• [OT] Dogs causing fires; dogs being protected by politicians

    From Rhino@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 19 10:56:06 2025
    I just saw two stories about dogs that caught my eye.

    The first story was about a dog that had (apparently) caused two
    separate fires in its owner's house because it had somehow touched the
    controls of the stove and turned them on.

    I think it's clear here that the REAL problem is not the dog but the
    design of the stove controls that makes it easy for the dog to
    inadvertently turn on the burners or the oven.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/stove-fire-dog-safety-recall-1.7610272

    The second story is about Premier Doug Ford's order to stop animal
    testing on cats and dogs in Ontario. While this edict is surely intended
    to stop research that mistreats cats or dogs or ends in euthanizing
    them, it seems that it is being interpreted, at least by scientists as
    an order not to do ANY research on cats and dogs, even research that
    would HELP cats and dogs. A researcher looking into surgical techniques
    that could actually prove beneficial to cats, dogs and other larger
    species of animals has shut down his research for fear of having the
    government coming down hard on him.

    This problem seems like one that could be resolved to everyone's
    satisfaction by having the relevant parties discuss this and agree that research which does NOT harm the animal is perfectly okay.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/not-taking-any-chances-ontario-researcher-closes-lab-after-premier-warns-to-stop-testing-on-dogs-1.7612040

    --
    Rhino

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From super70s@21:1/5 to Rhino on Tue Aug 19 10:18:33 2025
    On 2025-08-19 14:56:06 +0000, Rhino said:

    I just saw two stories about dogs that caught my eye.

    The first story was about a dog that had (apparently) caused two
    separate fires in its owner's house because it had somehow touched the controls of the stove and turned them on.

    I think it's clear here that the REAL problem is not the dog but the
    design of the stove controls that makes it easy for the dog to
    inadvertently turn on the burners or the oven.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/stove-fire-dog-safety-recall-1.7610272

    "Push your stove control down, then turn... or pull it it up and turn"
    which would be even more annoying. I can't wait.

    I defeat every child-proof bottle in the house because no kids are around.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to All on Wed Aug 20 08:39:58 2025
    On 2025-08-19 15:18:33 +0000, super70s said:

    On 2025-08-19 14:56:06 +0000, Rhino said:

    I just saw two stories about dogs that caught my eye.

    The first story was about a dog that had (apparently) caused two
    separate fires in its owner's house because it had somehow touched the
    controls of the stove and turned them on.

    I think it's clear here that the REAL problem is not the dog but the
    design of the stove controls that makes it easy for the dog to
    inadvertently turn on the burners or the oven.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/stove-fire-dog-safety-recall-1.7610272

    "Push your stove control down, then turn... or pull it it up and turn"
    which would be even more annoying. I can't wait.

    I defeat every child-proof bottle in the house because no kids are around.

    More and more stove tops and ovens these days have silly touch-controls
    rather than physical switches and knobs. Not only are touch controls
    dangerous and give little / no response feel, but they also far more time-consuming to use (you have to repeatedly touch or hold the +
    button while it slowly ticks up to "7" or whatever, instead of simply
    twisting a knob to "7"). :-(

    It was the same with cars starting to move to silly touch controls
    instead of physical buttons and switches. Thankfully most car makers
    quickly saw sense and are stopping the idiocy. Apparently VW owners are
    even suing (in the US of course) the company because they hate the
    silly touch controls.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From super70s@21:1/5 to Your Name on Tue Aug 19 16:42:14 2025
    On 2025-08-19 20:39:58 +0000, Your Name said:

    On 2025-08-19 15:18:33 +0000, super70s said:

    On 2025-08-19 14:56:06 +0000, Rhino said:

    I just saw two stories about dogs that caught my eye.

    The first story was about a dog that had (apparently) caused two
    separate fires in its owner's house because it had somehow touched the
    controls of the stove and turned them on.

    I think it's clear here that the REAL problem is not the dog but the
    design of the stove controls that makes it easy for the dog to
    inadvertently turn on the burners or the oven.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/stove-fire-dog-safety-recall-1.7610272

    "Push your stove control down, then turn... or pull it it up and turn"
    which would be even more annoying. I can't wait.

    I defeat every child-proof bottle in the house because no kids are around.

    More and more stove tops and ovens these days have silly touch-controls rather than physical switches and knobs. Not only are touch controls dangerous and give little / no response feel, but they also far more time-consuming to use (you have to repeatedly touch or hold the +
    button while it slowly ticks up to "7" or whatever, instead of simply twisting a knob to "7"). :-(

    I know where you're coming from. A few months ago I bought a (rather
    pricey) Speed Queen washing machine because their reliability was
    recommended by a plumber -- and even the manager of the appliance
    section of a local Lowe's (and none of the big box stores carry Speed
    Queens, the company is pretty choosy about who they let sell their
    products).

    Anyway they make models with knobs and models with "silly-touch"
    controls (which are of course more expensive). The plumber said don't
    mess with any models with the silly-touch because they're bound to tear
    up sooner. So I just bought the one with knobs because I don't really
    need all the bells & whistle options that the silly-touch models give
    you anyway.

    It was the same with cars starting to move to silly touch controls
    instead of physical buttons and switches. Thankfully most car makers
    quickly saw sense and are stopping the idiocy. Apparently VW owners are
    even suing (in the US of course) the company because they hate the
    silly touch controls.

    Yeah, I'm driving around in a car before they started all the rear-view
    monitor (I guess because some poor kid got ran over one time) and
    Bluetooth and other crazy stuff. Some of those new dashes look like you
    need to be a licensed pilot to operate them.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From shawn@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Aug 19 18:13:38 2025
    On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 16:42:14 -0500, super70s
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On 2025-08-19 20:39:58 +0000, Your Name said:

    On 2025-08-19 15:18:33 +0000, super70s said:

    On 2025-08-19 14:56:06 +0000, Rhino said:

    I just saw two stories about dogs that caught my eye.

    The first story was about a dog that had (apparently) caused two
    separate fires in its owner's house because it had somehow touched the >>>> controls of the stove and turned them on.

    I think it's clear here that the REAL problem is not the dog but the
    design of the stove controls that makes it easy for the dog to
    inadvertently turn on the burners or the oven.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/stove-fire-dog-safety-recall-1.7610272

    "Push your stove control down, then turn... or pull it it up and turn"
    which would be even more annoying. I can't wait.

    I defeat every child-proof bottle in the house because no kids are around. >>
    More and more stove tops and ovens these days have silly touch-controls
    rather than physical switches and knobs. Not only are touch controls
    dangerous and give little / no response feel, but they also far more
    time-consuming to use (you have to repeatedly touch or hold the +
    button while it slowly ticks up to "7" or whatever, instead of simply
    twisting a knob to "7"). :-(

    I know where you're coming from. A few months ago I bought a (rather
    pricey) Speed Queen washing machine because their reliability was
    recommended by a plumber -- and even the manager of the appliance
    section of a local Lowe's (and none of the big box stores carry Speed
    Queens, the company is pretty choosy about who they let sell their
    products).

    Anyway they make models with knobs and models with "silly-touch"
    controls (which are of course more expensive). The plumber said don't
    mess with any models with the silly-touch because they're bound to tear
    up sooner. So I just bought the one with knobs because I don't really
    need all the bells & whistle options that the silly-touch models give
    you anyway.

    It was the same with cars starting to move to silly touch controls
    instead of physical buttons and switches. Thankfully most car makers
    quickly saw sense and are stopping the idiocy. Apparently VW owners are
    even suing (in the US of course) the company because they hate the
    silly touch controls.

    Yeah, I'm driving around in a car before they started all the rear-view >monitor (I guess because some poor kid got ran over one time) and
    Bluetooth and other crazy stuff. Some of those new dashes look like you
    need to be a licensed pilot to operate them.

    I get that but the reason is really one of safety. With everything
    tossed into the screen people were finding that on some vehicles they
    had to hit multiple buttons on the screen just to change the volume on
    the radio. You can imagine how bad an idea that is while driving.

    Now to get back to the licensed pilot issue I got asked by a friend to
    ride down to Hartsfield Airport to bring back a vehicle with them back
    in the early 90s. I agreed and didn't give it a second thought. Turns
    out it was some loaded truck/suburban assault vehicle that had more
    buttons than most civilian planes.

    The vehicle was parked in the covered parking lot so I wanted to turn
    on the lights. After about five minutes I gave up trying to find the
    button to turn the lights on and drove out of the covered lot. Luckily
    it was during the day time so I didn't need to turn the lights on as I
    would have had to start hitting every switch/button to figure out
    which one controlled the lights. That's a case where a screen might
    have helped simplify the interface. ;)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rhino@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 19 18:28:42 2025
    On 2025-08-19 6:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
    On Aug 19, 2025 at 2:42:14 PM PDT, "super70s" <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On 2025-08-19 20:39:58 +0000, Your Name said:


    It was the same with cars starting to move to silly touch controls
    instead of physical buttons and switches. Thankfully most car makers
    quickly saw sense and are stopping the idiocy. Apparently VW owners are >>> even suing (in the US of course) the company because they hate the
    silly touch controls.

    Yeah, I'm driving around in a car before they started all the rear-view
    monitor (I guess because some poor kid got ran over one time) and
    Bluetooth and other crazy stuff. Some of those new dashes look like you
    need to be a licensed pilot to operate them.

    I think that there's a significant market out there of people who don't want all the hi-tech gizmos in their cars for a car company to take advantage of if
    they were smart. A dashboard with analog gauges and just AC and heat with knobs and levers like there used to be. No screens and sensors and built-in cameras and GPS trackers that send data on you back to the mothership and all sorts of other crap that will just break down eventually.

    I have a 1999 Toyota 4Runner that still runs like a dream and has none of that
    garbage and I'm the happier for it. The *only* thing I've thought I might enjoy having is one of those backup cameras but other than that, you can keep all the rest. I have my phone with Google Maps for when I need to get anywhere
    new and that's all I need.


    I toyed with adding a backup camera to my XTerra after I saw the one in
    my brother's Jeep Grand Cherokee. I never did it though. However, I did
    find out that you can definitely retrofit one to an existing vehicle; it
    wasn't even a lot of money, depending on what camera it was. You could
    probably do it yourself if you've got moderate DIY skills.

    --
    Rhino

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BTR1701@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 19 22:21:09 2025
    On Aug 19, 2025 at 2:42:14 PM PDT, "super70s" <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On 2025-08-19 20:39:58 +0000, Your Name said:


    It was the same with cars starting to move to silly touch controls
    instead of physical buttons and switches. Thankfully most car makers
    quickly saw sense and are stopping the idiocy. Apparently VW owners are
    even suing (in the US of course) the company because they hate the
    silly touch controls.

    Yeah, I'm driving around in a car before they started all the rear-view monitor (I guess because some poor kid got ran over one time) and
    Bluetooth and other crazy stuff. Some of those new dashes look like you
    need to be a licensed pilot to operate them.

    I think that there's a significant market out there of people who don't want all the hi-tech gizmos in their cars for a car company to take advantage of if they were smart. A dashboard with analog gauges and just AC and heat with
    knobs and levers like there used to be. No screens and sensors and built-in cameras and GPS trackers that send data on you back to the mothership and all sorts of other crap that will just break down eventually.

    I have a 1999 Toyota 4Runner that still runs like a dream and has none of that garbage and I'm the happier for it. The *only* thing I've thought I might
    enjoy having is one of those backup cameras but other than that, you can keep all the rest. I have my phone with Google Maps for when I need to get anywhere new and that's all I need.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to shawn on Wed Aug 20 17:38:01 2025
    On 2025-08-19 22:13:38 +0000, shawn said:
    On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 16:42:14 -0500, super70s
    <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On 2025-08-19 20:39:58 +0000, Your Name said:
    On 2025-08-19 15:18:33 +0000, super70s said:
    On 2025-08-19 14:56:06 +0000, Rhino said:

    I just saw two stories about dogs that caught my eye.

    The first story was about a dog that had (apparently) caused two
    separate fires in its owner's house because it had somehow touched the >>>>> controls of the stove and turned them on.

    I think it's clear here that the REAL problem is not the dog but the >>>>> design of the stove controls that makes it easy for the dog to
    inadvertently turn on the burners or the oven.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/stove-fire-dog-safety-recall-1.7610272

    "Push your stove control down, then turn... or pull it it up and turn" >>>> which would be even more annoying. I can't wait.

    I defeat every child-proof bottle in the house because no kids are around. >>>
    More and more stove tops and ovens these days have silly touch-controls
    rather than physical switches and knobs. Not only are touch controls
    dangerous and give little / no response feel, but they also far more
    time-consuming to use (you have to repeatedly touch or hold the +
    button while it slowly ticks up to "7" or whatever, instead of simply
    twisting a knob to "7"). :-(

    I know where you're coming from. A few months ago I bought a (rather
    pricey) Speed Queen washing machine because their reliability was
    recommended by a plumber -- and even the manager of the appliance
    section of a local Lowe's (and none of the big box stores carry Speed
    Queens, the company is pretty choosy about who they let sell their
    products).

    Anyway they make models with knobs and models with "silly-touch"
    controls (which are of course more expensive). The plumber said don't
    mess with any models with the silly-touch because they're bound to tear
    up sooner. So I just bought the one with knobs because I don't really
    need all the bells & whistle options that the silly-touch models give
    you anyway.

    It was the same with cars starting to move to silly touch controls
    instead of physical buttons and switches. Thankfully most car makers
    quickly saw sense and are stopping the idiocy. Apparently VW owners are
    even suing (in the US of course) the company because they hate the
    silly touch controls.

    Yeah, I'm driving around in a car before they started all the rear-view
    monitor (I guess because some poor kid got ran over one time) and
    Bluetooth and other crazy stuff. Some of those new dashes look like you
    need to be a licensed pilot to operate them.

    I get that but the reason is really one of safety. With everything
    tossed into the screen people were finding that on some vehicles they
    had to hit multiple buttons on the screen just to change the volume on
    the radio. You can imagine how bad an idea that is while driving.

    Now to get back to the licensed pilot issue I got asked by a friend to
    ride down to Hartsfield Airport to bring back a vehicle with them back
    in the early 90s. I agreed and didn't give it a second thought. Turns
    out it was some loaded truck/suburban assault vehicle that had more
    buttons than most civilian planes.

    The vehicle was parked in the covered parking lot so I wanted to turn
    on the lights. After about five minutes I gave up trying to find the
    button to turn the lights on and drove out of the covered lot. Luckily
    it was during the day time so I didn't need to turn the lights on as I
    would have had to start hitting every switch/button to figure out
    which one controlled the lights. That's a case where a screen might
    have helped simplify the interface. ;)

    The important standard functions like that should always be in the
    exact same place in *every* car. Unfortunately they aren't.

    On the rare occasions I have to drive my mother's car or a loan car
    from the service workshop, it often has the turn signals and windscreen
    wipers on the opposite side to my car, so takes a couple of "oops"
    moments before I get used to it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)