Backcountry Access (BCA) released its new Float 2.0 system for the current winter season and put it in their Float 17 Speed and Float 27 Speed models. We tested the Float 27 Speed Avalanche Airbag during a three-day avalanche safety and rescue course in the North Cascades.
The Float 2.0 system is 30 percent smaller and weighs 15 percent less than its proven predecessor. These improvements combine with a practical ski pack to make the affordable avalanche airbag an even better buy.
The Float 2.0 System
The Float 2.0 engine and cylinder are visibly smaller than those of the Float 1.0 system. The weight savings are substantial, and the reduction in size is equally valuable. The system now resides in the Float 27’s airbag compartment, freeing up 1.5 liters of precious volume in the gear section.
The loss of usable space with canister-based systems as compared to fan-based systems has been a point of contention. With the new engine and canister, BCA has done a great job in mitigating this disadvantage. The trade-off increases airbag inflation time by 0.5 seconds compared to the more substantial and weighty Float 1.0 system.
Like the Float 1.0, the Float 2.0 engine still uses a Venturi valve. This technology allows ambient air to rush into the airbag along with the compressed air, reducing both the time and amount of compressed air necessary to inflate the 150-liter airbag.
And the entirety of the airbag system is detachable from the pack for use outside of avalanche terrain or season.
Float 27 Speed Pack Features
The Float 27 Speed’s claimed 27 liters of volume is all usable space. The airbag and Float 2.0 engine live in the rear of the pack, and the remaining capacity is in the front compartment, providing quick access to avalanche equipment. Shovel and probe have specific and visible locations and remain separated from the bulk of the gear. A mesh, zipped pocket also resides here to organize smaller items.
The back panel uses raised, padded “islands” to provide cushioning and air channels. BCA designs the back of the pack to carry skis diagonally with stowable straps (one under the bindings, one higher up on the skis). There is also a single stowable ice ax loop.
Two Velcro gear loops attach to the upper front. A compression strap on each side allow gear lashing and load tightening. The right side of the hip belt has a gear loop, and the left side has an elastic pocket to store the leg loop. All hip belt buckling hardware is crushproof aluminum.
The shoulder straps have vertical zip pockets that run the entire padded length. You can house the airbag trigger on either side, as both will protect it from accidental engagement. Both sides are also compatible with BCA’s BC Link radio system, which you would mount on the opposite side. A sternum strap with a whistle completes the pack.
The Float 27 in Use
During Mountain Bureau‘s three-day AIARE 1 avalanche training, we made trips into the backcountry for drills and observations. In the main compartment, I carried an extra down jacket, extra gloves, two liters of water, lunch, snacks, other small accessories, and all avalanche gear.
With winter gear on, the pack carried well and fit my 6-foot frame (the Float 27 is only available in one size). Executing recovery drills displayed the organizational prowess of the main compartment: Shovel and probe were easily accessed and quickly deployed. Fully opening the main zip wasn’t necessary.
The compression straps helped stabilize the load during aggressive movement, as the daily loads required for the class didn’t max out the pack’s volume. Unfortunately, I was unable to test the ski carry system.
You hopefully won’t have to use the airbag. But I did test fire it! BCA utilizes a unique bell-shaped trigger, which proved easy to grasp with gloves on (could be more difficult with mitts), with the hand in almost any orientation. Check out the video below!
The Float 2.0 system functioned as designed. With a tug on the trigger, the airbag inflated without hesitation. And it didn’t obscure peripheral vision once deployed.
I also appreciated the airbag’s illustrated instructions for repacking printed on its surface.
Canister vs. Fan Systems
There are numerous relative advantages and disadvantages of canister- and fan-based avalanche airbag systems – too many to detail here. But the most obvious? Canister systems are cheaper. Fan systems, while more costly, can be inflated repeatedly on a single charge, and are allowed on airplanes.
Canister systems are cheaper. That’s their biggest advantage. Avalanche airbags are often one of the most expensive investments for the backcountry adventurer, so lowering the financial barrier puts enhanced safety within reach of more people.
With an MSRP of $630 for the BCA Float 27 Speed and $200 for the Float 2.0 cylinder, the total system costs significantly less than the fan-based Black Diamond Halo 28 JetForce ($1,100) and Arc’teryx Voltair 30 ($1,300).
However, filled compressed gas canisters are not allowed on U.S. flights and thus require refills or exchanges at the destination. If you don’t happen to have a high-pressure hand pump – which does the job in about 15 minutes – BCA suggests one of their 200+ certified refill/exchange centers, which provide refills for approximately $20 and exchanges for more.
BCA can also ship filled cylinders to your destination. Flying with empty canisters also necessitates a few precautions to ensure passage through airport security. Fan-based systems are free of these issues.
Fan-based systems are capable of multiple inflations without added financial or physical burden. Other advantages of fan systems are continued protection after a misfire or close call and the higher likelihood of deployment without delay.
Multiple firings of canister-based systems are possible, but this mandates purchasing extra canisters, which means decreasing pack space and shouldering additional weight.
Avalanche Airbags and Weight
Weight is always on the mind of most outdoor enthusiasts. An apples-to-apples comparison of avalanche airbags in the same volume range is difficult due to differences in durability, features, and other factors. Below are some specific product comparisons.
The BCA Float 27 Speed’s verified weight (with empty Float 2.0 canister) is 5 pounds 10 ounces. This is much less weight than the claimed weight of the fan-based Black Diamond Halo 28 JetForce (7 pounds 8 ounces for size L) and the Arc’teryx Voltair 30 (7 pounds 11 ounces).
The Float 27 is heavier than the claimed weight of the canister-based Ortovox Ascent (women’s-specific and weighing 4 pounds 11 ounces) and the Mammut Light Protection Airbag 3.0 (with 28.5-liter capacity and weighing 5 pounds 6 ounces).
Although air travel requires extra effort, and multiple deployments aren’t possible with a single canister, the lower cost of one of the most expensive pieces of gear for the winter adventurer presents a more accessible route to safer backcountry travel.
from GearJunkie.com – Outdoor Gear Reviews http://bit.ly/2FWCcLn
I’m the worst at keeping my browser organized—the absolute worst. I’ll open tabs like adding entries on a to-do list, and then forget about them for weeks as more of their peers join the party in the penthouse above Chrome’s address bar.
There are plenty of extensions you can use to manage any organizational … difficulties … you have in Chrome. Here are a few of the ones I use to keep me sane.
We’ve written about this wonder before (twice, in fact), but The Great Suspender is easily one of the best browser extensions I’ve ever installed. Even though I have a fairly formidable gaming desktop—16GB of memory! Get crazy!—I find that having 20+ tabs open in my browser’s background can sometimes slow it to a crawl or otherwise mess up Chrome in some catastrophic way.
With The Great Suspender, you set a time limit—say, 15 minutes. If you haven’t touched a particular browser tab in that time, The Great Suspender does exactly what its name suggests: It puts the tabs on a “standby mode” of sorts, ensuring they aren’t eating up extra memory in your browser. Better still, the extension fades out these tabs a little bit so you don’t lose track of the few tabs you’re actually using among your sprawling sea of open sites.
I love the concept of OneTab. I’ve installed it without issue and it works absolutely perfectly. My only hesitation in using it more than I already do, which is sparingly, is that its premise—condensing all of your open tabs into a single tab with a simple list of links—makes it easier to forget about them. But that’s a me thing, not a OneTab thing. If you let it work for you, this extension offers a perfect way to get more control over your messy browsing habits.
Sometimes, Chrome crashes. And, sometimes, it crashes in such a strange way that its typical “do you want to restore the tabs that were open before I made a mess” offering doesn’t work at all. That’s not a big deal if you have one or two tabs you were using; if you have 20 or more, you’re going to have to hunt through your history to find out what they all were.
Session Buddy has saved my bacon more times than I can count. Restoring old browser sessions—like the one that was working perfectly right before Chrome got the crazies—just takes a few mouse clicks. The extension even lists out all the websites that are in each of its saved sessions to help you verify you’re restoring the correct batch of tabs.
When you’re opening your 35th tab of the day in a single browser window, sometimes it’s just nice to have something pretty to look at. Earth View from Google Earth—the longest extension name for the simplest of features—shows you a new image from Google Earth whenever you open a new tab. Consider it Chrome’s Moment of Zen.
from Lifehacker http://bit.ly/2pvQBE3
Netflix has established itself as the premiere home for stand-up comedy over the past few years, and it has accomplished this by shelling out millions to some of the top names in the industry.
Ricky Gervais’ recent Netflix special, "Humanity," is the first of two specials in a deal the actor-comedian reportedly signed for $40 million.
Gervais follows stand-ups like Amy Schumer, Dave Chappelle, and Chris Rock in netting multi-million dollar deals from the streaming service.
It should be noted that Netflix has also drawn criticism for under-paying some comics. Comedian Mo’Nique came into a pay dispute with the company last year when they reportedly offered her $500,000 for a special.
Also, Louis C.K. was reportedly set to make between $30 million and $35 million from Netflix for a two-special deal, before the company cancelled his second special following sexual misconduct allegations against the comedian. While he was paid for his first special, released in early 2017, we’ve excluded him from this list as his deal is not ongoing.
Here are the 5 comedians Netflix has paid insane amounts of money:
Amy Schumer — $13 million
Netflix initially offered Amy Schumer $11 million in 2017 for her hour-long "The Leather Special," but Schumer was reportedly able to use Netflix’s more lucrative deals with Chris Rock and Dave Chappelle as a bargaining chip to receive $13 million for the hour, according to Variety.
Ricky Gervais — $40 million
Ricky Gervais reportedly "secured the highest fee ever paid for a UK stand-up special" for his most recent Netflix special, "Humanity," according to Chortle. Gervais told the outlet that his second special in the deal, which was extended in January, would be worth the same. He then retweeted a Twitter user who wrote that Gervais had made $40 million from Netflix for the two specials.
Gervais has also profited from previously released shows that Netflix acquired of his, including "Derek" and "An Idiot Abroad."
Chris Rock — $40 million
Chris Rock signed a two-special deal with Netflix in 2016 that was worth $40 million in total, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The first of his two specials, "Tamborine," debuted in February.
from SAI http://read.bi/2GgXouJ
Tim Berners-Lee, the British creator of the web, has said that Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg can fix the issues that meant Cambridge Analytica could scrape millions of user profiles.
Berners-Lee added in a tweetstorm that it was likely Zuckerberg felt "devastated" by the way Facebook had been "misused and abused" — and that sometimes he felt the same about his own creation.
He wrote: "I would say to him: You can fix it. It won’t be easy but if companies work with governments, activists, academics and web users we can make sure platforms serve humanity."
But he also said internet users who rely on free services need to become better educated about how they give away their data.
He wrote: "What can web users do? Get involved. Care about your data. It belongs to you. If we each take a little of the time we spend using the web to fight for the web, I think we’ll be ok. Tell companies and your government representatives that your data and the web matter."
Although Berners-Lee refrained from criticising Zuckerberg or Facebook, that he felt compelled to comment at all is indicative of how the scandal is indicative of a wider battle over the internet and how it works. Cambridge Analytica could only harvest data from Facebook, because the company permitted access to third-party app developers in a bid to boost user engagement and growth.
from SAI http://read.bi/2FTRhgt
On Thursday, in a packed federal courthouse in San Francisco, U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup donned a space-themed tie and listened as scientists and lawyers formally presented the fundamentals of climate science. The hearing, dubbed a “tutorial” by Judge Alsup, marked the first time a judge has ever asked for and heard a presentation of climate science for the purposes of deciding a court case.
The case Alsup is presiding over involves several fossil fuel companies and two major cities — San Francisco and Oakland. The cities are suing the world’s oil giants — Chevron, BP, Shell, and others — for extracting and selling fuels that the companies knew would stoke climate change and sea level rise.
Adapting to these changes requires massive infrastructure undertakings, such as building formidable concrete sea walls, and the coastal cities want Big Oil to pay.
Judge Alsup gave each side two hours to present charts, data, and research on both the history of climate science and “the best science now available on global warming, glacier melt, sea rise, and coastal flooding.”
Although Alsup made clear from the outset that the event was not a trial of climate science — but a climate lesson for himself — the evidence provided likely foreshadows the arguments both sides will make during the actual trial. While admitting the reality of human-caused global warming, lawyers for Chevron (the other oil giants have two weeks to tell Alsup if they agree with Chevron’s science presentation) presented outdated science and repeatedly emphasized uncertainties about how fossil fuel emissions will affect global warming.
They also presented climate change as a global problem requiring a global solution, foreshadowing a defense strategy of arguing that no single company should be held liable for climate change-related damages.
“Oil companies basically went from a climate deniers playbook,” said Kassie Siegel, director of the Climate Law Institute, in an interview. “They overemphasized and overstated really narrow issues of uncertainty about the effects of global warming.”
For instance, the oil companies’ lawyer, Ted Boutrous, cited a U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report from 1990, which stated that the observed increase in global temperature could just be due to natural shifts in the planet’s climate.
Nearly three decades have since passed, however, and confidence has grown about tying increasing temperatures to fossil fuel burning. A federal climate report published in late 2017, for example, found that there is no natural explanation for recent global warming.
“This assessment concludes, based on extensive evidence, that it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century,” the report said. “For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.”
As Don Wuebbles, a former White House climate science advisor and atmospheric scientist, said during the tutorial, 17 of the last 18 years have been the warmest years on record. The instrumental climate record began in the late 1800s, although researchers have far longer climate timelines gleaned from tree rings, ice cores, and other so-called “proxy” sources.
While three climate scientists presented climate science basics for the plaintiffs, the defendants relied exclusively upon Boutrous, who has previously defended both Walmart and the Standard Fire Insurance Company before the U.S. Supreme Court, to inform the judge about the nuances of climate science.
“I don’t know if Ted Boutrous has a background in climate science, but he has a background in spin,” Siegel said.
Alsup grilling Chevron on rate of change of sea level rise. Chevron says sea level has been rising for centuries, nothing new. Plaintiffs’ experts presented evidence that it’s dramatically increased in recent years, fueled by climate change. #ClimateTutorial @ClimateLawNews
— Amy Westervelt (@amywestervelt) March 21, 2018
Chevron and the other oil companies may have a difficult time finding scientists who will, in a federal court, make scientific statements about climate change that oil companies find agreeable.
“The oil companies are now in a real pickle,” said Siegel, noting that climate scientists have previously made false or misleading statements on behalf of oil companies. Publicly, most of these companies now admit that climate change is occurring, even if they continue to sell more oil and gas that contributes to the problem.
“It’s a lot harder to lie to the court under penalty of perjury,” said Siegel.
Richard Wiles, Executive Director of the Center for Climate Integrity, agrees.
“The fact that Chevron’s lawyer, rather than an actual climate scientist, provided the court with its version of climate history suggests that the industry could not find a scientist willing to carry its water,” Wiles said in a statement.
Only scientists, however, presented evidence for the plaintiffs. Along with Wuebbles, geoscientist Myles Allen, who leads Oxford University’s Climate Dynamics Group, and Gary Griggs, a professor of earth sciences at University of California at Santa Cruz, presented climate science information to Alsup.
Griggs noted that significant sea level rise has been measured just miles from the courthouse near the San Francisco shore, and Allen delivered quotes from Svante Arrhenius, a scientist who in 1895 noted that carbon dioxide emissions could have a warming effect on the Earth.
As for what comes next, the oil companies have filed a motion asking Alsup to dismiss the case. If this were to happen, there would be no trial, said Michael Burger, executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, via email.
But if things proceed, the next step will likely be discovery, wherein plaintiffs and defendants exchange information that will be used as evidence in the trial. During the past few years, as climate change-related litigation has increased, oil companies have gone to great lengths to avoid the discovery process, since it could reveal what oil companies knew about climate change, when they knew it, and what they told the public and their shareholders about it.
The tutorial event may have been unprecedented, but the case is just one of many current lawsuits against oil companies. Across the country, New York City is also suing the same oil companies for damage caused by human-caused climate change.
“Taxpayers around the country should ask themselves whether they want to foot the bill for climate impacts that scientists now attribute directly to the oil and gas industry or demand that polluters pay for the damages they’ve caused,” Wiles said.
from Mashable! http://on.mash.to/2G4j2zb
Every year Jeep aims to wow the Moab off-road crowd with an offering of cool concept vehicles. This year is no different, with seven concepts that dive into the brand’s heritage and heavily accessorize all sorts of iconic Jeeps.
For 2018, Jeep and Mopar are showing off seven new concept vehicles: the 4SPEED, Sandstorm, B-Ute, Wagoneer Roadtrip, Nacho, Jeepster, and J-Wagon. Each is extremely off-road capable, or “Trail Rated” as Jeep likes to say.
“Pushing the limit is something the Jeep brand is no stranger to, and these seven new, exciting, and capable concept vehicles are the latest example of that,” said Mike Manley, head of Jeep brand at Fiat Chrysler Automobiles.
While you’re unlikely to see any of these concepts make it into production, you will see them swarming the hills around Moab during the nine-day 52nd annual Easter Jeep Safari event, beginning March 24.
The 4SPEED is all about lightweight, quick, nimble off-road performance. Carbon fiber and perforated aluminum components make up much of the body, providing weight savings.
Shortened by a full 22 inches while retaining the stock wheelbase, the 4SPEED offers impressive entry and departure angles. This lightweight off-road machine should be no slouch, receiving power from the new 2.0L turbocharged inline four-cylinder engine.
The Sandstorm is all about high-speed desert fun, carrying a Baja desert-racing theme throughout. The wheelbase has been extended and the suspension fully rebuilt to allow for massive wheel travel and high-speed off-road stability.
The 6.4L V8 Hemi under the vented carbon fiber hood will be an absolute hoot when ripping through the desert!
The B-Ute takes the Jeep Renegade to new heights of off-road performance, without going over the top. A small 1.5-inch lift, bigger tires and wheels, and some rock rails will make this little SUV quite capable.
A stealthy dark-gray and black theme blankets this Jeep, creating a clean yet rugged look. You could easily apply this design concept to your own Jeep Renegade build.
The Wagoneer Roadtrip is an extremely tasteful restomod. Based on an original 1965 Jeep Wagoneer, the Wagoneer Roadtrip concept vehicle is heavily modified for off-road capability and modern comfort.
A stretched wheelbase, beefy axles, custom lifted suspension, 33-inch MT tires, and rock rails will make this Wagoneer a capable adventurer. And a clean, modern interior and Hemi V8 with four-speed automatic transmission make for a comfortable and spirited drive in this modern classic.
The Nacho showcases what you could drive away at the Jeep dealer by throwing the Mopar parts and accessories catalog at a new Jeep Wrangler. The only conceptual part on the whole Jeep is the satin-carbon finish on the bead-lock capable wheels.
A 2-inch lift and 37-inch tires make the Nacho seriously off-road hungry. Write a really big check to your local Jeep dealer, and you too can have a Nacho Jeep.
Based on the styling and classic paint scheme from the 1966 Jeepster, the new Jeepster concept combines the latest from Jeep performance and the brand’s long heritage of iconic vehicles.
A raked back windshield and concept roll cage help complete the iconic aggressive Jeepster look. The Jeepster concept has a 2-inch lift and 37-inch tires – a bold, useable setup.
The J-Wagon is all about clean, classy styling that looks at home in both urban and remote mountain landscapes. “Brass Monkey”-colored accents inside and out add class to the conceptual “Warm Neutral Grey” paint scheme. Black metal concept rock sliders let you know the J-Wagon isn’t just about looks, it’s trail ready.
Stay tuned for more about these impressive Jeep concepts as they hit the trails in Moab from March 24 to April 1.
from GearJunkie.com – Outdoor Gear Reviews http://bit.ly/2HXF8Ux
Over the past few days, Facebook has come under intense scrutiny due to its previous relationship with Cambridge Analytica, a data-science company that secretly culled information from 50 million Facebook users. This has raised questions not only about the social network’s role in the data harvest but also over Facebook’s entire business practice of collecting data from its users.
Some are so fed up with Facebook that they’ve called for a mass exodus, kickstarting the #deletefacebook movement — including Brian Acton, the co-founder of WhatsApp (which Facebook bought in 2014 for $22 billion). But while that reaction is understandable, for many, that just isn’t an option.
The fact is, with over 2 billion users, Facebook is the most popular social network in the world. Many people, including myself, use it to keep in touch with family and friends from around the globe. It doesn’t matter if my mother lives in Malaysia or if I have friends who live in Japan and Australia; I can keep in touch with all of them in just one place. Facebook’s also where I learn about their birthdays, their marriage proposals, their babies and their problems. It’s how I know if a friend is in from out of town, if my cousin got a new job, or just if someone is in trouble and needs help. I know that without Facebook, I would feel more disconnected and more isolated from the people I know.
It is time. #deletefacebook
— Brian Acton (@brianacton) March 20, 2018
But it goes beyond just keeping in touch with loved ones. Many people rely on Facebook for employment as well as community support. I’m a member of a couple of Facebook groups where comedians and improv troupes regularly find gigs or advertise their shows. I’m in another group where Bay Area female entrepreneurs find solace with each other and help each other find work.
Safiya Noble, an assistant professor of information studies at the University of Southern California, wrote in her book, the Algorithms of Oppression: "For many people, Facebook is an important gateway to the internet. In fact, it is the only version of the internet that some know, and it plays a central role in communicating, creating community and participating in society online."
Jillian C. York, a writer and activist in Berlin, pointed out on Twitter that deleting Facebook is a privilege that many people just don’t have. She notes that those with disabilities or illnesses, people with families across borders, young queer and trans folks and many others will lose their support network if Facebook were to go away.
I would love to leave Facebook and if you can afford to, do it. Lots of folks tell me it would be a great loss for them…because it’s where their community is.
— 🦄 jillian (@jilliancyork) March 20, 2018
"If people use social media to actively maintain relationships and create connections, Facebook can improve our wellbeing," Melanie C. Green, associate professor and director of graduate studies for the department of communication at the University of Buffalo, told Engadget. Facebook can also have a negative influence, she added, if, for example, people compare themselves to others and then feel worse about themselves. But leaving Facebook still isn’t as easy as just, well, deleting your account.
"The challenge with leaving Facebook is that it’s a collective-action problem," Green said. "Lots of people may want to leave, but since there is not a clear alternative platform that everyone can move to at once, it’s hard to give up those connections." In short, there just aren’t any usable alternatives for the masses at this time.
There’s also the practical matter of Facebook Login being used for so many apps and websites. Tinder, for example, relies on Facebook Login to authenticate users. For some, their Spotify playlists are tied up with a Facebook Login account. Sign up for a new Spotify account, and years of song preferences are suddenly gone. Sure, that doesn’t sound like a big deal, but could be enough inconvenience for people to not delete their Facebook accounts. It also bears remembering that deleting your Facebook account while keeping your Instagram and WhatsApp accounts won’t exactly rid you from Facebook’s data-collecting ways.
The Guardian reports that Noble also said that deleting your Facebook won’t change how data are collected, sold and used against the public. Many companies track and profile us in our everyday lives, and "the abuses of power that come from having vast troves of information about us" is "available for exploitation."
Other data experts agree. Frederike Kaltheuner of Privacy International told the media outlet: "You can delete your Facebook, but you will still be tracked in your online and increasingly also your offline life. Mobile phones are, by definition, a tracking device." That’s why York, Noble and others like them are strongly pushing for international standards and regulations, to at least make sure that companies like Facebook are accountable for their actions.
Seeing a lot of glib "just don’t be on Facebook" comments. I’m not on FB myself, and there’s a significant cost to it. "Don’t be on FB" is unhelpful, unrealistic advice for a large number of people. It’s like saying "just don’t have a credit card, or a car".
— matt blaze (@mattblaze) March 20, 2018
Plus, there are a few ways to remain on Facebook while lessening your data trail. You can, for example, revoke permission from certain third-party apps in the Apps tab under Settings. You can also choose what kind of information about yourself you want to share — probably none, if you’re paranoid — or you can just disable the app platform altogether if you’re OK with not using Facebook Login anymore. In general, it’s probably a good idea to stop taking those Facebook quizzes — knowing which celebrity you look like isn’t exactly worth giving up your data to an anonymous third party.
And hey, if you just don’t want to risk it and you have no qualms of doing so, there’s no harm in removing your Facebook account. Just be sure to backup all of your archives before then. The company says that it’ll take up to 90 days to delete your account entirely, so you have some time to recover it if you have second thoughts.
In the end, there’s no right or wrong answer to the question of whether you should delete your Facebook account. Go ahead and do so if you want. But if you don’t want to, because of personal or professional reasons, you shouldn’t feel ashamed about that either.
from Engadget http://engt.co/2G0C49u