-door sales obnoxious. If someone tries to sell me
> something that way, that will guarantee that I will avoid that brand.
>
> What does electricity cost there? Here, it's supposedly 8.12 cents
> per kilowatt hour, but that's the asterisked price. The actual price,
> with mandatory taxes, surcharges, and fees, is more than twice that:
> 17 cents per kilowatt hour.
We have a slightly higher cost per kwH. We also pay a $18 base charge for
service plus 5% sales tax. The cost per kWh varies slightly each month
depending on what our electric co-op paid for power. We also have a
single-tier cost structure in summer and a two-tier system that gives a
slight break to smaller consumers in winter. For last month, still counted
as summer, we paid 12.8 cents/kWh, or 14.6 cents/kWh including the base
charge and sales tax on usage of 1603 kWh. As an aside, the significant
base charge is fairly common for rural co-ops. Line maintenance costs are
significantly higher per customer than is typical for urban electric
companies and many rural accounts have very low usage.
Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com
netcat
> What does electricity cost there? Here, it's supposedly 8.12 cents
> per kilowatt hour, but that's the asterisked price. The actual price,
> with mandatory taxes, surcharges, and fees, is more than twice that:
> 17 cents per kilowatt hour.
14.7 cents, with all taxes added up and a very rough conversion of 1USD=
10EEK (which it was recently when I last checked)
rgds,
netcat
Paul Dormer
dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com (David Friedman) wrote:
>
> I've had two people show up at my door in recent weeks, wanting me
> to hire them to do something substantial--once to do home repairs,
> once tree trimming and associated work.
About ten years ago, someone came round offering to replace the gutters
and soffits outside my house. Somehow, he persuaded me to have it done.
(He was Irish - they have the gift of the gab, as they say.)
The next day, I got home from work to find they'd already started, even
though he'd said the work wasn't going to start until next week. Then he
informed me that when they took the old gutters off, they found extra
work that needed doing. Of course, they charged me for that.
Then, when they wanted paying, the guy in charge said he'd prefer cash.
The total came to something like �900 - who carries that much cash around
normally, and ATMs won't give out more than �500, I think it was, in one
day. He did agree to take a cheque for the balance, and I paid them just
to get rid of them. All the while, they were telling me about other jobs
they could do on the house in such an insistent way, I wanted to get rid
of them.
As it happens, I don't think there have been any problems with the new
gutters and soffits, but with my head for heights, I'm not going to climb
a ladder to inspect them.
Then, summer last year, one afternoon the doorbell rang. A guy was there
who claimed to be from the same company who'd done the gutters, although
if I caught the name he gave correctly, it wasn't the name of the company
that had done the work, as I still had a receipt.
He said that they had discovered there was a problem with their previous
work, and they needed to do further work. I smelled a rat, thinking that,
although he hadn't mentioned whether I would have to pay for the extra
work, judging by my previous experiences, if it was the same company, I'd
probably end up paying something.
I told him I was busy and could he come back in a couple of weeks. I was
busy. I had some financial matters I needed to get in the post before
going on holiday, but I wasn't about to tell him my house was going to be
unoccupied for a fortnight.
After I got rid of him, I mentally rehearsed what I'd tell him about
exactly why I would not do business with his company if it was the same
one as I'd dealt with all those years ago. But he never came back. I
guess one of my neighbours threatened to call the police, or something.
Coincidentally, I was reminded of this because I last night watched an
episode of the TV series Life about a zen cop in Los Angeles dealing with
the murder of someone running a roofing scam.
Paul Dormer
Lynch) wrote:
>
> You don't have a "no solicitors" sign on your door?
>
Wouldn't that stop only lawyers? :-)
Actually, I don't think that sign (or versions of it) is used very often
over here.
>
> What does electricity cost there? Here, it's supposedly 8.12 cents
> per kilowatt hour, but that's the asterisked price. The actual price,
> with mandatory taxes, surcharges, and fees, is more than twice that:
> 17 cents per kilowatt hour.
I seem to be on a fairly complicated tariff where the first 25% of the
units used during the day are charged at 19.330p and the remainder at
11.850p and nighttime units are charged at 4.640p. VAT is charged at 5%
and then I got a �2.00 discount on that.
Lowell Gilbert
> David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>> "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> Did it occur to you that perhaps he only gave you the numbers of
>>> known happy customers?
>
>> I assume he only gave me the numbers of customers he thought were
>> happy. But talking to happy customers provides information.
>
> Indeed. When applying for a job, I only give people I think will say
> good things about me as references. I don't think that's dishonest.
Indeed. It is essential to be reasonable in setting up contacts between
other people.
Job references are slightly different, because happy customers may have
learned more since their own transactions. If you have a bad experience
after getting references, it's reasonable to contact those references to
let them know about it; just be nice about it.
> (Actually, I can't think of any bosses who would have anything bad to
> say about me. But if I did, I wouldn't list them as references.)
I've been advised to list some peers as references as well as supervisors.
David V. Loewe, Jr
p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
<Long story about door-to-door sales>
>Coincidentally, I was reminded of this because I last night watched an
>episode of the TV series Life about a zen cop in Los Angeles dealing with
>the murder of someone running a roofing scam.
Good show. I was disappointed that it was canceled.
--
"...you know, it seems to me you suffer from the problem of
wanting a tailored fit in an off the rack world."
Dennis Juds
netcat
dave...@charter.net says...
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:49 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
> p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
>
> <Long story about door-to-door sales>
>
> >Coincidentally, I was reminded of this because I last night watched an
> >episode of the TV series Life about a zen cop in Los Angeles dealing with
> >the murder of someone running a roofing scam.
>
> Good show. I was disappointed that it was canceled.
What's a zen cop?
rgds,
netcat
David Loewe, Jr.
<net...@devnull.eridani.eol.ee> wrote:
>dave...@charter.net says...
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:49 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
>> p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
>>
>> <Long story about door-to-door sales>
>>
>> >Coincidentally, I was reminded of this because I last night watched an
>> >episode of the TV series Life about a zen cop in Los Angeles dealing with
>> >the murder of someone running a roofing scam.
>>
>> Good show. I was disappointed that it was canceled.
>
>What's a zen cop?
A cop into Zen philosophy. The character studied it while he was in
prison for a murder he didn't commit. He was later cleared, awarded
many millions in compensation and re-instated to the LA Police.
--
"Novak's First Rule (more formally known as 'Novak's First General
Rule') is that people are stupid."
John S. Novak, III 'The Humblest Man on the Net'
in <slrn76mac...@207.155.184.72>
Jette Goldie
> Paul Dormer <p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:
>> One advantage of the recent economic situation, and especially
>> the changes in fuel prices over the past few years is that it had
>> stopped representatives from electricity companies coming round the
>> door touting for business.
>
> You don't have a "no solicitors" sign on your door?
>
That will do a *lot* of good.
--
Jette Goldie
jette....@gmail.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wolfette/
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://wolfette.livejournal.com/
("reply to" is spamblocked - use the email addy in sig)
David Harmon
Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote,
>On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:48:12 -0800, David Friedman
><dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>>In the second case I found nothing relevant online, asked for phone
>>numbers of people in my area whom they had worked for, was given a
>>bunch, called several of the people up, got generally favorable reports.
>
>Did it occur to you that perhaps he only gave you the numbers of known
>happy customers?
If he has "a bunch" of local happy customers, that puts him way ahead of
some.
Richard Kennaway
> prison for a murder he didn't commit. He was later cleared, awarded
> many millions in compensation and re-instated to the LA Police.
I'm trying to imagine a combination of "Kung Fu" and "The Shield".
--
Richard Kennaway
Philip Chee
> In article <hcvvk7$8pj$1...@reader1.panix.com>, k...@KeithLynch.net (Keith F.
> Lynch) wrote:
>
>> You don't have a "no solicitors" sign on your door?
>>
> Wouldn't that stop only lawyers? :-)
In certain European countries (I think Germany) the equivalent sign in
the equivalent language is legally enforceable and penalties are imposed
by the local authorities/courts.
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
Philip Chee
There was a sort of sequel series to Kung Fu set more or less in
contemporary times about a descendant of wossname Caine who is a police
officer and his less than smooth relation with his cranky father (played
by David Carradine). Both of them Shaolin exponents. Perhaps that's what
you were thinking of.
Kip Williams
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:49 +0000 (GMT Standard Time), Paul Dormer wrote:
>> In article<hcvvk7$8pj$1...@reader1.panix.com>, k...@KeithLynch.net (Keith F.
>> Lynch) wrote:
>>
>>> You don't have a "no solicitors" sign on your door?
>>>
>> Wouldn't that stop only lawyers? :-)
>
> In certain European countries (I think Germany) the equivalent sign in
> the equivalent language is legally enforceable and penalties are imposed
> by the local authorities/courts.
You win today's prize for straightfacedly taking a jest literally. Here,
I'll toss it to you... Oh, darn, it went over your head. Sorry.
Kip W
Keith F. Lynch
> In certain European countries (I think Germany) the equivalent sign
> in the equivalent language is legally enforceable and penalties are
> imposed by the local authorities/courts.
Does it also block missionaries? If not, is there a separate sign
that does? I get about as many missionaries as I do salesmen, and
they're equally unwelcome.
Keith F. Lynch
Here, the summer and winter rates are listed separately. But they're
both listed as exactly 8.12 cents per kilowatt hour.
I think around here only large industrial centers get discounts for
nighttime usage. They also get a discount if they volunteer for
roving blackouts.
Jette Goldie
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:07:01 +0000, Richard Kennaway wrote:
>> David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> A cop into Zen philosophy. The character studied it while he was in
>>> prison for a murder he didn't commit. He was later cleared, awarded
>>> many millions in compensation and re-instated to the LA Police.
>> I'm trying to imagine a combination of "Kung Fu" and "The Shield".
>
> There was a sort of sequel series to Kung Fu set more or less in
> contemporary times about a descendant of wossname Caine who is a police
> officer and his less than smooth relation with his cranky father (played
> by David Carradine). Both of them Shaolin exponents. Perhaps that's what
> you were thinking of.
>
>
"Kung Fu:The Legend Continues"
I rather enjoyed that, but I don't think that was the one being discussed.
Paul Dormer
<1j8ry2v.1aejphlcqilgaN%drachirREVERSE...@yawannek.gro.ku>,
drachirREVERSE...@yawannek.gro.ku (Richard Kennaway) wrote:
It's a rather quirky show usually dealing in somewhat odd cases. In the
first episode I saw, the victim had been killed by a bomb in his
refrigerator but the top half of his torso had been protected by the
fridge door, so the police find just the top half of his corpse sitting
on the kitchen floor as if he was half buried. He turns out to have been
an IRS agent who was also a bigamist and both wives think he's a secret
agent of some sort.
In an episode I saw last week, the victim was the (male) lead singer in a
heavy metal tribute band and the suspects are other people who'd tried
out for the band, one of whom is a woman. When she's in the full make-up
and costume, she's cocky and aggressive, but when you see her in her day
job in a theatre, she's shy and nervous. And no one comments on this.
Paul Dormer
Lynch) wrote:
>
> Here, the summer and winter rates are listed separately. But they're
> both listed as exactly 8.12 cents per kilowatt hour.
>
In the UK, electricity consumption is considerably higher in winter than
it is in summer, but I don't recall ever seeing season rates.
> I think around here only large industrial centers get discounts for
> nighttime usage. They also get a discount if they volunteer for
> roving blackouts.
There was a big push on storage radiators some years back, and that was
what was installed in my house when I moved it. The idea is that
electricity demand is much lower at night, so you buy cheap electricity
to charge your radiators. I spent a sizeable chunk of my career on a
computer system that controlled storage radiators using signals sent out
on the BBC LW transmitters.
I remember a control engineer in the electricity supply industry telling
me that the problem with the industrial tariffs that involved being cut
off when demand was high was that the black outs happened so infrequently,
when they did, the consumers complained.
Paul Dormer
dave...@charter.net (David V. Loewe, Jr) wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:49 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
> p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
>
> <Long story about door-to-door sales>
>
> >Coincidentally, I was reminded of this because I last night watched an
> >episode of the TV series Life about a zen cop in Los Angeles dealing
> >with the murder of someone running a roofing scam.
>
> Good show. I was disappointed that it was canceled.
I have still about six episodes to go, having got a bit behind whilst on
holiday this summer.
As it happens, I first came across the show when I was on holiday last
summer. I spent a few days in Copenhagen and one night, I was relaxing
in my hotel room (from which I could just see the top of the Tivoli
Gardens) and I switched on the TV. Danish TV seems to show a lot of
bought in US and UK programmes which they show subtitled (unlike German
TV, which is mostly dubbed). A show started, and I thought I recognised
British actor Damian Lewis so I kept watching to see the opening credits
to see if I was correct. By then, I was hooked and it was several months
before it turned up on British TV.
Damian Lewis, Hugh Laurie and Dominic West are all British actors who
went to Eton College (a very exclusive public school, in the UK sense),
who have done well on US TV.
Dorothy J Heydt
A heavy makeup job is like a mask: you don't look like yourself
any more. This could provide a useful "shield" for someone who
is shy.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at hotmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the hotmail edress.
Kithrup is getting too damn much spam, even with the sysop's filters.
Paul Dormer
Heydt) wrote:
>
> >In an episode I saw last week, the victim was the (male) lead singer
> >in a heavy metal tribute band and the suspects are other people who'd
> >tried out for the band, one of whom is a woman. When she's in the
> >full make-up and costume, she's cocky and aggressive, but when you
> >see her in her day job in a theatre, she's shy and nervous. And no
> >one comments on this.
>
> A heavy makeup job is like a mask: you don't look like yourself
> any more. This could provide a useful "shield" for someone who
> is shy.
Indeed, but it was the fact that none of the other characters mentioned
it that amused me.
In fact, it was almost a red herring, leaving you wondering whether the
one in costume and the shy redhead were actually two different people.
Keith F. Lynch
> k...@KeithLynch.net (Keith F. Lynch) wrote:
>> Here, the summer and winter rates are listed separately. But
>> they're both listed as exactly 8.12 cents per kilowatt hour.
> In the UK, electricity consumption is considerably higher in winter
> than it is in summer, but I don't recall ever seeing season rates.
In at least this part of the US, it's the other way around. I'm
an exception, as I never use air conditioning. My electricity
consumption is higher during winter because of the (electric) blower
on the (gas) furnace. But it's usually under $20 per month even in
the winter. This month may be an exception, as I've cranked the heat
way up and opened the windows, to eliminate the dead-mouse odor.
Except for the furnace and the answering machine, there's nothing I
always leave turned on. (I unplugged the refrigerator decades ago.)
And the two devices that draw power even when tuned off -- the Apple
laptop and the portable DVD player -- I leave unplugged when not in
use. (And the DVD player, I leave the battery off of.) (In the
summer I do turn off the furnace in the daytime, but usually turn it
on at night. Even when it doesn't get chilly at night, anything damp
would stay damp all summer if I didn't run the furnace.)
The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
"upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
the spiky off-white spectrum. I am annoyed that the plan is to outlaw
incandescents in a few years. Isn't it enough that I don't drive,
don't use air conditioning, don't use a refrigerator or freezer, and
that my total electricity consumption is low? Haven't I done enough?
Can't I retain one inexpensive luxury? It's not as if fluorescents
were all that "green" anyway, as they constitute toxic waste.
Incandescents are clean enough that you can safely eat one if
you grind it up first.
Karl Johanson
> The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
> "upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
> the spiky off-white spectrum. I am annoyed that the plan is to outlaw
> incandescents in a few years. Isn't it enough that I don't drive,
> don't use air conditioning, don't use a refrigerator or freezer, and
> that my total electricity consumption is low? Haven't I done enough?
> Can't I retain one inexpensive luxury? It's not as if fluorescents
> were all that "green" anyway, as they constitute toxic waste.
> Incandescents are clean enough that you can safely eat one if
> you grind it up first.
Cheep LED lights will likely be available before incandescants might be
banned.
Karl Johanson
David V. Loewe, Jr
Ah, but the problem is how to allow you incandescent bulbs, but prohibit
them to those profligate souls who drive, use A/C, use a refrigerator
and what not.
>It's not as if fluorescents
>were all that "green" anyway, as they constitute toxic waste.
>Incandescents are clean enough that you can safely eat one if
>you grind it up first.
--
Keith F. Lynch
> Cheep LED lights will likely be available before incandescants
> might be banned.
I'm not sure they won't share many of the disadvantages of
fluorescents. For instance I expect they too flicker at 120
Hz, and that they too have spikes and holes in their spectrum.
I hope I'm wrong.
At least it should be possible to get rid of the flicker by
converting AC to DC. LEDs can work off DC; fluorescents cannot.
Dorothy J Heydt
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
>"upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
>the spiky off-white spectrum.
Have you taken a look at CFLs recently? We use nothing else, and
I don't see flicker or buzz, and you can choose among several
spectra. It's possible that the frame-rate of your eyes is much
much faster than mine and you would see a flicker where I see
none. But you might just check them out.
Keith F. Lynch
> Have you taken a look at CFLs recently? We use nothing else, and I
> don't see flicker or buzz, and you can choose among several spectra.
> It's possible that the frame-rate of your eyes is much much faster
> than mine and you would see a flicker where I see none. But you
> might just check them out.
I've seen them. Several of my friends use them in their homes.
Jette Goldie
> In article <hd49be$cf6$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>
>> The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
>> "upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
>> the spiky off-white spectrum.
>
> Have you taken a look at CFLs recently? We use nothing else, and
> I don't see flicker or buzz, and you can choose among several
> spectra. It's possible that the frame-rate of your eyes is much
> much faster than mine and you would see a flicker where I see
> none. But you might just check them out.
>
>
I'm VERY sensitive to flicker and I haven't noticed any with the new CFLs.
Kip Williams
> The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
> "upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
> the spiky off-white spectrum. I am annoyed that the plan is to outlaw
> incandescents in a few years. Isn't it enough that I don't drive,
> don't use air conditioning, don't use a refrigerator or freezer, and
> that my total electricity consumption is low? Haven't I done enough?
> Can't I retain one inexpensive luxury?
Stock up. There may also be a grey market, unless every country
simultaneously bans incandescents. (In which case, really stock up.)
I'm hoping for longer life from the new bulbs. I have two fixtures in my
office with four bulbs in each, and I'm constantly replacing them. In
the year and a half I've been here, I've probably put in eight bulbs,
and there are four out right now. Dirty current?
Kip W
Karl Johanson
>> Cheep LED lights will likely be available before incandescants
>> might be banned.
>
> I'm not sure they won't share many of the disadvantages of
> fluorescents. For instance I expect they too flicker at 120
> Hz, and that they too have spikes and holes in their spectrum.
> I hope I'm wrong.
Some white LEDs use blue LEDs & a yellow phosphorescent material to produce
a whitish light. Some don't like it.
> At least it should be possible to get rid of the flicker by
> converting AC to DC. LEDs can work off DC; fluorescents cannot.
Karl Johanson
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
>Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>
>> The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
>> "upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
>> the spiky off-white spectrum. I am annoyed that the plan is to outlaw
>> incandescents in a few years. Isn't it enough that I don't drive,
>> don't use air conditioning, don't use a refrigerator or freezer, and
>> that my total electricity consumption is low? Haven't I done enough?
>> Can't I retain one inexpensive luxury?
>
>Stock up. There may also be a grey market, unless every country
>simultaneously bans incandescents. (In which case, really stock up.)
There is talk (I seem to recall an article in the NY Times to this
effect) of incandescent bulbs that meet the new standards for energy
efficiency - at least here in the US.
<looks>
http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/can-incandescent-bulbs-be-made-efficient/
So, perhaps, Keith will still be able to obtain incandescent bulbs for
his use. Although, with the increase in efficiency, his secondary
purpose in using incandescents (heating) will not be as effective.
>I'm hoping for longer life from the new bulbs. I have two fixtures in my
>office with four bulbs in each, and I'm constantly replacing them. In
>the year and a half I've been here, I've probably put in eight bulbs,
>and there are four out right now. Dirty current?
--
"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough
to take it all away."
- Barry Goldwater
Keith F. Lynch
> Stock up. There may also be a grey market, unless every country
> simultaneously bans incandescents. (In which case, really stock up.)
If I rewire all my light fixtures to use two bulbs in series, the
bulbs should last a lifetime. Of course they're even more inefficient
that way. So much so that even a few percent of the population doing
this would wipe out any supposed efficiency gains of the ban.
Similarly, I doubt there's any benefit to mandated low-flow toilets
if you have to flush two or three times when you use to be able to
flush once.
> I'm hoping for longer life from the new bulbs. I have two fixtures
> in my office with four bulbs in each, and I'm constantly replacing
> them. In the year and a half I've been here, I've probably put in
> eight bulbs, and there are four out right now. Dirty current?
Incandecent or fluorescent? Incandescents are nearly immune to dirty
current.
My main light fixture takes four bulbs. I only replace them when all
four are out. Their lifetimes are close enough that all four are good
most of the time.
David Loewe, Jr.
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Kip Williams <k...@rochester.rr.com, mrk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Stock up. There may also be a grey market, unless every country
>> simultaneously bans incandescents. (In which case, really stock up.)
>
>If I rewire all my light fixtures to use two bulbs in series, the
>bulbs should last a lifetime. Of course they're even more inefficient
>that way. So much so that even a few percent of the population doing
>this would wipe out any supposed efficiency gains of the ban.
>
>Similarly, I doubt there's any benefit to mandated low-flow toilets
>if you have to flush two or three times when you use to be able to
>flush once.
A pet peeve of mine. I frequently have to flush twice to get the water
to not have a yellow tinge when all I've done is urinate.
--
"To the last, I grapple with thee; From Hell's heart, I stab at thee;
For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee."
-Herman Melville, "Moby Dick"
Kip Williams
>> I'm hoping for longer life from the new bulbs. I have two fixtures
>> in my office with four bulbs in each, and I'm constantly replacing
>> them. In the year and a half I've been here, I've probably put in
>> eight bulbs, and there are four out right now. Dirty current?
>
> Incandecent or fluorescent? Incandescents are nearly immune to dirty
> current.
Incandescent. They die like flies, for some reason.
Kip W
Michael Benveniste
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>I'm not sure they won't share many of the disadvantages of
>fluorescents. For instance I expect they too flicker at 120
>Hz, and that they too have spikes and holes in their spectrum.
>I hope I'm wrong.
When was the last time you looked at fluorescent technology?
The majority of fluorescents sold today do not use an electromagnetic
ballast. Instead, they use an electronic ballast with a frequency
typically in the 20-120kHz range. Note the 'k'. As a result, there
is no visible flicker when the light is operating properly.
"Full spectrum" fluorescents are also available. The BlueMax brand is
excellent, for example. As you might expect, they are a bit more
expensive, but an 800 lumen "sunset" CFL is still only about $9 and
is rated at 10K hours.
I've used the daylight (~5500K) version of such fluorescents for
macrophotography, and I own two flourescent flat-panel "strobes" which
produce excellent light.
Fluorescents still have downsides -- there's often a noticeable warm
up period, most can't be used on dimmers, there's that pesky mercury
disposal issue, and the SPD is never going to be as smooth as a black
body source.
But if you're basing your objections on old-style "flickering" office
fluorescents, it may be time to take another look.
--
Mike Benveniste -- m...@murkyether.com (Clarification Required)
Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain
Philip Chee
> In article <hd49be$cf6$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>
>>The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
>>"upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
>>the spiky off-white spectrum.
>
> Have you taken a look at CFLs recently? We use nothing else, and
> I don't see flicker or buzz, and you can choose among several
> spectra. It's possible that the frame-rate of your eyes is much
> much faster than mine and you would see a flicker where I see
> none. But you might just check them out.
Some of the CFL desk lamps in my house have a built in inverter. The
flicker if it exists occurs at several kilohertz. Since I am not an
insect, this is effectively continuous illumination for me.
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]Of course I'm running Windows*$#!#NO CARRIER
* TagZilla 0.066.6
Paul Dormer
Williams) wrote:
>
> I'm hoping for longer life from the new bulbs. I have two fixtures
> in my office with four bulbs in each, and I'm constantly replacing
> them. In the year and a half I've been here, I've probably put in
> eight bulbs, and there are four out right now. Dirty current?
It's certainly been my experience that CFLs last longer. I've had bulbs
in the hallway that had to be replaced after about ten years.
I replace the bulbs in my living room about two years ago. They were the
last to be replaced as they were on dimmer switches. In the end, I
replaced the switches as I couldn't find and CFLs that worked with them.
The bulb that was on the longest, I seemed to have to replace every year
or so, and I haven't had to replace the new ones yet.
The only exception is the light-operated light I have in the porch, which
seems to last only about five years, but I suspect that that is a fault
with the light sensor, not the bulb itself.
Paul Dormer
Lynch) wrote:
>
> > In the UK, electricity consumption is considerably higher in winter
> > than it is in summer, but I don't recall ever seeing season rates.
>
> In at least this part of the US, it's the other way around.
>
I went on a course once for electricity control engineers where they
discussed this very point. However, the course was nearly thirty years
ago (doesn't time fly) so I have no up-to-date figures.
As I recall, the curve for electricity demand against temperature in the
USA goes down and then up, with a minimum demand at the temperature where
increased air conditioning meets lessening heating. With maximum
temperatures in the bulk of the US being somewhat higher than those in
the UK - at that time, the highest recorded temperature in the UK was
about 38C - there was little data to go on for the upper part of the
curve over here. But 1975 and 1976 were two very hot summers, and 1976
was prolonged, with a drought being declared. Data from that period
showed that in the UK, demand dropped as temperature increased up to a
certain temperature, and then remained constant.
Of course, in the last thirty years, things have changed, including two
record breaking summers and commercial premises are now more likely to be
air conditioned. I never worked in an air conditioned building before
1994 (although computer rooms tended to be air conditioned). But I don't
think there has been much of an increase in home air conditioning.
> The one way in which I really "waste" electricity is that I refuse to
> "upgrade" to fluorescent lights. I dislike the flicker, the buzz, and
> the spiky off-white spectrum.
Whereas, as I've probably mentioned before, I switched to CFLs long
before it became fashionable because I find the spectrum nearer to
daylight than incandescents, which I find too yellow. I've never noticed
either flicker or hum. I've had a reading light affixed to my bed
headboard with a CFL in it for nearly 20 years. It's about 20 cm from my
head whilst I'm reading in bed, so I think I'd probably notice a hum.
David V. Loewe, Jr
I switched long before it became fashionable because I can get much more
light from a socket of a given rating by switching to CFLs. For
example, the main light socket in my living room is rated at 60 W. I
have a 200 W equivalent (measured in lumens) CFL bulb in that fixture.
--
"The flame rises but it soon descends
Empty pages and a frozen pen
You're not quite lovers and you're not quite friends
After the thrill is gone,"
Don Henley & Glenn Frey
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> In article <hd49be$cf6$1...@reader1.panix.com>, k...@KeithLynch.net (Keith F.
> Lynch) wrote:
>
>>
>> > In the UK, electricity consumption is considerably higher in winter
>> > than it is in summer, but I don't recall ever seeing season rates.
>>
>> In at least this part of the US, it's the other way around.
>>
>
> I went on a course once for electricity control engineers where they
> discussed this very point. However, the course was nearly thirty years
> ago (doesn't time fly) so I have no up-to-date figures.
>
> As I recall, the curve for electricity demand against temperature in the
> USA goes down and then up, with a minimum demand at the temperature where
> increased air conditioning meets lessening heating. With maximum
> temperatures in the bulk of the US being somewhat higher than those in
> the UK - at that time, the highest recorded temperature in the UK was
> about 38C - there was little data to go on for the upper part of the
> curve over here. But 1975 and 1976 were two very hot summers, and 1976
> was prolonged, with a drought being declared. Data from that period
> showed that in the UK, demand dropped as temperature increased up to a
> certain temperature, and then remained constant.
>
> Of course, in the last thirty years, things have changed, including two
> record breaking summers and commercial premises are now more likely to be
> air conditioned. I never worked in an air conditioned building before
> 1994 (although computer rooms tended to be air conditioned). But I don't
> think there has been much of an increase in home air conditioning.
As a sample point for a somewhat warmer location, we live just northwest
of Dallas in an "all-electric" house heated and cooled by a reasonably
efficient heat pump. Looking at the electric co-op's charts for the last
year it's definitely cooling that dominates our power consumption. Peak
daily usage was in July, at 111 kWh. Minimum was in April, at 45 kWh.
Peak winter usage was in December, at 72 kWh. That equated, btw, to a
maximum bill of $464.55 and a minimum of $197.75.
Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com
Keith F. Lynch
> As a sample point for a somewhat warmer location, we live just
> northwest of Dallas in an "all-electric" house heated and cooled
> by a reasonably efficient heat pump.
At outdoor temperatures above absolute zero, heat pumps are more
efficient than heaters, as they move heat rather than create it. On
the other hand, gas is much cheaper than electricity. I wonder why
nobody sells gas heat pumps, so people can combine these advantages.
> Looking at the electric co-op's charts for the last year it's
> definitely cooling that dominates our power consumption. Peak
> daily usage was in July, at 111 kWh.
For your home, or for the entire co-op? It seems high for the
former, low for the latter (unless it's a very small co-op).
I seldom use 111 kWh in a month. I'm not sure my wiring could
even support 111 kWh in a day.
Richard Todd
> <rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>> As a sample point for a somewhat warmer location, we live just
>> northwest of Dallas in an "all-electric" house heated and cooled
>> by a reasonably efficient heat pump.
>
> At outdoor temperatures above absolute zero, heat pumps are more
> efficient than heaters, as they move heat rather than create it. On
> the other hand, gas is much cheaper than electricity. I wonder why
> nobody sells gas heat pumps, so people can combine these advantages.
Meaning systems that contain both a heat pump and a conventional gas-burning
heater? They do sell them.
Jay E. Morris
On 8-Nov-2009, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> I switched long before it became fashionable because I can get much more
> light from a socket of a given rating by switching to CFLs. For
> example, the main light socket in my living room is rated at 60 W. I
> have a 200 W equivalent (measured in lumens) CFL bulb in that fixture.
Exactly. I have replaced 40s in the hall ceiling light with 100 equivalent,
and the two outside 60s with 250s. What I'm waiting on through is 3-way
CFLs.
Jay E. Morris
Home Depot (are they in UK?) lists a dimmer switch made to work with
Phillips CFLs. Don't know why they'd only work with those but that's what
the description says.
Keith F. Lynch
No, that's not what I mean. I mean a gas-burning heat pump which uses
no electricity at all. (Okay, it might use electricity to blow air
around, or to ignite the gas.)
I have read of gas-burning refrigerators that use no electricity at
all. This would be exactly equivalent.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> <rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>> As a sample point for a somewhat warmer location, we live just
>> northwest of Dallas in an "all-electric" house heated and cooled
>> by a reasonably efficient heat pump.
>
> At outdoor temperatures above absolute zero, heat pumps are more
> efficient than heaters, as they move heat rather than create it. On
> the other hand, gas is much cheaper than electricity. I wonder why
> nobody sells gas heat pumps, so people can combine these advantages.
They're not cost effective given their relative efficiencies, the state
of the art in the equipment and the relative cost of electricity versus
natural gas (or even worse, propane). It's even worse in our area, with
mild winters and hot summers, since for most of the year the waste heat
from gas powered systems is just that...wasted.
Note also that while they're always more efficient than a simple heater,
production heat pumps aren't generally sufficient at temperatures below
about 20F. We have about 14 kW of resistive heating that acts as a
backup to the heat pump for the occasional cold wave.
>> Looking at the electric co-op's charts for the last year it's
>> definitely cooling that dominates our power consumption. Peak
>> daily usage was in July, at 111 kWh.
>
> For your home, or for the entire co-op? It seems high for the
> former, low for the latter (unless it's a very small co-op).
>
> I seldom use 111 kWh in a month. I'm not sure my wiring could
> even support 111 kWh in a day.
My service is rated for 200 amps at 240 volts (actually 246 volts at the
moment), so over 1000 kWh per day at max load. I believe the co-op now
supports 320 amp service as well. Fortunately those load levels are
typically momentary, not continuous. Otherwise we'd be spending $135 or
more per day on electricity.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>>> At outdoor temperatures above absolute zero, heat pumps are more
>>> efficient than heaters, as they move heat rather than create it.
>>> On the other hand, gas is much cheaper than electricity. I wonder
>>> why nobody sells gas heat pumps, so people can combine these
>>> advantages.
>
>> Meaning systems that contain both a heat pump and a conventional
>> gas-burning heater? They do sell them.
>
> No, that's not what I mean. I mean a gas-burning heat pump which uses
> no electricity at all. (Okay, it might use electricity to blow air
> around, or to ignite the gas.)
>
> I have read of gas-burning refrigerators that use no electricity at
> all. This would be exactly equivalent.
They're mainly used for "off the grid" requirements. We have a dual-mode
model in our trailer. It's more cost effective to run it off electricity
if we have grid access. It's a closer contest if we compare direct propane
and a gasoline-fired portable generator.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> In article <sQjJm.2942$W77....@newsfe11.iad>, k...@rochester.rr.com (Kip
> Williams) wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm hoping for longer life from the new bulbs. I have two fixtures
>> in my office with four bulbs in each, and I'm constantly replacing
>> them. In the year and a half I've been here, I've probably put in
>> eight bulbs, and there are four out right now. Dirty current?
>
> It's certainly been my experience that CFLs last longer. I've had bulbs
> in the hallway that had to be replaced after about ten years.
>
lights get cycled frequently. I've had 4 of 8 fail in about five years
in two of our rooms. They've done very well when the lights are left
either on or off for large periods of time.
David Harmon
<mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote,
> What I'm waiting on through is 3-way CFLs.
I have seen them at Home Depot. Sorry I don't remember any more than
that, since it was not something I was looking for.
Jay E. Morris
Thanks. Wasn't last time I looked but that was some months ago, I'll look
again.
Colette Reap
>
>On 8-Nov-2009, p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote:
>
>>[...] In the end, I replaced the switches as I couldn't find and CFLs that worked
>>with them.
>
>Home Depot (are they in UK?) lists a dimmer switch made to work with
>Phillips CFLs. Don't know why they'd only work with those but that's what
>the description says.
>
We don't have Home Depot, but we have several similar chains. You can
get dimmer switches which work with CFLs here. Seems you can either
get a modified dimmer or a modified CFL:
'Problems
Because of the differences in function, dimmers designed for standard
bulbs will typically not work in fluorescent fixtures. The light will
fail to work or may be damaged.
Solutions
Manufacturers have developed solutions to allow fluorescent lights to
be dimmed. The most common method changes the power at the control or
"ballast" of the fixture, instead of the light itself. Special dimming
ballasts are available.
Advances
Lighting companies, such as General Electric, also manufacture
advanced fluorescent bulbs. These new designs allow light to be dimmed
without modifying the ballast control, but are not as widespread as
other fluorescents.'
--
Colette
Tim Illingworth
I think ours came from the lighting section at WalMart. Or maybe
Kroger...
Tim
Doug Wickstr�m
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Incandescents are clean enough that you can safely eat one if
>you grind it up first.
Lead.
Doug Wickstr�m
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> Cheep LED lights will likely be available before incandescants
>> might be banned.
>
>I'm not sure they won't share many of the disadvantages of
>fluorescents. For instance I expect they too flicker at 120
>Hz, and that they too have spikes and holes in their spectrum.
>I hope I'm wrong.
LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
much faster than fluorescents. However, as there are no "white"
LEDs, spectral characteristics are a function of the phosphors
used, just as for fluorescent tubes.
>>At least it should be possible to get rid of the flicker by
>converting AC to DC. LEDs can work off DC; fluorescents cannot.
There is no technological reason why fluorscent tubes cannot run
on direct current of sufficient voltage, and some do. That they
normally run off of AC is a convenience, not a requirement.
As for compact fluorescent lamps, they have an electronic ballast
and can operate at much higher frequencies than mains AC, and
many do.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
They've been around for a few years. I think we bought ours at Home
Depot, although they may only be stocked at the chain's larger stores.
Keith F. Lynch
> LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
> much faster than fluorescents.
They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. One obscure security
threat is that digital data can sometimes be read directly off modem
lights, even from miles away with a good telescope. But if fed with
60 Hz current they will turn on and off just 120 times per second,
the same as fluorescents.
> There is no technological reason why fluorscent tubes cannot run
> on direct current of sufficient voltage, and some do. That they
> normally run off of AC is a convenience, not a requirement.
Okay. I've just never heard of one that does. And when I tried
running one off DC some years ago, it glowed only one one side, and
burned out within a couple minutes.
> As for compact fluorescent lamps, they have an electronic ballast
> and can operate at much higher frequencies than mains AC, and
> many do.
I'm glad to hear it. That shows that people are aware that it's an
issue, despite claims that 120 Hz flicker is unnoticeable.
I wonder why they don't just use a slower phosphor.
Keith F. Lynch
>> Incandescents are clean enough that you can safely eat one if you
>> grind it up first.
> Lead.
I don't think there's any lead-based solder in them. They sometimes
get hot enough that solder would melt.
One advantage of incandescent bulbs in my overhead fixture is that
when bugs fly into it, the bugs quickly overheat and die. With
fluorescents or LEDs, they'd keep flying around all evening, driving
me to distraction.
Keith F. Lynch
> "Jay E. Morris" <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote,
>> What I'm waiting on through is 3-way CFLs.
> I have seen them at Home Depot. Sorry I don't remember any more
> than that, since it was not something I was looking for.
My brother has one. I don't know where he got it. It does often
flicker randomly, though.
David Harmon
Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote,
>David Harmon <b...@example.invalid> wrote:
>> "Jay E. Morris" <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote,
>>> What I'm waiting on through is 3-way CFLs.
>
>> I have seen them at Home Depot. Sorry I don't remember any more
>> than that, since it was not something I was looking for.
>
>My brother has one. I don't know where he got it. It does often
>flicker randomly, though.
I want one that flickers randomly. I want to build a simulated kerosene
lantern with a randomly flickering electric lamp inside.
David Loewe, Jr.
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Doug Wickstr�m <nims...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
>> much faster than fluorescents.
>
>They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. One obscure security
>threat is that digital data can sometimes be read directly off modem
>lights, even from miles away with a good telescope.
You've got to be kidding me...
>But if fed with 60 Hz current they will turn on and off just 120
>times per second, the same as fluorescents.
--
"...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess.
They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a
characteristic of them."
- Margaret Thatcher
Philip Chee
Feathers!
Phil
--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
[ ]I have a firm grip on reality. Now I can strangle it.
* TagZilla 0.066.6
Karl Johanson
I can sell you some simulated kerosene for a good price.
Karl Johanson
Paul Dormer
mor...@epsilon3.com (Jay E. Morris) wrote:
>
> Home Depot (are they in UK?) lists a dimmer switch made to work with
> Phillips CFLs. Don't know why they'd only work with those but
> that's what the description says.
The dimmer switches had been fitted before I bought the house. I never
used the switches except at full on and off, so it was easier to replace
the switches with normal switches.
Robert Sneddon
Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> writes
>On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 03:38:59 +0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
><k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>
>>Doug Wickstr�m <nims...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>> LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
>>> much faster than fluorescents.
>>
>>They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. One obscure security
>>threat is that digital data can sometimes be read directly off modem
>>lights, even from miles away with a good telescope.
>
>You've got to be kidding me...
Not implausible, assuming slow modems. At V.90 (56k) modem speeds it
gets a bit trickier. It's a very elaborate method of secretly observing
other people's traffic. Keith's old-fashioned VDU is much easier to
monitor remotely by listening in to the EM signals from the electron
beam guns and the H and V deflection coils. A TFT screen connected to a
computer is more difficult to remotely monitor than older more
promiscuous hardware. Neither require line-of-sight access to the
screens.
>>But if fed with 60 Hz current they will turn on and off just 120
>>times per second, the same as fluorescents.
Then again LEDs used in lamps aren't fed with mains power, they're
supplied with low-voltage DC as you know. They may be fed with pulsed DC
to provide a proportional dimming capability but this would operate at
tens of kilohertz, the same sort of frequency as modern compact
fluorescent lamps and electronic ballast systems for fluorescent tube
arrays.
--
To reply, my gmail address is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
netcat
says...
> Keith F. Lynch wrote:
> > Kip Williams<k...@rochester.rr.com, mrk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I'm hoping for longer life from the new bulbs. I have two fixtures
> >> in my office with four bulbs in each, and I'm constantly replacing
> >> them. In the year and a half I've been here, I've probably put in
> >> eight bulbs, and there are four out right now. Dirty current?
> >
> > current.
>
> Incandescent. They die like flies, for some reason.
Vibration?
rgds,
netcat
Kip Williams
Well, that's something to think about. They're ceiling mounted, and it
could be that the dishwasher, the heating/air system, or the garage door
opener mechanism have some cumulative effect. Those are the things with
effects we at least hear through the house, so it could be. And
sometimes, Sarah and her friends stomp around in the room overhead as well.
Kip W
cryptoguy
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 03:38:59 +0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
>
> <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> >> LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
> >> much faster than fluorescents.
>
> >They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. One obscure security
> >threat is that digital data can sometimes be read directly off modem
> >lights, even from miles away with a good telescope.
>
> You've got to be kidding me...
Nope. I've seen the original papers describing the attack (though I
don't have a handy cite).
Here's another: The screen of a CRT display can be reconstructed by
observing the brightness of the light it throws on the wall behind it,
without directly observing the screen.
On a CRT, the brightness of a pixel starts out very bright when the
beam hits it, and then dies off until the beam comes around for the
refresh. This means that the light thrown off by the screen, observed
at a short enough time interval, is largely determined by the singular
pixel the beam is on.
pt
David Harmon
Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote,
>Okay. I've just never heard of one that does. And when I tried
>running one off DC some years ago, it glowed only one one side, and
>burned out within a couple minutes.
Unlike the tube itself, the ballast in a typical fluorescent fixture is
good for AC only. It's an inductor. What did you use for a ballast
circuit to limit and stabilize the current in your experiment?
I wouldn't be surprised if some compact fluorescents with built-in
inverter power supplies could be jiggered to run from DC, but that's
very different.
cryptoguy
> netcat wrote:
> > In article<nTkJm.6796$ET3.5...@newsfe17.iad>, k...@rochester.rr.com
Vibration resistant incandescent bulbs are available at most HW
stores.
One of my pet peeves is fixtures that use a plethora of low wattage
bulbs where one would do. I have a lot of these in my house - it was
built in the 1840s and the previous owner installed a lot of
'chandelier' type fixtures, with up to 8 20 watt bulbs.
They look great, but the problem is that at any given point, one or
more bulbs will be dead, and its a pain to replace them as soon as
they do so. You tend to live with a gradually dimming light until only
1 or 2 are still live, or you know guests you want to impress will be
visiting.
pt
David V. Loewe, Jr
<fr...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>"David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> writes
>>On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 03:38:59 +0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
>><k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>Doug Wickstr�m <nims...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
>>>> much faster than fluorescents.
>>>
>>>They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. One obscure security
>>>threat is that digital data can sometimes be read directly off modem
>>>lights, even from miles away with a good telescope.
>>
>>You've got to be kidding me...
>
> Not implausible, assuming slow modems. At V.90 (56k) modem speeds it
>gets a bit trickier. It's a very elaborate method of secretly observing
>other people's traffic.
Every modem I've seen that has lights has send and receive lights, not
"ones" and "zeros" lights. How do you get the data (he said that the
data could be read, not the amount of traffic) from the mere fact that
the device is sending or receiving information?
>Keith's old-fashioned VDU is much easier to monitor remotely
>by listening in to the EM signals from the electron beam guns and
>the H and V deflection coils. A TFT screen connected to a computer
>is more difficult to remotely monitor than older more promiscuous
>hardware. Neither require line-of-sight access to the screens.
Yes, I know about this one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEMPEST
PCs were introduced to the Navy back in the mid-80s when I was in the
service. They had to meet TEMPEST requirements for exactly that reason.
--
"The quality of the crate matters little. It is the quality of the man
sitting in the crate that counts
- Baron Manfred von Richtofen, aka The Red Baron
David V. Loewe, Jr
<treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 9, 12:21�am, "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 03:38:59 +0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
>> <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> >Doug Wickstr�m <nimshu...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
>> >> much faster than fluorescents.
>>
>> >They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. �One obscure security
>> >threat is that digital data can sometimes be read directly off modem
>> >lights, even from miles away with a good telescope. �
>>
>> You've got to be kidding me...
>
>Nope. I've seen the original papers describing the attack (though I
>don't have a handy cite).
As every modem I've seen that has lights [1] has send/receive lights
(and not ones and zeros lights), I'd be very interested in reading a
citation for this. Let's put it this way, I'd be more willing to
believe that the EM emissions could be read than I am to believe the
lights tell you anything. But, if you find the time, please give a
reference.
>Here's another: The screen of a CRT display can be reconstructed by
>observing the brightness of the light it throws on the wall behind it,
>without directly observing the screen.
>
>On a CRT, the brightness of a pixel starts out very bright when the
>beam hits it, and then dies off until the beam comes around for the
>refresh. This means that the light thrown off by the screen, observed
>at a short enough time interval, is largely determined by the singular
>pixel the beam is on.
I'm familiar with TEMPEST and other anti-espionage measures.[2] See
response to Robert.
[1] Looking at my last actual modulating/demodulating (aka phone line)
modem, it doesn't have any lights at all.
[2] Including the exploit where they get sound by measuring the
vibrations of the windows.
--
"What are these voices outside love's open door
Make us throw off our contentment
And beg for something more?"
Don Henley, Mike Campbell & JD Souther
Doug Wickstr�m
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Doug Wickstr�m <nims...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> LEDs flicker, yes, but much too fast for you to see; they turn on
>> much faster than fluorescents.
>
>They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. One obscure security
>threat is that digital data can sometimes be read directly off modem
>lights, even from miles away with a good telescope. But if fed with
>60 Hz current they will turn on and off just 120 times per second,
>the same as fluorescents.
Fluorescents have a delay while the mercury vapor ionizes.
>> There is no technological reason why fluorscent tubes cannot run
>> on direct current of sufficient voltage, and some do. That they
>> normally run off of AC is a convenience, not a requirement.
>
>Okay. I've just never heard of one that does. And when I tried
>running one off DC some years ago, it glowed only one one side, and
>burned out within a couple minutes.
>
>> As for compact fluorescent lamps, they have an electronic ballast
>> and can operate at much higher frequencies than mains AC, and
>> many do.
>
>I'm glad to hear it. That shows that people are aware that it's an
>issue, despite claims that 120 Hz flicker is unnoticeable.
The main reason is to reduce the size of the transformer
required.
>I wonder why they don't just use a slower phosphor.
The ones they use now are visible in total darkness after the
lights are turned off. Isn't that long enough for you?
Doug Wickstr�m
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Doug Wickstr�m <nims...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> Incandescents are clean enough that you can safely eat one if you
>>> grind it up first.
>
>> Lead.
>
>I don't think there's any lead-based solder in them. They sometimes
>get hot enough that solder would melt.
Look at the bottom of the lamp.
Doug Wickstr�m
<fr...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Then again LEDs used in lamps aren't fed with mains power, they're
>supplied with low-voltage DC as you know. They may be fed with pulsed DC
Yes and no. Some setups simply run a bunch of them in series.
Doug Wickstr�m
It's the stomping.
Robert Sneddon
<nims...@comcast.net> writes
>On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 12:09:28 +0000, Robert Sneddon
><fr...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Then again LEDs used in lamps aren't fed with mains power, they're
>>supplied with low-voltage DC as you know. They may be fed with pulsed DC
>
>Yes and no. Some setups simply run a bunch of them in series.
The LED units being deployed for lighting today are DC-powered with
sophisticated thermal control circuitry as the high-power LED chips are
running hot and some if not all of the chips have a positive thermal
coefficient and can "runaway" given the chance, much like laser chips
do. There's a lot of engineering design work being carried out on how to
get the heat away from the chips, supply and control the high currents
the chips require and make it cheap and fit existing sockets. There's
already some commoditisation of LED lamps but the first ones commonly
available to the public were GU-series units to replace mains halogen
dichroic bulbs. The lumen output of these bulbs is well down on the
units they are replacing though.
Coincidentally, I've just had a power cut in the flat leaving me in the
dark. My pocket 9-LED torch (a Poundland bargain, only a quid! Batteries
not included) got me to my toolbag where I got my "light sabre" 36-LED
lightstick (about 15 quid from my usual computer gear supplier, with a
LiPoly battery in the handle) which allowed me to check the rest of the
flat in case something had gone wrong in the fusebox. It turns out
several buildings were out, not just our flat. I found a few candle
stubs in a drawer and lit them just in case. Fire, can't beat it.
Keith F. Lynch
LEDs only work with current in one direction. So if they're hooked
directly to a 60 Hz AC line, they'll flash at 60 Hz. That's even
worse than fluorescents, which flash at 120, i.e. on both halves of
the AC waveform.
> The LED units being deployed for lighting today are DC-powered with
> sophisticated thermal control circuitry as the high-power LED chips
> are running hot and some if not all of the chips have a positive
> thermal coefficient and can "runaway" given the chance, much like
> laser chips do.
I thought the whole point was that they, like fluorescents and unlike
incandescents, produce a negligible amount of waste heat.
> Coincidentally, I've just had a power cut in the flat leaving me in
> the dark. My pocket 9-LED torch (a Poundland bargain, only a quid!
> Batteries not included) got me to my toolbag where I got my "light
> sabre" 36-LED lightstick (about 15 quid from my usual computer gear
> supplier, with a LiPoly battery in the handle) which allowed me to
> check the rest of the flat in case something had gone wrong in the
> fusebox. It turns out several buildings were out, not just our flat.
I have a wind-up white LED flashlight. It's supposed to run for an
hour from one minute of winding. It's more like ten minutes, but it
still beats buying batteries.
I wonder if it would work better if it used a mainspring instead of a
rechargable battery. Rechargable batteries gradually stop holding a
charge. (Anybody want a dozen dead UPS batteries?)
> I found a few candle stubs in a drawer and lit them just in case.
> Fire, can't beat it.
About the only good thing about candles is they'll still work after
S.M. Stirling's "Change." They produce very little light, the
light is even more yellowish and accompanied by waste heat than
incandescents, they consume oxygen and pollute the air, they don't
last long, they're expensive per light output, they get wax all over
the place, and of course they're a fire hazard.
Keith F. Lynch
> It's the stomping.
It's definitely the stomping here. My upstairs neighbors often make
my light fixtures rattle. A couple of times they've even broken them.
I'm surprised they've never broken my ceiling and fallen through.
Keith F. Lynch
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> I'm glad to hear it. That shows that people are aware that it's an
>> issue, despite claims that 120 Hz flicker is unnoticeable.
> The main reason is to reduce the size of the transformer required.
Well, whatever the reason, it's good that they no longer flicker at
120 Hz. Now if only they'd get rid of those color video projectors
that project one color at a time, rapidly alternating between a red,
a green, and a blue image. If I never see one of those horrors again,
it will be far too soon.
>> I wonder why they don't just use a slower phosphor.
> The ones they use now are visible in total darkness after the lights
> are turned off. Isn't that long enough for you?
I think that's a different effect. Similarly, a CRT TV screen can be
seen glowing for several minutes after it's turned off. Maybe an hour
or more if your eyes are sufficiently dark adapted. But the TV's
phosphor is pretty fast during normal usage, otherwise the TV image
would be badly smeared.
Keith F. Lynch
> "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. �One obscure
>>> security threat is that digital data can sometimes be read
>>> directly off modem lights, even from miles away with a good
>>> telescope. �
>> You've got to be kidding me...
> Nope. I've seen the original papers describing the attack (though I
> don't have a handy cite).
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=545189
> Here's another: The screen of a CRT display can be reconstructed by
> observing the brightness of the light it throws on the wall behind
> it, without directly observing the screen.
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/emsec/optical-faq.html
Apparently this doesn't work with non-CRT screens.
> On a CRT, the brightness of a pixel starts out very bright when the
> beam hits it, and then dies off until the beam comes around for
> the refresh. This means that the light thrown off by the screen,
> observed at a short enough time interval, is largely determined by
> the singular pixel the beam is on.
Yes, but you use deconvolution to compensate for the phospher decay
time, otherwise the image would be badly smeared.
Decades ago it occurred to me that if you project a uniform white
raster from a fast-phosphor CRT into a dark room, that you should
get a usable video signal from any photocell in the room. The image
would look as if the photocell was the light source and the CRT
was the camera. Any extraneous light would cause uniform fogging.
Unfortunately I never had the resources to try it.
Dorothy J Heydt
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Kip Williams <k...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>> netcat wrote:
>>>> Vibration?
>
>>> Well, that's something to think about. They're ceiling mounted,
>>> and it could be that the dishwasher, the heating/air system, or the
>>> garage door opener mechanism have some cumulative effect. Those
>>> are the things with effects we at least hear through the house, so
>>> it could be. And sometimes, Sarah and her friends stomp around in
>>> the room overhead as well.
>
>> It's the stomping.
>
>It's definitely the stomping here. My upstairs neighbors often make
>my light fixtures rattle. A couple of times they've even broken them.
>I'm surprised they've never broken my ceiling and fallen through.
Oh, dear.
We had an upstairs neighbor once -- briefly -- I don't know what
he did for a living, if anything, but he liked to stay up till
way late at night and then sleep way late into the morning. We,
on the other hand, had to get up and go to work. ANY sound we
made would cause him to pound heavily with something (broom
handle? cane? sledgehammer?) on his floor. On one momentous
occasion he left a small (1 inch, maybe) bulge in our ceiling.
He also complained every time anyone closed our front door,
saying we slammed it. Finally he complained to the landlord.
Landlord said, "Funny, they've been living there for years and
I've never heard anyone else complain. Maybe what you need is to
live in a house by yourself." And I guess that's what he did,
for he went away.
But the bulge in the ceiling remained as long as we lived there.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at hotmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the hotmail edress.
Kithrup is getting too damn much spam, even with the sysop's filters.
Keith F. Lynch
> We had an upstairs neighbor once -- briefly -- I don't know what he
> did for a living, if anything, but he liked to stay up till way late
> at night and then sleep way late into the morning.
There were hours when they were quiet? Luxury! My upstairs neighbors
sleep in shifts.
At least they've never complained about any noise I made.
David V. Loewe, Jr
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>cryptoguy <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>>> They *can* turn on and off extremely quickly. �One obscure
>>>> security threat is that digital data can sometimes be read
>>>> directly off modem lights, even from miles away with a good
>>>> telescope. �
>
>>> You've got to be kidding me...
>
>> Nope. I've seen the original papers describing the attack (though I
>> don't have a handy cite).
>
>http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=545189
I sit corrected.
--
"My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four.
Unless there are three other people."
- Orson Welles
Keith F. Lynch
> Not implausible, assuming slow modems. At V.90 (56k) modem speeds
> it gets a bit trickier.
My understanding is that it even works at broadband speeds. All
that's needed is a modem or other device that has an LED that's on
when a 1-bit goes through and off when a 0-bit goes through. Or
vice versa. As Doug Wickstr�m said, "they turn on much faster than
fluorescents."
At some point, there won't be enough photons per steradian per bit,
but I think that would be at speeds well above standard broadband,
depending on how far away the observer is and how good his telescope.
For low speeds, it might suffice to look at closed curtains back-lit
by modem lights, so long as all other light sources are either uniform
or flicker with a predicatable pattern.
> It's a very elaborate method of secretly observing other people's
> traffic. Keith's old-fashioned VDU is much easier to monitor
> remotely by listening in to the EM signals from the electron beam
> guns and the H and V deflection coils.
I'm not sure that's still practical. There's a lot more broad-
spectrum noise than there used to be thanks to leaky broadband,
cell phones, fluorescent lights, etc. (Yes, fluorescents make
a lot of radio noise.)
Anyhow, I'm not worried about it. If they want to see what I'm
postingto rasff, there are easier ways.
Keith F. Lynch
> "David Harmon" <sou...@netcom.com> wrote
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote,
>>> flicker randomly, though.
>> I want one that flickers randomly. I want to build a simulated
>> kerosene lantern with a randomly flickering electric lamp inside.
Most of the time it doesn't flicker. Neither do kerosene lamps if
they're sheilded from the wind.
> I can sell you some simulated kerosene for a good price.
How much simulated money do you want for it?
Keith F. Lynch
> Doug Wickstr�m wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> Incandescents are clean enough that you can safely eat one if you
>>> grind it up first.
>> Lead.
> Feathers!
I knew Edison tried feathers as a filament (along with hundreds of
other random materials). But I thought they didn't work, so light
bulbs were never again made with feathers.
Dorothy J Heydt
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> We had an upstairs neighbor once -- briefly -- I don't know what he
>> did for a living, if anything, but he liked to stay up till way late
>> at night and then sleep way late into the morning.
>
>There were hours when they were quiet? Luxury! My upstairs neighbors
>sleep in shifts.
Well, AFAIK this guy lived alone. He did throw parties though,
but they didn't generate that much noise. On the other hand,
they did go outside and wander all around the duplex smoking lots
of pot, which since we had teenagers in the house at the time,
was not something I felt particularly tolerant about. (Whether
the teenagers ever smoked pot or not, I don't know. They
certainly didn't do it in the house. They are now
thirty-somethings and don't smoke it now.)
>
>At least they've never complained about any noise I made.
Possibly they're deaf and can't hear you.
On the OTHER hand, you live alone and probably don't generate
that much noise either.
Keith F. Lynch
> On the OTHER hand, you live alone and probably don't generate that
> much noise either.
True, but with the lack of soundproofing, it's a wonder I don't get
noise complaints when I comb my hair, or turn pages in a book.
David Loewe, Jr.
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> On the OTHER hand, you live alone and probably don't generate that
>> much noise either.
>
>True, but with the lack of soundproofing, it's a wonder I don't get
>noise complaints when I comb my hair, or turn pages in a book.
*My* upstairs neighbors had the temerity to claim that noise I was
hearing from upstairs was, in fact, their upstairs neighbors. If I was
hearing it that clearly in my apartment, from things the immediate
upstairs neighbors claimed were dropped on the floor above them, then it
would have been unbearable in the immediate upstairs apartment.
--
"Choose your friends wisely."
Dr. Jerry Pournelle
Kip Williams
> Dorothy J Heydt<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> We had an upstairs neighbor once -- briefly -- I don't know what he
>> did for a living, if anything, but he liked to stay up till way late
>> at night and then sleep way late into the morning.
>
> There were hours when they were quiet? Luxury! My upstairs neighbors
> sleep in shifts.
Our upstairs neighbors used to get around their apartment by flinging
themselves at the floor with all their might, getting up, and flinging
themselves again.
I don't know what they slept in.
Kip W
Dorothy J Heydt
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> On the OTHER hand, you live alone and probably don't generate that
>> much noise either.
>
>True, but with the lack of soundproofing, it's a wonder I don't get
>noise complaints when I comb my hair, or turn pages in a book.
Well, as I think I said upthread, if they make as much noise as
you indicate, they've probably gone deaf.