10 Worst Toys List

W.A.T.C.H.’s annual “10 Worst Toys” list nominates representative toys with the potential to cause childhood injuries, or even death. W.A.T.C.H.’s annual “Toy Conference” has generated extensive national press and media coverage. Because of these efforts, and the positive response from both the media and the public, there have been many toy and product design changes. Founder Edward M. Swartz and W.A.T.C.H. have fearlessly exposed potentially dangerous toys to the general public. As a result, children’s lives have been saved.

1. DISNEY-PIXAR WALL-E FOAM ROCKET LAUNCHER
W.A.T.C.H. OUT!  This Disney “rocket launcher”, named after a popular movie character, uses air pressure from pumping a “tube launcher”, which “shoots” a rocket “up to 20 feet!” The packaging contains inconsistent labeling, stating in bold letters that the projectile toy is “FOR ALL AGES!”, while also advising in smaller letters on the back that it is “not recommended for children under three years of age.” The rocket, despite the manufacturer’s proclamation that it is “safe”, launches at a high rate of speed with the potential to cause serious eye injuries.

2. MOON BOARD POGO BOARD
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! An elastic cord connects a “trick handle” to the “Moon Board”, consisting of a plastic platform integrated with two inflatable “pogo balls” so children can “attempt tricks and special jumps….” Numerous “safety tips” and cautions are provided on the packaging, including: “Remember that the cord connecting your Moon Board to the trick handle is elastic. If stretched and released, it could spring back and cause injury”; “Only use your Moon Board in safe areas that are free of any obstacles….”; and “Do not attempt ‘tricks’ beyond your skill level.” Furthermore, despite the manufacturer’s recommended use of a helmet, knee and elbow pads, and wrist.

3. CURIOUS BABY CURIOUS GEORGE COUNTING – MY FIRST BOOK OF NUMBERS
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! Children’s books have traditionally provided hours of safe entertainment for young minds, however potentially deadly hazards may be found even in these educational products. This colorful book, depicting the famed character “Curious George” on its cover, is marketed for newborn babies as their “first book of numbers”. A 6 1/2” long metal rod holding five wooden beads is imbedded in between the cardboard-like pages, to serve as a “rattle” and a “counting device for babies of different ages.” The rod and beads have the potential to dislodge, posing a potentially serious risk of ingestion and choking injuries.

4. THE DARK KNIGHT BATMAN FIGURE
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! This tall 30” figure is modeled after the famous Batman hero known to generations of children. Batman’s mask includes two 1” ears made of pointed, rigid plastic. Toddlers may fall on these inflexible protrusions, with the potential for penetrating and blunt-force injuries.

5. X-MEN ORIGINS SLASHIN’ ACTION WOLVERINE
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! The Wolverine action figure, sold for children as young as four years old, is marketed as an “indestructible combat machine” with a “[s]lashing [u]ppercut!” Wolverine has rigid, pointed plastic claws sporting three 1 1/2” protrusions on both fists. The right “pop-out” claw retracts upon impact, whereas the left claw remains rigid and unforgiving upon contact. Incredibly, there are no warnings on either the box or the toy itself.

6. LOTS TO LOVE BABIES – “mini nursery”
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! This “Perfect Mini Doll”, sold for oral-age children as young as two years old, comes complete with its own bathtub. The tub, however, has a small plastic shower attachment, connected only by a thin plastic cord. Once detached, the shower head fails even the industry’s inadequate small parts “choke tube” standard.

7. JUST KIDZ JUNIOR MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! This toy musical instrument set includes a saxophone and xylophone, both of which display an array of lights and sounds at the touch of a button. Babies as young as eighteen months old are encouraged to use the “drumstick” to play music on the xylophone. The slender, 4 1/4” drumstick is connected to the xylophone only by a knotted cord. Once separated, the drumstick could be mouthed and occlude a child’s airway.

8. CAT “rugged mini”
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! These miniature “Caterpillar” brand construction vehicles are sold for eighteen-month-old babies, sporting large plastic wheels and moveable parts for “free-wheeling fun!” Unfortunately the vehicle’s axles and wheels have the potential to separate from the chassis, exposing a solid metal spoke over 3” long, which could cause serious puncture wounds.

9. PUCCI PUPS MALTESE
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! Parents are “advised” to supervise their two-year-old toddlers who play with these plush pets. The pet’s leash is approximately 35” long, presenting a serious potential strangulation hazard. The industry’s standard limits strings on crib and playpen toys to 12” in length. Moreover, the long, fiber-like hair on the “pup” is not adequately rooted and is easily removeable, presenting an aspiration hazard for small children.

10. SPY GEAR VIPER-BLASTER
W.A.T.C.H. OUT! Young children are encouraged to “defend against enemy spies” with the “viper-blaster” for “split-second defense tactics” or as a “precision shooter!” The blaster shoots the supplied “darts” with enough force to potentially cause eye injuries.

Visit Watch to view the images of the toys mentioned above.

Thanksgiving is next week (as we all probably know) and some us buy a pre-baked Pumpkin Pie at the local grocery store, or those of us who feel adventurous, bake a fresh Pumpkin Pie.

So if you feel that you can bake a delicious Pumpkin Pie without burning the house down, here is a recipe that you can use. Let us know how it turns out!

A delicious pumpkin pie, spiced with ginger and cinnamon. Serve this pie with a dollop of whipped cream and sprinkle with a little cinnamon or cinnamon-sugar.

Ingredients:
1 1/4 cups pumpkin puree, canned or fresh
3/4 cup sugar
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon ground ginger
1 teaspoon ground cinnamon
1 teaspoon all-purpose flour
2 eggs, lightly beaten
1 cup evaporated milk, undiluted
2 tablespoons water
1/2 teaspoon vanilla extract
1 unbaked pastry shell (9-inch)

Preparation:
Combine pumpkin, sugar, salt, spices, and flour in a medium mixing bowl. Add eggs; mix well. Add evaporated milk, water, and vanilla; mix well. Pour into pastry-lined pie pan. Bake at 400° for 15 minutes; reduce heat to 350° and bake about 35 minutes longer, or until center is set.

Which brings us to the of the Eggo Waffle shortage!

Article from Associated Press:

Leggo my Eggo! Kellogg fights waffle shortage
By DORIE TURNER, Associated Press Writer Dorie Turner, Associated Press Writer

On the Web

Sometimes these community foundations make our life very difficult. We usually access their site, look at their mission, guidelines, areas of geographical focus and the programs they fund. The navigation in some of them are kind of tricky and we have to spend some time looking around for the information we are interested in.

As of late, we are finding that some community foundations are placing more emphasis on posting information for donors (why they should open a trust fund, etc) rather than information of interest for nonprofit organizations. A case in point is the St. Albert Community Foundation in Canada. Every single page, just about, is information as to why you should become a donor, rather than information that is useful to nonprofit organizations… At the end of the day we just let them off our directory.

We continue to add new Foundations to our directory and try to maintain a balance – a few from Canada, the majority from the US. Even though we still have quite a few to add, we do not want o overload the section (it would take too long to load the page. So please bear with us while we continue with the task at hand.

Healthcare and Senator Joe Liberman
About 5 weeks ago we sent a message to Senator Joe Liberman regarding his opposition to the Health Care bill. His office responded that he was against it because the cost of premiums would “explode” (or skyrocket). I thought to myself, after reading the response “what does he think had been going on for the past 1-1/2 years?” He will surely will not get my vote next year.

We have been avid participants of AT & T surveys for the past year or so. Usually they send a survey about the offers on new services they are considering bundling for consumers. It may be a special package for Internet and telephone service combined for $xx.xx per month, or any other package or special offer they might be considering for their products such as UVerse TV, Cingular plans, etc. etc..

Well, last week I received the latest survey and this one really caught my eye. In this last survey they are asking the level of interest I would have in “subscribing” if they were to offer Internet access on a “tier” or “level” basis.

 As an example, one of the questions they asked was “Would you be interested in subscribing to Internet access for $29.99 for 2 gigabytes of bandwidth per month? (additional usage over the 2 gigabytes would be at additional cost).

What this means to me is that they are already planning on implementing a tiered-service model for access to the Internet. How much would consumer have to pay would depend on the  amount of bandwidth you use during your time on the Internet. As an example – if you have children who play games online, or download music, watch movies while on the Internet, or upload pictures, etc. to Facebook or any other other Social Network, your cost would be substantially more than a person who just does comparison shopping or surfs the Internet.

The reason is that when you are playing games, watch movies or music, you are using a higher amount of bandwidth from your ISP. So consequently, if you do not want to pay the higher fee, you cannot use the same amount of bandwidth and thus are unable to access, download or upload as before because of the bandwidth cap imposed.

Excerpts from articles regarding Net Neutrality

Neutrality proponents claim that telecom companies seek to impose a tiered service model in order to control the pipeline and thereby remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and oblige subscribers to buy their otherwise uncompetitive services. Many believe net neutrality to be primarily important as a preservation of current freedoms. Vinton Cerf, considered as a “father of the Internet” and co-inventor of the Internet Protocol, Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the web, and many others have spoken out in favor of network neutrality. Bob Kahn, (also considered as a father of the Internet), has spoken against it. (Wikipedia)

The current rules, which never went through an official rule-making process and are being contested in court by Comcast, give broadband consumers the right use whatever services, applications and devices they like, so long as they don’t harm the network.

FCC chairman Julius Genachowski proposes adding two more principles:

1. broadband providers cannot discriminate against services or applications by slowing them down

2. broadband providers must tell customers how its engineers manage the network when it gets congested

The first new rule seeks to prevent cable ISPs from slowing down online video services and 3G providers from messing with internet calling services like Skype.

Those rules are necessary because there is little competition in the broadband market, Genachowski added. ”The net result is that broadband providers’ rational bottom-line interests may diverge from the broad interests of consumers in competition and choice,” Genachowski said.

The second new rule is intended to prevent a repeat of Comcast’s blocking of peer-to-peer traffic, which was discovered by an engineer having trouble sharing public-domain barbershop-quartet songs on the net. Comcast denied for months that it was blocking the traffic, and only after a year of substantial pressure from the FCC did the company explain what it was doing. (Wired Article)

For more in-depth information you can read this article at CyberTelecom.

Back to the AT & T survey – Once I marked that I would not subscribed to a tiered-service they send me to a page that asked “Why” (A programmer can control the flow of a survey by simply entering in the survey “logic” – If yes forward to this page – If No forward to this other page.

Basically I told them that I was aware of the Net Neutrality issue and that if AT & T was to implement such a plan I would then be forced to change my telephone provider, my Internet access provider and the three (3) cellular telephone service to another company.

By the way, these networks already have the capacity for managing text messages built in into their network. The cost to them is the same whether they manage one million messages or 100 million messages – the reason is that text messages are small packets (tech term) that can be handled by the network with no problems. I heard in one of the news shows (name escapes me right now), that it cost the networks something like $0.02 cents when they manage a text message you send, but they charge consumers something like $0.22 per message. The news program indicated that Congress was looking into that.

We continue to research the web seeking new resources and sites to assist our visitors find the grants they seek. We are trying to balance the information we post in the sense that we want to include a wide variety of sites rather than all the sites for one particular state. As we mentioned before, there are a large number of Foundations that do not have a web site and we are trying to figure out the best way to post this information.

This year is our 13th anniversary of providing information to our visitors, and we still remain of the best kept secrets on the web – so we would appreciate if you can spread the word so that others can take advantage of the information we provide.

As always, we would appreciate if you can support our site by visiting our sponsors – they help us pay the bills and continue to provide our service free of charge.

We continue to add new resources to our directory but I am still too sure that visitors know exactly where to go to find the new additions. As an example, an average visitor would go to the home page and check out the lower box to see the new foundations added. Of course they will only see the last few foundations we have added but not the entire list. I have to find a way to lead them to the new section so that they are able to see all the foundations we have added in the last seven days – an average of 12 to 15 foundations on any given day.

As we continue to research the web for new resources we have started to subscribe to foundation mailing lists so that we are able to receive any new RFP the foundations may have. I have noticed that most foundations have deadlines varying from February 1 to April 1 of any given year for their request for proposals.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Democrat-turned-Independent from Connecticut, said Tuesday that he will not vote for a healthcare reform bill that includes a government-run insurance plan.

This means that as things now stand, Democrats will not have enough votes to pass healthcare reform with a so-called public option unless Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) can pick up unexpected GOP votes.

“We’re trying to do too much at once,” said Lieberman. “To put this
government-created, government-run insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayer, for the premium payer and for the national debt. I don’t think we need it now.”

Is Bayh Backing Off His Threat?

In Indiana, Bayh would face 51 percent of disgruntled Democratic voters, vs. 7 percent who would be more likely to support him for blocking a public option. Independents want him to vote against a GOP filibuster 35 percent to 13 percent.

 Comments: I reside in Connecticut and 61% of Senator Liberman’s
constituents are in favor of the Public Option. The concern of Senator Liberman is not about new federal government entitlement program. He is more concerned that The Cigna Insurance, The Travelers, The Hartford Insurance Company and many other insurance companies located in Hartford, Connecticut, will not make campaign contributions similar to the $2 million in contributions made the past year. Mr. Liberman, should be vote against the Public Option, should be removed as the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee.

Senator Bayh of Indiana should stop thinking about the $2 million worth of
stock he has in the WellPoint Insurance company and those who
contributed to his campaign, and start thinking about what the people who
elected him want!!

McCain Moves to Block FCC Net Neutrality

Tony Bradley, PC World | Friday, October 23, 2009 7:02 AM PDT
 

Why You Should Care About Net Neutrality
The Federal Communications Commission Mulls New Internet Neutrality Regulations

OPINION – ABC News
By LESLIE HARRIS
Oct. 23, 2009

You’ve probably heard the term or read it online and simply skipped past it without a second thought. Maybe it seemed abstract, arcane or a bit geeky, not something you as an Internet user needed to worry about.

But now it’s time to pay attention, because this week the Federal Communications Commission turned up the heat on a long-simmering debate known as “Internet neutrality.”

Thursday, in a bold move, the FCC proposed regulations to ensure that broadband providers — the companies providing high-speed Internet connections to our homes — deliver Internet traffic to subscribers in a nondiscriminatory manner.

So why should you care? If you use the Web or instant messaging — or Google or Facebook or Twitter or use VoIP to make a call, to take just several popular examples — you are enjoying the fruits of the Internet’s history as an open and “neutral” network. Individuals or small start-ups launched each of these applications and services on a level playing field.

The Internet Works Because It’s Open
Each succeeded because Internet users found their services valuable. Many other innovative ideas had an equal chance to succeed on the Internet, but failed to attract users. That’s how the Internet works, and it’s important to keep it that way — open and available for new applications to rise or fall on their own merits, without interference.

That’s what makes the Internet different from other media. Broadband companies provide consumers with “on ramps” to the Internet. But unlike other media, they do not try to control what gets carried across their networks. They are, for the most part, agnostic as to which online applications or service their subscribers’ access.

No online service gets preferential treatment, and an online service that competes with the broadband provider’s own offerings is delivered without discrimination.

As a result, innovators are free to develop new technologies and services — taking advantage of the Internet’s open set of common technical standards — and share them with the entire world. There is no need to negotiate or seek permission from anyone on the network.

No Gatekeepers on the Internet
In short, there are no gatekeepers on the Internet. Google started in a garage and Facebook in a dorm room, and they did not need to seek permission from anyone to launch online.

This novel arrangement of “innovation without permission” is exactly what makes the Internet a hotbed of technological advancement and creativity. Whether people realize it or not, everyone who uses the Internet today benefits greatly from the Internet’s open platform and lack of centralized control.

But as the Internet has moved from dial-up to broadband, concerns are growing that the future of the open and neutral platform may not be a sure thing. In the dial-up world, the Internet ran across plain old telephone wires and benefitted from longstanding “common carriage” rules that required the phone companies to carry all traffic without discrimination.

Broadband carriers do not need to play by those rules, and concern is growing that pressures to manage increasingly complicated broadband networks and maximize revenues will lead carriers to seek increasing levels of centralized control.

FCC to Consider Whether New ‘Internet Neutrality’ Rules Are Needed
OK, now that you’re up to speed on “telephony trivia” the question about to be hard fought before the FCC shortly is whether any new “Internet neutrality” rules are needed to ensure the preservation of the open Internet.

Proponents of new rules to ensure non-discrimination, including most prominently the chairman of the FCC, point to cases where broadband providers have blocked competitive services like VoIP or taken action to disfavor lawful peer-to-peer file sharing applications.

They also point out that the broadband marketplace only has limited competition, so consumers have little ability to influence the practices of their provider — or to walk if discrimination occurs. What is more, the economic self-interest of broadband companies makes discrimination over time more likely.

Today’s broadband Internet delivers content and services that directly compete with the broadband company’s own cable TV and phone services. The opportunity for mischief, either by slowing down or otherwise discriminating against the online competition or cutting financial deals with some online services for favored status, is a serious concern.

Traffic Online Is Increasing at Exponential Pace
Complicating the analysis is the question of how to define the phrase “reasonable network management.” Traffic on the Internet is increasing at an exponential pace, forcing network providers to invest heavily in upgrading their networks and making them more capable of managing traffic to cope with congestion.

There are legitimate questions about whether prioritization of specific categories of traffic that need speedier or more reliable delivery constitutes discrimination or is simply legitimate network management requiring nuanced public policy guidance.

In addition, there are questions of when and how broadband providers may offer communications services that are not Internet-based (think cable television, private corporate networks, etc.) and hence ought not be subject to non-discrimination rules.

Broadband providers are adamant that no rules are necessary: They argue Internet subscribers sign up for service with the expectation that they will get access to the entire Internet, and a broadband provider would be foolish to deliver anything less. The market they say, will keep them honest. Meanwhile, rules could hamstring efforts to manage congestion and maximize network performance, and depress investment in broadband.

There are reasons to be skeptical that market forces would provide an adequate safeguard against such an outcome because it is difficult for consumers to evaluate the impact of a broadband provider’s prioritization policies.

Suppose a new application is working poorly or slowly. Is the new application just not that good or it is the broadband provider interfering with its delivery?

Without more transparency, consumers cannot tell what is going on and the market cannot provide an effective check. And it doesn’t help that most consumers have a very limited number of broadband providers from which to choose.

With its proposed Internet neutrality regulations, the commission is facing a tricky task. It must avoid a rule that amounts to micromanagement of broadband networks. It must provide the flexibility to deal with network harms and congestion. And it must leave breathing room for innovation for both network operators and online companies.

Most of all, it needs to regulate lightly, evaluating practices on a case-by-case basis and drawing a bright jurisdictional line between regulation of the physical connections to the Internet — the wired or wireless “on ramps” — and regulation of the multitude of content, services and applications that flow over those on ramps.

Right now, the Internet’s openness rests on thin, unregulated footing.

We can risk the Internet with a wait-and-see approach or find some lightweight regulatory safeguards to ensure that it continues to serve as an unparalleled engine of innovation.

The FCC has made the right choice in taking action. Now the hard part begins.

Leslie Harris is president and CEO of the Center for Democracy & Technology.