tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-43143346032117250722011-11-18T07:01:44.738-08:00Things I Want To Talk About...Random musings on things found in the world and my sometimes crazy ideas about things I don't know much about. Highly opinionated. Occasionally factual. Possibly funny.mallthushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06327582118285855048noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4314334603211725072.post-9698552555649981782009-07-30T12:46:00.000-07:002009-07-30T12:58:39.109-07:00Cell Phone Voicemail ScamI happened to read a great article by David Pogue in his <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/indexes/2009/07/30/technology/circuitsemail/index.html?8cir&emc=cir">Circuits </a>column in the New York Times about cell phone voicemail and those annoying mandatory voicemail instructions you seemingly can't avoid.<br /><br />Based on his math for Verizon's profits off of this and then accounting for the other three of the "big four" in cell phones (AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile) and then the other players, the industry, in the US alone, is raking in about $2 billion a year.<br /><br />Now I'm all for making a buck and if there were an easy way to skip these, then I'd be all for it. If you're <span style="font-style: italic;">able</span> to not pay for something and you do anyway, I can't feel too sorry for you. On the other hand, if you <span style="font-style: italic;">make </span>someone pay for something they don't need or want in order to get to a basic function, then that's just not cricket.<br /><br />So, I suggest the following. Unless you have something really important to say, don't leave a message. When (or even before...if they're going to pick up, it doesn't take seven rings) the voicemail picks up, hang up. The other person can see you called and they can call back. Easy as pie and pretty much what we did back in the dark ages of pagers.<br /><br />Just my 2ยข.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/4314334603211725072-969855255564998178?l=tststb.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>mallthushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06327582118285855048noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4314334603211725072.post-74662428506168975002008-07-16T09:13:00.000-07:002008-07-16T09:22:09.661-07:00Getting Serious About Fuel Efficiency In the USA<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;font-size:100%;" >So, I just finished reading a <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/15/lutz-no-beat-for-the-u-s-smaller-cuvs-on-the-way-insignia-st/">recap </a>of "Maximum" Bob Lutz's News Conference yesterday (7/15).<br /><br />OK. No surprise we're not getting the small, fuel efficient Chevrolet Beat (Spark?). It's not designed to meet US safety standards.<br /><br />Here's a novel thought though...let's change those standards. Let's stop forcing auto makers to make cars designed to protect people too stupid to wear their seatbelts. It's funny that conservative American politicians criticize the Europeans as running nanny states and then vote for regulations in the US that are so abhorrent to the idea of personal responsibility.<br /><br />If I want to drive a small car with limited crash protection and no airbag in order to pay less for it and get better mileage, isn't that my call? Apparently not.<br /></span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/4314334603211725072-7466242850616897500?l=tststb.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>mallthushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06327582118285855048noreply@blogger.com0