(Photo: Govert Flint)
Some people hate the cubicle lifestyle and the sedentary work of computer-centered jobs.
After I graduated from college, I worked in a warehouse for 3 years while attending graduate school. If I was ever susceptible to this perspective, 3 years of manual labor permanently inoculated me from it. Sitting down in an air conditioned office for 8 hours is totally awesome.
So I would flip out if I walked into my office and found one of Govert Flint’s Dynamic Chairs. Margaret Rhodes of Wired of says that using it “is like attending a new-age Pilates class.” You’ll get quite a workout:
Scroll around by shifting your body’s weight from side to side. Sensors in the seat detect the pressure and angle of your tush and communicate that data to three accelerometers that measure that movement on an axis, and translate it into activity on the computer’s screen. To click, kick up your right leg. Sensors will detect that motion too. For the time being, arms and hands are unencumbered, for typing, but Flint imagines plenty of future possibilities there. (That’s why the video that accompanies Flint’s thesis shows actors using their arms.)
The movements of ballet dancers inspired Flint’s design. Their hip movements in particular are ideal:
Flint also spoke with a physiologist at the ballet who pointed out that human hips weren’t designed to stay rooted in a chair. There’s a lot of cartilage in there that’s meant to allow walking, hence the hip rotations that let users scroll.
I’m curious about any productivity studies conducted on these chairs. As previously noted, treadmill desks may make you healthier, but can impair the accuracy of your work.
Comments (0)
2. Cutting crosswise or lengthwise? SUDAFED® 12 Hour or SUDAFED® 12 Hour Pressure+Pain? Time is relative anyways. Do not try to cut the pill. That's impossible. There is no pill.
3. Yes.
Time-release or extended release pills, however, should not be split, for exactly the reason Jeff suggested. There are different extended release mechanisms, and splitting does different things to them. Dumping the entire dose at once is one potentially dangerous possibility.
I think the only deciding point might be whether you were moving or not. If you were stopped because of traffic or a light, you could argue that you were not actively operating your vehicle but even then, your attention should be on the road & when the traffic would move again & NOT on your cell phone device.
If I were the judge, I'd probably have to side with the cop.
2. Don't know.
3. I prefer MINI (basically a small BMW). But, having been around, and in, many 3, 5, and 6-series. I can say this: the newer the better!
2. Sudafed - you get half the results for the 12 hours. These pills operate on how much is submitted to your stomach/bloodstream to tell the cells how much to decrease swelling, mucous production, and other symptoms. If you take half, you get half as much relief. Good news is that you can also take another half after 6 hours because the total dose is the same after a 12 hour period.
3. BMW - not sure - never owned that type of car. All I can say is get a car fax, and a quote on insurance BEFORE you buy.
Your pharmacist will advise not to.
Go over to the forums at http://www.bimmerfest.com/. I own an e46 and got/get great info over there. They're is lots of info they can share about what to look for etc even before you buy. HIghly recommended (I registered here just so I could answer this).
Simply reading the statute doesn't answer the question. Oversimplifying slightly, it prohibits driving "while using a wireless telephone." (Veh. Code, § 23123.) Does that mean while using the telephone *as* a telephone?
People v. Spriggs (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1 held that using a phone as a GPS unit while driving violates the statute. It explained: "The statute . . . focuses on the distraction a driver faces when using his or her hands to operate the phone, specifically including 'the physical distraction a motorist encounters when either picking up the phone, punching the number keypad, holding the phone up to his or her ear to converse, or pushing a button to end a call.' That distraction would be present whether the phone is used for carrying on a conversation or for some other purpose."
Spriggs is a decision of a very low-level court (Fresno Superior Court). Other state courts could disagree. But they probably won't. While Spriggs is not binding, it *is*persuasive. In other words, a judge probably won't want to waste the time or energy to redecide the issue.
My non-lawlerly advice: Assert the First Amendment. Argue that the statute is unconstitutional to the extent that it prevents you from making a record of a newsworthy event.