^ No problem - it's water under the bridge.
I also feel that I should apologize for the somewhat vehement nature of my postings. When talking of speed-detections countermeasures, I do tend to get a bit heated, as I simply want the truth to stand by itself, without external biases or influences - including my own. I thus have a tendency to pursue things to minutia.
Originally Posted by Veil Guy
It's all good. No, I really didn't take anything negative from your post, as I have found them all to be well-thought.
I just didn't want to come across as being "negative" with you, or what you'd written.
The imprecise nature of language, as well as the fact that I am not writing formally (and thus am typing as fast as I can think) tend to compound on each other, and as you've seen, make for errors on my part.
As always, the Errornet has a way of putting a kink in human relations.
If I read your post correctly you were merely indicating the Scott had felt that I was biased--which I believe he had indicated (being a stated-loyal follower of V1s). |
We are all entitled to our preferences.
Googling definition of bias, I found the following result:
a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation
With my suggestion of what I could consider a perfect radar detector, I only considered aspects of performance that could be achieved in the near-term from a given manufacturer.
The use of arrows for providing directional information is (and has been) under patent/intellectual property of Valentine Research. So suggesting arrows in 'my perfect radar detector' is simply not feasible, because of this restriction. Acknowledging this fact doesn't make be 'biased' it only makes me respectful of reality.
My personal definition of "bias" has ignored the second part of your cited reference, and similarly, also, based on the page-flipping of the dictionaries I have at-hand (we're old-fashioned, for growing up in the digital age, my wife and I both adore print media) certainly did not pay enough attention to the other notably negative connotations of the word.
I agree, it's certainly more "preference," what we're talking about - and that the bias that was spoken of in the posts prior is something else, totally.
Truth be told, this is really one of the underlying concerns that I have long held about laser diode-based laser jammers being sold in the U.S. |
I believe Blinder, Denmark has held a patent on the construction of laser-diode laser jammers in the U.S. for some time.
While some of these other products may be legally sold in other countries, the same may not be really true in this country (which may explain why [some of] these products are being made available in the manner in which they are). Inconvenient for some, perhaps, but I believe true nonetheless.
Please forgive my tangential-reference [to the Blinder issue], but it's related in the same way. Does this make me biased towards Blinder (as some may have accused or felt on RD.NET months ago)?
At the end of the day, I have to be able to sleep at night. Maintaining a level of moral clarity on this issue, helps me to.
That's a good point, and it is one that I can both agree with as well as respect.
For me, in walking the moral gray-line with this hobby already - and also perhaps because I am not involved in the business/industry aspects of the field - I am definitely more flexible the moral/ethical sense.
This has also been, in-part, why I've only rarely brought my personal preferences and biases onto the discussion tables - with the exception being, as-noted prior, when others have specifically asked that of me.
There's someone I'd consider a friend of mine, on LegacyGT.com - the BL/BP-Chassis Subaru Legacy enthusaist community that I belong to - who is always asking about the legality of certain modifications, be it the use of a radar detector or laser jammer, or putting aftermarket lighting elements into the vehicle, or performing various performance-related mechanical and engine-management modifications.
This enthusiast gets a lot of hassle from others, but he's always stuck to the straight-and-narrow, and I frankly respect him, very much, for it, and have always tried to answer his questions with regard to such concerns in as factual a manner as I can.
In the same vein, whenever someone asks me about these speed-detections countermeasures, I note, up-front, that I will only discuss the technical issues - that I don't feel that it is my place to discuss legalities or morals/ethics...nor, of-couse to impose my thoughts of such onto another individual.
At the end of the day, you're right, we have to be able to look ourselves in the mirror, and close our eyes and go to sleep.
And this, as much as anything else, should weigh-in to one's purchase decisions, when it comes to these devices, which are currently mostly gray-market (to include any and all of the laser-diode based jammers, with the exception of the Lidatek, of which the company's exact "whereabouts" is, currently, anyone's best guess, but also encompasses the Blinder/Escort design knock-offs, too).