Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009 September 27

= September 27 =

Political Cola
Is there  any  truth  to  idea  that  Coke  and  Pepsi  have  political  affiliations,  with  Coke  being favoured more by Democarat Presidents, and Pepsi by  Republicans, but with some exceptions ? Do they  interfere in political circles ? It seems right,  since  Republicans like Arnold Schwarzenegger  product  placed  Pepsi  in  a  lot  of  his  movies,  but  then, so did  Micael J. Fox,  whom  I  understand  to  be  a  Democrat. Personally, I prefer Coke to Pepsi, but  I also like Mirinda as well as Fanta, and prefer Mountain Dew to  anything Coca Cola has, although this means nothing since our political parties in New  Zealand may  not be directly comparable to those in the US ( Trouble is, we sometimes have as many as thirty on the ballot at election time. Most of these weirdos come and go )  -- This unsigned query was posted at 06:25 on September 27, 2009 by Christopherlilly 


 * Product placement in a film may result from considerations other than the personal political affiliation of the producer or other individual. Otherwise, and this is historical (mid-1970s, at least), PepsiCo participated in the Arab states' commercial boycott of Israel while the Coca-Cola Company has been bottling (and contributing to the local economy) in Bnei Brak since 1968. Period collector's items included 7-Up bottles with Arabic lettering and Coke bottles with a Hebrew logo in stylized script mimicking the original. -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The party affiliations you mention conform to the view of J.C. Louis in his book Cola Wars (1980, Everest House, ISBN 0896960528, not to be confused with the novel of the same name, and I see that our article Cola Wars is about something else: competition between Coke & Pepsi in the 1980s). - Jmabel | Talk 07:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

making money to live
is there a way one can be online doing some research work for some company and earn a living,especialy for the immobile?


 * There are lots of jobs that allow you to work from home, but you need to get a proper job, not sign up to a "get rich quick" scheme or similar. If you either have to pay to get the job, or the application process does not involve some kind of interview, you can be pretty sure it's a con. In many countries employers are legally obliged to make reasonable changes to accommodate disabilities, which could well include working from home, even when it wouldn't otherwise be allowed (you'll probably still have to go into the office from time-to-time, though). Alternatively, you could try running your own business from home. That is probably the most flexible option, but is not a reliable way to make money. --Tango (talk) 10:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Patent authorities and lawyers do searches for prior art when a new patent is sought. Much of this work is done online, even starting at Wikipedia. If you have the technical insight necessary this could be a job for you. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You generally have to have training for that, though. They don't let just anyone be a patent examiner, you need training in the relevant field, so you can understand the complexities of the inventions in question. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's not assume anything about the OP's background. Much of patent search work is administrative, such as collecting linked patents, and can be done by a secretarial assistant. Patent examiners do indeed need authorization but they also need staff. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 19:08, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, let's also tell them about potential opportunities working for the circus, at home. I mean, who knows? Maybe the OP is a lion trainer, and maybe this career which we don't know much about actually farms out their work to people at home! --Mr.98 (talk) 20:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * One of my relatives does some sort of service where she is someone's remote secretary during the day, working from home. She makes phone calls and schedules his appointments and things of that nature. I've no idea how she got the job, but it sounds like the sort of thing you might be looking for. It is a "real" job and not a scheme. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Contract programmers, and even contract writers, can earn a living while working from home. In the case of programming, you have to be good enough to earn jobs; and contract writing is becoming less profitable as free information proliferates on the modern web.   Nimur (talk) 15:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Certainly contract computer programming is one example. Writing or translating technical manuals for complicated products is another.  There are companies that allow full-time employees to telecommute (work from home) - but most require occasional (weekly, perhaps) "in person" meetings - which might be a problem for our OP.  These are not low-skill jobs though.  There is a (perhaps unfortunate) feeling with many companies that low-grade employees would cheat and work much fewer hours than they are required to work - so it's only in the more highly professional skills where you are judged by results in which this can apply.  Contract work can be done this way because the company are paying for a final product and they really don't care how many hours you have to work in order to get it done.


 * But - please, please - beware of scams. Any business that requires you to put in your own money "up front" for anything whatever is highly likely to be a scam.  Illegal - or just barely legal - pyramid schemes (aka Multi-level marketing) are rampant.  Many of the jobs which require monotonous typing in of printed materials (phone books, for example) are rigged so that you cannot win - they do things like paying you $0.10 per entry typed and then DEDUCTING $5.00 for every one that's done inaccurately.  (They'll have two or three people type in the same entries - then compare the results and look for discrepancies.)  They set the ratio of these two numbers such that they hardly ever have to pay you anything at all...and may indeed require you to pay them.


 * SteveBaker (talk) 16:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Economics
I dont know what Sticky Prices are. the article here sucks. I was wondering if you guys could give me some examples of sticky prices. John Asfukzenski (talk) 10:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * As the article says, wages are the best example. Products in a pound-store or dollar-store could also be described as sticky (unusually, they are sticky in both directions). A sticky price is just one that won't easily change when the market changes. --Tango (talk) 10:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sticky Prices can arise from Privatisation of public services. A private operator can run a public service more efficiently, which is the rationale for the privatisation. However the new private operator is handed an effective monopoly with pre-established prices and is likely to absorb all the resulting profit than reduce the prices. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * So-called bargain prices almost always end in the digit "9" as in the example "SALE PRICE $19.99". Introduction of a $9.99 note would save some fumbling with coins. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Except it wouldn't. Almost everything has tax that pushes it beyond the .99 anyway (into very un-round numbers like .14 or .23), and even if everything really DID stay at .99, you'd be saving yourself all the trouble of having ONE penny as change, which again is a lot better than the kind of change you get from those other odd numbers (a nickel, a dime, two pennies, etc.). --Mr.98 (talk) 14:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The only time I was charged more than the sticker price on an item was in California which, with due respect to that fine state, is not the world. Perhaps "almost everything" that Mr.98 buys is a different thing than I buy, since that explains Mr.98's observation. The coin fumbling that could be saved is both the accumulation of single pennies in my pocket and the need for shopkeepers to stock up on pennies which can require extra trips to their bank and/or me paying sums inconveniently all in pennies when my pocket overflows. When the smallest denomination of a currency won't buy anything useful, and it is just being recycled in support of an illusory saving, it is more trouble to have around than it is worth and it should be banished the same way as the farthing in 1960. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * There are two good reasons that stores (without EPOS) like to stick with retail prices (which in most places include any sales taxes) ending in .99 of whatever currency is applicable. One is the well-known phenomenon of N.99 sounding disproportionally cheaper than N+1.00, thus drawing more business. The other, less well-known, is to discourage staff dishonesty. With a price at N.00, many people will tender N.00 to the cashier and not wait for a receipt: this potentially allows the cashier to pocket the money without operating the till; however, almost no-one will tender the exact money for an N.99 price, thus forcing the cashier to operate the till to give change and (usually) a receipt and making any pilfering much easier to detect. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not really true. In the UK, where the stated price traditionally INCLUDES tax (in the US, prices traditionally - and confusingly - EXCLUDE tax) STILL tend to end in '.99'.  The staff-cheating reason doesn't apply (because here in the USA, the price tendered is not the XXX.99 amount).  It can only be to convince people that the price is $1 (or 1 pound) less than it really is. SteveBaker (talk) 16:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure what you are saying is "not really true", Steve; your slightly unclear restatement doesn't appear to disprove anything I said. I am in the UK, am a former retail shop worker, and know first hand that many items are where feasible deliberately priced at (to put it slightly differently) £(N-1).99 for the psychological appeal of sounding less than £N.00; my mother still is one in the Charity sector, and has worked for more than one organisation that officially advises its managers to adopt £N.99 prices explicitly to lessen the opportunity for pilfering as described. In any one outlet, either or both reasons might apply, but EPOS renders the latter less important because avoiding its use is more noticeable. The effect of US-style excluded sales taxes changing the price from N.99, as suggested by Mr.98, is a red herring because the manufacturer or retailer can often (I agree not always) simply adjust their before-tax price so as to make the price-plus-tax total add up to N.99. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 05:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A better example of sticky prices are the ones you see for sold-on-TV gadgets. The TV series "Pitchmen" showed just how critical this price point actually is.  There are a couple of price points for these items that simply cannot be breached (either up or down) - $19.99 is certainly one of them.  When an item is really worth less than $19.99 - they'll sell you two of them - or add other bits and pieces to 'sweeten' the deal to push the "value" to $19.99.  When things cost more than $19.99, watch out for insanely high "packaging", "handling", "restocking", "administrative", "shipping" fees - that sometimes rise to more than $10!!  On still more costly items, we're seeing " three payments of JUST $19.99!! " - or "You can try this in your home for 30 days at no risk for just $19.99" - with (amazingly) no indication whatever of the actual price of the item! $19.99 is the cost to rent the item for one month!!  Very often, you see "...and we'll DOUBLE this offer and all you have to pay is the extra shipping and handling!" - with a highly inflated shipping & "handling" cost.  It's quite amazing to see the lengths they'll go to in order to avoid saying anything other than "$19.99". SteveBaker (talk) 16:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The only things I've seen here (in Canada) that are priced to come out with a round number are newspapers. They will be 87 cents (or whatever), plus tax, to come to a total of exactly $1. I suppose this is because it is impratical to put 99 cents in a newspaper box. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think many of the answers here are kinda missing the mark. One of the central "micro-foundations" of Keynsian (macro) Economics is the idea that prices do not immediately shift with changes in supply or demand. One of the reasons for this is the existance of an explicit contract defining the price of something. Wages are a good example of this. Unions normally negotiate wages for some fixed future period and there is no ability for that wage to decrease if the demand for that labour was also to decrease. Sometimes prices can be fixed by custom or by the desire for companies to not look like they are greedy or "price gouging." It would make sense if the burgers at McDonald's cost more on a Friday night. Higher demand would (in a perfectly competitive market) lead to a higher price. But people would say bad things about McDonald's if they chose to do that (although they do charge more in poorer areas of Australia). The other factor that textbooks noramlly cite as contributing to price stickyness is menu cost or the cost of actually changing the price. The wikipedia article is quite good (if a little technical) but the idea is simply that firms will be less likely to change their prices as often as might be efficient because it costs them money to do so. More signs, changing data in cash registers etc.


 * When the inter-bank interest rate goes down(up), banks are quick to reduce(increase) interest on deposits(loans) but slow to reduce(increase) interest on loans(deposits). An exercise for the reader: Express the foregoing dual-symmetrical statements in mathematical or computer language form. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The Guinea (British coin) gives examples of prices sticking to multiples of £1.05 despite its formal replacement by the pound £1 in 1816. The guinea has an aristocratic overtone; professional fees and payment for land, horses, art and bespoke tailoring and furniture were often quoted in guineas and it is still quoted in the prices of racehorses. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Backing up from a truck
Movie scene: a truck is carrying another vehicle. E.g. in the first five minutes of Transformers 2 there is a motorcycle (three-wheeler?) and a car. The back ramp of the truck is lowered while the truck is in motion (usually fast for dramatic effect), and the vehicle inside backs up, hits the road, and starts driving forward.

Will that work well in reality? The vehicle is backing up down the ramp, then suddenly its back wheels hit the asphalt, and need to start spinning rapidly forwards. A second later front wheels follow. Do the gearbox and the engine think such a sudden reversal of direction is a happy fun not-at-all-void-your-warranty idea? 88.112.58.122 (talk) 11:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You may not need to be in gear when going backwards - a good push combined with air resistance and a slightly sloping ramp might do the job, then you could engage a forward gear and rev the engine while in mid-air and hit the ground running, as it were. Alternatively, you could get a stunt double to do it in multiple shots. --Tango (talk) 11:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * (ec) To "back up" does not mean the vehicle is in gear when it hits the road. It could roll down the ramp in neutral or declutched. Aeroplane tyres are hitting runways like this all the time. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Aeroplane wheels is an excellent point! Though there is a difference: aeroplane wheels are passive -- there is no engine that turns them. So in the truck scenario maybe if the driver is suitably trained it will work: "land" in neutral, rev up the engine, at just the right speed (engine turn rate equals wheel turn rate) switch to drive? Not trivial but doable? 88.112.58.122 (talk) 13:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Now it strikes me that I'll need to suggest this to MythBusters. 88.112.58.122 (talk) 13:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Haven't they actually done something like this? Or was it only driving a car into a moving truck with a car? --Saddhiyama (talk) 14:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It was driving into a moving truck with a car. Not quite the same question, because you're not talking about anything changing directions (or going from zero to whatever instantly). --Mr.98 (talk) 15:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * They did it both ways. The myth was driving into a moving truck, but after demonstrating that it's no big deal, they rolled back off the truck as well. &mdash; Lomn 14:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Depending on the speed of the truck and the steepness of the ramp - you'd end up either rolling forwards - or backwards. Almost certainly, forwards.  In that case, in a car, it's easy - you roll down the ramp with the gearbox in neutral - when you're off the ramp and rolling forwards at some speed - you drop the car into gear and the engine will start...it'll be bumpy - but it'll work.  That, after all, is how you 'bump start' a car with a broken starter motor.  Alternatively, you could be rolling along in neutral, start the car with the starter and rev the engine so that the speed matches the revs you need at a particular gear - then drop into that gear...done correctly, the result would be very smooth.


 * If the truck was moving VERY slowly - then you might roll down the ramp and find yourself rolling backwards. That's much harder.  Either you have to start the engine and drop into reverse - or you are in severe risk of trashing your clutch and/or gearbox.  It's certainly much tougher.  So ironically, this stunt is easier when the truck is moving fast than when it's going slower.


 * If the engine is already started and you back down the ramp under power - it would be VITALLY important to have the car be in neutral when the drive wheels hit the road. That done, it's just a matter of getting the engine revs right and dropping into an appropriate gear for the speed you're driving at.


 * Incidentally - I should mention the bit in The Italian Job (not the recent remake - the original) where a Mini drives onto a ramp attached to the rear of a fast-moving modified bus at about 50mph. This is the opposite of the stunt our OP is talking about...but in a sense, it's more impressive.  The Mini is a front-wheel-drive car - so when the front wheels hit the ramp, they are rotating at 50mph - and have to come to an almost complete stop as the car is propelled up the ramp and has to stop before hitting the front end of the bus!  This stunt was repeated three times in the movie - and I have seen it done "for real" by stunt drivers several times since then.  It was also featured (much more slowly - and in rearwheel-drive cars) by "The Mythbusters". SteveBaker (talk) 15:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

If I were to do the stunt the OP describes, I would leave my good tyres at home and fit bald ones, maybe even put grease on them. The stress on the transmission that the OP is concerned about cannot exceed the force that makes the tyres skid. Slow cranking the camera and sound effects can dramatize the stunt. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * So long as the vehicle is in neutral (or has the clutch depressed) at the point where its drive-wheels go from ramp to road - there won't be any stress. Once you're rolling along in neutral, you can adjust the engine revs and then select a gear appropriate to the speed you're now travelling at...easy! The only stress I could imagine would be in a four-wheel drive vehicle where the center differential would be under a considerable stress. SteveBaker (talk) 20:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

September 27th Day of the Avril
It's her birthday today! I was wondering if there's been any news on her fourth studio album, since she broke up with Whibley recently and he had a hand in producing it. Has the release date been set back? Will songs he helped produce be dropped from the album? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.88.101  (talk • contribs)  14:24, 27 September 2009
 * There's no mention of a change of date on her site. She does describe the situation with Whibley as positive. Other than that, we can't predict the future here at the Ref desk. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 15:40, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a subject for the Entertainment Ref. Desk. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That's debatable...203.214.104.166 (talk) 09:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

What is this problem !!!!
I generally put myself to thinking when i see others suffering or if there ar any deaths in someone else's family my mind relates to my own and i get depressed about terribly and which also makes me extremely emotional.why does my mind relate to my own and compels me to sometime offer alms more than i can afford and try to help any soul i come accross who is needy, well, i am not unhappy about giving at all but the mind trying to relate. is there anythin i can do to help myself from thinking negative and lead a happy life with fellow beings and family.does psychatry help in such instances or am i insane??please help Seekhle (talk) 16:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * That's called empathy, and it would a be a problem if you didn't have it. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You are not insane. What you express is Compassion. The article may interest you, particularly about how highly all the different religious traditions regard what you are feeling. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You're not mad, nor are you alone. There are many of us out there, it's just that it's not fashionable to empathise with people at the moment. Remember that you need to look after yourself too. It's ok to give, but in order to give you need to receive too. Us givers are usually quite bad at receiving. --TammyMoet (talk) 20:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Managing empathy is not easy for some people and can become debilitating in ways similar to clinical depression. The world—and even one's own society—is arguably less cruel and violent than in the past, but electronic mass communications can make it seem overwhelming. Speaking from personal experience (caveat! anecdotal Ref Desk response rather than authoritative answer) this can take the form of becoming overwrought by reading the newspaper; intense impulses to come to the aid of strangers enduring grief, deprivation, or other suffering; having distressing nightmares, emotional outbursts, etc. and more. Web sites such as Gratefulness.org that offer a non-denominational, inspirational "thought of the day" can be reassuring in guiding your empathetic surges, but the most effective and certainly individually-focused help may come from consulting a psychologist or psychiatrist; the latter may prescribe medication. This is a valid option to help you help yourself. Don't let cost deter you till you've investigated what publicly funded resources are available, and don't deny yourself out of guilty feelings that "so many people are worse off than I" and "I should be able to handle this on my own." The aim is to help you find ways to live with your intense feelings and direct them into practical ways to channel your empathy into action or contemplation as best suits you and your situation.  (and consider this for logical motivation: helping yourself is a meaningful step toward helping others!) -- Deborahjay (talk) 05:19, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Discovering the reality of one's own empathy can open the door to becoming a performing artiste or counsellor to others. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I find it necessary to point out what other's (perhaps Deborahjay aside) haven't seemed to mention: Yes, while what you describe can be called empathy or compassion, it seems like it is a problem for you, and, in such cases it may be best to consult a mental health professional such as a psychologist. A certain amount of empathy and compassion is healthy, but when it starts to impact on your ability to function or it is negatively impacting you in a significant way then you may require health. More over, we cannot really give medical advice, so, when in doubt, we have to say, go consult a medical health professional :p Rfwoolf (talk) 11:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * For another solution, if you follow a religious persuasion, prayer is very effective, as it can help you have faith that you are doing something instead of just stagnantly watching.4.68.248.130 (talk) 11:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hand signals in WWII battles
In some WWII films, you see soldiers in battle signalling to each other using an elaborate system of hand signals. Obviously these signals are designed to warn their colleagues of danger and to tell them where to go. Were such systems really used, and if so is there a list of them somewhere? --Richardrj talkemail 18:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Infantry soldiers also need means of recognizing friend or foe. A WWII film, The Longest Day, shows Allied soldiers being issued with hand clickers for signalling. Unfortunately the bolt on German rifles makes a similar sound. Anyone who remembers the film concerned is invited to edit this post! Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Edited - you were right. :-) 94.168.184.16 (talk) 18:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Standardised Hand Signals for Close Range Engagement Operations. Includes a video. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:40, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm skeptical about how "uniform" or "standardized" such hand signals are. Even if they are taught in basic training, I expect that there's a lot of room for interpretation about these sort of things.  The best example is the counting.  I have seen at least a dozen variations on ways to count from one to ten, and higher, with a single hand.  Nimur (talk) 18:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Although the OPs question is answered with an affirmative, it does make it painfully clear that Wikipedia needs a Military hand signals article. There are so many questions in this topic that I would like to see answered, something which a good article could take care of. Did the Germans use hand signals during WWII? Which country was the first to use hand signals? And when? And does the signals vary from country to country? --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

It was American paratroopers who were issued with the clickers. Very much doubt the scene with the rifle bolt - but it was fun, wasn't it!Froggie34 (talk) 09:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The Longest Day (film). BrainyBabe (talk) 07:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Facebook "view as" mode
I feel the Facebook "view as" mode is a very useful idea, but the implementation is almost useless. The reason is, that once you click on a link leading to someone else's profile, Facebook exits "view as" mode and resumes normal behaviour. Now my idea of privacy concerns encompasses not only what my Facebook friends see of me, but also what they see of each other. Is there a way I could request Facebook to implement such a change to the "view as" mode? J I P | Talk 21:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * To be perfectly frank, how they see each other is no business of yours and would violate their privacy. --Nricardo (talk) 23:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The whole point of "view as" is so you can see if you have your privacy settings correct for other people—so you set up your mother's account to not view anything except for some very sanitized links you post, and then, just to double-check, you "view as" her to make sure it looks right.
 * If you could view any other profile as anyone else, it would mean completely skipping out on all privacy settings. -If I put you in a special "don't see my naughty pictures" category, but if you "view as" someone else and can see the naughty pictures, what's the point in having the category at all?
 * So, no. It's a horrible idea, and I think you have missed the point of the "view as" feature altogether. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, now I understand. I was all the time thinking when viewing one of my friend's profile as another friend, I could only see less of their profile, which would be all OK, but I never thought I could actually see more, which would indeed be a privacy violation. Stupid mistake in thinking. J I P  | Talk 05:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The only reason I originally asked this was, if I could see person A's "naughty pictures" but I wished person B could not, I could have a way to verify this. I never had any intention of seeing anything person A would not let me see, even if he/she would let person B see it. So in effect, I wish I could have seen the logical conjunction of my and person B's views of person A's profile. The whole idea of my question was to check if other people can see less of each other, not more. J I P  | Talk 19:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

DVD players' tolerance for imperfect media
My sister gave me Season 1 of Battlestar Galactica for Christmas, and I've been working my way through it. One annoyance is that my DVD player frequently freezes on almost perfect, new disks, with only the slightest motes of dust or something on them. I have to pull the disk out, wipe it, put it back in, and wait through the bloody FBI warning etc.

I'd like to get a better player, but I'd like to know if there's any rating system for them on this particular point &mdash; how well the player can deal with slightly imperfect media. Does anyone know? I didn't see that particular thing on Amazon. --Trovatore (talk) 21:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately all DVD players do this. I have a brand new top of the range one that hangs up with a DVD I've just rented. I suggest you run a lens cleaner through it occasionally.--Shantavira|feed me 07:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have trouble believing they're all the same on this point. This is a software issue, after all.  Better software (actually, firmware, I suppose) should be able to do better recovery from error conditions.  Also, a rented DVD could be almost arbitrarily bad -- I'm talking about DVDs that are new out of the box. --Trovatore (talk) 08:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe Shantavira's experience is different, but none of the DVD players/recorders that I have had (all major brands), have ever been sensitive to dust; scratches yes, but not dust. I suggest you get a new DVD player.  Astronaut (talk) 09:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's the plan. I'm looking for some way of picking one that doesn't have this problem.  It's very strange that I can't find this rather obvious point in the ratings systems that I've seen. --Trovatore (talk) 09:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Even for scratches, even if it's not possible to reproduce the recorded content accurately, it should still be possible to "fail gracefully" &mdash; skip a frame or two, or blur several frames slightly, but don't freeze. Is it really the case that no one tracks the capability of the firmware for error recovery? --Trovatore (talk) 09:31, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I never anticipated that any modern DVD player wouldn't have decent error recovery - perhaps nobody else did either and that is why there is no such tracking. --Tango (talk) 14:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * My DVD player doesn't just freeze up, but it prevents ejection of the DVD. And I can't even power it off.  The only way I can get the DVD out of the player when this happens, is to physically unplug the player from the power plug, then plug it back in, turn it on, and eject.  99.166.95.142 (talk) 16:10, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've had this problem, and so have others. The software (firmware?) controlling recovery from read errors seems hopelessly inadequate.  It would be interesting to post this question on the computing reference desk to see if any experts can explain why the error recovery section is so badly written.    D b f i r s   20:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It could be a fault with that specific player, is it under warranty? Might be worth phoning their support line. --Tango (talk) 14:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ... true, but exactly the same thing (having to disconnect power to regain control) has happened to two different DVD players of mine (different manufactures), and to a friend, exactly as 99.166.95.142 describes above. Do they all use the same firmware?    D b f i r s   12:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * There are players marketed in China that specifically claim to be able to read scratched and imperfect discs, but it has been a while since I last went back (3 years). Who says rampant piracy doesn't have its benefits?! --antilivedT 07:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I have also noticed that some older DVD players will choke on scenes with more elaborate graphics. I think that's more of a hardware issue, as DVD players have gotten faster processors over time. DVDs can also be recorded with variable bit rates, meaning some scenes in a movie play back at 8 mbps, whereas others are playing at 1 mbps.--Drknkn (talk) 02:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I've had this problem too. Someone told me that playing DVDs on a computer can help, as the computer 's DVD reader is less sensitive. No idea if that's true, but I did find I could watch films on my old laptop that my old DVD player froze on repeatedly. --Dweller (talk) 13:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)