EEVblog #751 - How To Debunk A Product (The Batteriser)

[rich]

If you look at carefully at bullet point D in the quoted block it does indeed say the use of BATTERISER and BATTEROO marks.  It's so inconsistent with the rest of Count VII section that I assume it to be a typo on Energiser's part?

[rich]

That's what was in the suit ... but what was the actual outcome?

Energizer only filed it last week, so a little early to tell! But the point remains, this is a list of what they are asking to be awarded, not a guarantee of what will be received.

[Brumby]

... not a guarantee of what will be received.

That's the point I wanted to make clear.

But, yes, an answer will come ... in time.

[Fungus]

It's a bluff. They're not going to ship anything, they just want to use Energiser as a way out.

Basically all this update says is, "Send us another threatening letter, please! A really nasty one this time!"

[ez24]

If this guy can make a dead Ostrich fly, anything is possible! (The cat is my personal favorite. The best cat is a dead one. An even better one has a remote control.)

Oh dear, I meant a live pig.  The reason is years ago I saw a video of a horse driving a custom car around a farm (I think from the mid 1900s).  I think a young pig could steer itself towards food.
But I agree this video shows a good use of a cat.

[boffin]

One of the things that hasn't been mentioned with regards to Garmin GPS (or I missed it in the hundreds of pages) is that the older Garmin GPSr (at least the old ones like the eTrex series) have a setting "Alkaline/NiCd" which changes the voltage threshold at which the device reports "Battery Low".  It's probably dead easy to replicate their results if:

• You used a NiCd (or MiMH) battery (something with a lower chemistry voltage)
• had the GPSr set to Alakaline (expecting it to have a higher chemistry voltage)

You could then claim you got 8x the lifespan before the battery warning.


Don't have a GPSr here, but I'll go home and take a couple of pics of the settings.  The setting definitely existed on both my old eTrex Vista and my Rino 120

[Jay_Diddy_B]

Hi,

This has been mentioned in this thread. I am not sure where.

I helped one of the Forum members make a time-lapse video of the Garmin GPS. I helped by supplying two boost converters. The boost converters were my best guess at the Bateriser Batteroo. The video can be found here:



He used the same GPS and tested with and without the boost circuits.

Regards,

Jay_Diddy_B

[rrinker]

 No worries for Batteroo though, you are not a smart PhD like they have working for them, and your circuit is just a poor imitation of their super-secret ultra powerful physics-bending super incredible ultimate battery boost circuit. 
 

[Brumby]

... their super-secret ultra powerful physics-bending super incredible ultimate battery boost circuit.

This is what Marketing does when it finds any wisp of a selling point.

As I understand it, the claim was that they just made it small.


... but how are we going on dates?

[EEVblog]

It's a bluff. They're not going to ship anything, they just want to use Energiser as a way out.

But this time they used fairly definite language and gaves dates. They could have not done that and been much more vague like they always have, or simply remained silent as everyone had forgotten about it all. So I think there is a very good chance they will ship something now.

[ez24]

So I think there is a very good chance they will ship something now.

Is there any online betting place where we could make bets on this?   I would bet no.

[Brumby]

It's a bluff. They're not going to ship anything, they just want to use Energiser as a way out.

But this time they used fairly definite language and gaves dates. They could have not done that and been much more vague like they always have, or simply remained silent as everyone had forgotten about it all. So I think there is a very good chance they will ship something now.

While we all would like to get something in hand to assess ... there is another possibility that comes to mind....

They are making all the right noises for expectations to rise and anticipation to grow - but this could be a big build-up so when they play their 'disaster' scenario (possibly inferring a 'Big Battering', but something well planned out) there will be outrage from the fanboys that will drown out the skeptics saying 'We told you so.".

[ez24]

play their 'disaster' scenario

this is what I expect, too bad no betting.  Just think of the online gambling Dave could set up on this one.  I do not know the Australian gambling laws.

[Brumby]

I don't know any details of the NSW gambling laws (I believe it's a state jurisdiction) - but by general observation, I think they are not something you would casually flirt with, especially if there is a monetary prize.

[ez24]

I don't know any details of the NSW gambling laws (I believe it's a state jurisdiction) - but by general observation, I think they are not something you would casually flirt with, especially if there is a monetary prize.

How about an used scope prize hint hint

[Brumby]

Hmmm....

[Galenbo]

Dr Roohpavar's Linkedin claims he's still professor at "California State University East Bay"
They still didn't kick him out? Or is that a scam university that offers you a degree for 150 dollar?

Somebody here actually knows that university?

[JoeO]

Dr Roohpavar's Linkedin claims he's still professor at "California State University East Bay"
They still didn't kick him out? Or is that a scam university that offers you a degree for 150 dollar?

Somebody here actually knows that university?

Here is their website.
http://www.csueastbay.edu/

I can't find him by doing a search for his name.  He is probably gone.

[FloFo]

a quick google search reveals:
http://www.csueastbay.edu/csci/departments/cs/faculty/info.html
http://www.csueastbay.edu/directory/profiles/cs/roohparvarfarzan.html

[ez24]

a quick google search reveals:
http://www.csueastbay.edu/csci/departments/cs/faculty/info.html
http://www.csueastbay.edu/directory/profiles/cs/roohparvarfarzan.html

Not teaching now, probably because he is in China working on the "thing"

[Galenbo]

Unbelievable the guy is still on their listings.
Somebody knows the general reputation of that university?

[Halcyon]

Looks like his University e-mail address is still valid:

MX record about csueastbay.edu exists.
Connection succeeded to mx2.csueastbay.iphmx.com SMTP.
220 esa1.csueastbay.iphmx.com ESMTP

> HELO **Suppressed**
250 esa1.csueastbay.iphmx.com

> MAIL FROM: <**Suppressed**>
=250 sender <**Suppressed**> ok

> RCPT TO: <farzan.roohparvar@csueastbay.edu>
=250 recipient <farzan.roohparvar@csueastbay.edu> ok

[Cerebus]

Looks like his University e-mail address is still valid:

MX record about csueastbay.edu exists.
Connection succeeded to mx2.csueastbay.iphmx.com SMTP.
220 esa1.csueastbay.iphmx.com ESMTP

> HELO **Suppressed**
250 esa1.csueastbay.iphmx.com

> MAIL FROM: <**Suppressed**>
=250 sender <**Suppressed**> ok

> RCPT TO: <farzan.roohparvar@csueastbay.edu>
=250 recipient <farzan.roohparvar@csueastbay.edu> ok

You can't be certain about that until you actually send a complete email. Quite a lot of SMTP servers are nowadays configured to always say OK at that stage even if the address isn't valid to prevent using that as a mechanism for scanning for valid email addresses to build spam address lists from.

[Kalvin]

Somebody knows the general reputation of that university?

http://www.forbes.com/colleges/california-state-university-east-bay/

#465 Top Colleges
#153 in Public Colleges
#89 in the West

There are some other info inside the article and the section "Profile & News".

[grumpydoc]

You can't be certain about that until you actually send a complete email. Quite a lot of SMTP servers are nowadays configured to always say OK at that stage even if the address isn't valid to prevent using that as a mechanism for scanning for valid email addresses to build spam address lists from.

A lot of SMTP servers say OK to anything during the RCPT TO: phase because they aren't in a position to validate the user name/mailbox portion anyway, because they are not the system which will do local delivery.

I must admit I have the system which does local delivery for my domains set up to reject invalid user/mailbox names during "RCPT TO:". I found that I was getting tons of email to random user names but not in a pattern which suggests attempts to scan my user name space - in fact I have never seen anything which looks like an attempt to do that. Some are totally random but with repeated attempts over and over with the same user name. Some look like someone has merged a dictionary with a list of hosts, some look like someone has taken a spam email address list and tried every permutation of user name and host name. At least this one sort of makes sense as an individual might have the same user/mailbox name with multiple servers.

By rejecting undeliverable email as soon as possible I avoid the cost of running it through the spam and virus checkers and I leave the system sending it to me with the problem of trying to bounce to the sender (which is probably forged anyway). So I waste less CPU and generate less backscatter.

Works for me.