среда, 29 апреля 2015 г.

uFord Issues Four Recalls Covering Nearly 600,000 Vehiclesr


4 4 4 9
  • Just days after Ford bit the bullet and recalled nearly 400,000 vehicles under investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for a door latch issue, the automaker is at it again, issuing four recalls covering nearly 600,000 vehicles with an array of potential problems.

    Ford announced today that it plans to recall 591,000 vehicles in North America for issues including difficulty steering, fuel pump seizure, and fire risks.

    The first recall involves 518,313 model year 2013 to 2015 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ and some 2015 Ford Edge crossover vehicles equipped with steering gear motor attachment bolts that may break due to corrosion.

    If the bolt breaks, the steering system in the car would default to manual mode, making it more difficult to steer. While Ford says that the issue does not cause total loss of steering, the problem can increase the likelihood of a crash.

    The company is unaware of any injuries or accidents related to the issue. Dealers will notify consumers and replace the bolts and any damaged steering gear.

    The second recall involves 50,157 model year 2014 Ford Focus, Edge, Escape and Transit Connect vehicles and model year 2014 to 2015 Ford Fiesta vehicles that may have nickel plating that can cause the fuel pump to seize, leading to the vehicle failing to start or stalling while in motion.

    The company says it is aware of one allegation of an accident that may be related to the issue, but provided no details on what occured. Dealers will replace the fuel delivery module for owners of affected vehicles.

    Ford also issued a recall of 22,600 model year 2015 Lincoln MKZ vehicles with headlights that might be brighter than regulations allow.

    The company says that when the lights are activated they may affect the vision of oncoming drivers. So far, there have been no accidents or injuries reported related to the issue.

    Dealers will update the body control module software to adjust the intensity of the lights.

    The final recall involves a much small number of vehicles, just 91 model year 2015 Ford F-150 trucks that may have an increased risk of catching fire.

    The potential issue relates to certain underbody head shields that may be improperly installed or missing. Ford says it is unaware of injuries or fires related to the issue.

    Dealers will inspect vehicles for missing heat shields and fasteners and install missing components as needed.

    Ford Issues Four Safety Recalls In North America [Ford]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uWrist Tattoos May Be Messing With Apple Watchesr


4 4 4 9
  • Do you have a tattoo on your wrist? If so, you might want to think twice about splashing out a few hundred dollars on a new Apple Watch — or at least try one at the store to see if your ink might interfere with some of the device’s functionalities.

    For example, the sensors on the Apple Watch are supposed to be able to detect when the device is on your wrist so that it doesn’t lock up and you don’t have to punch in an unlock code every time you try to use it.

    But some people, like this reddit user, are claiming that he was having trouble with his new Apple Watch repeatedly locking up until he tried it on piece of his skin that isn’t tattooed.

    “My hand isn’t tattooed and the Watch stayed unlocked,” he writes. “Once I put it back on the area that is tattooed with black ink the watch would automatically lock again.”

    CNN Money explains that the issue isn’t that tattoos make skin darker — the Apple Watch works on skin colors — but that tattoos make skin cells opaque to the Apple Watch’s sensors. So when the device tries to send a signal to detect a user’s heartbeat, sold-colored tattoos may be bouncing those signals back before they have any chance to detect a pulse. This appears to be especially true of red and black tattoos, reports CNN.

    [via Business Insider]



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uToday Is The First Time In MLB History That A Game Will Be Played Without A Single Paying Customerr


4 4 4 9
  • Upon the news yesterday that the Baltimore Orioles would face the Chicago White Sox in a postponed game at an empty Camden Yards today, we tried to recall if there’s ever been another instance when two teams faced off without anyone paying to watch.

    We weren’t the only ones with that question — the Baltimore Sun confirmed with Major League Baseball’s historian that today’s game will be the first in major league history to be played without a paying crowd.

    Consumerist reached out to some folks in the know as well, who said that after very thorough searching, the list of other examples remained empty.

    The previous holder of the Lowest Attending Game title belonged to a faceoff between the Troy Trojans of New York and the Worcester Ruby Legs of Massachusetts on Sept. 28, 1882. Only six fans showed up to that game at the Worcester Driving Park Grounds, due to league changes that meant those two teams were about to be phased out of existence.

    The teams that replaced them in the next season? The Philadelphia Quakers and New York Gothams joined the National League — and stayed there to this day as the Phillies and the Giants franchises.

    Taking a look back at baseball’s lowest attended game before today [Baltimore Sun]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uHBO & Showtime File Lawsuit To Block Live Streams Of Pacquiao Vs. Mayweather Fightr


4 4 4 9
  • A screengrab from the lawsuit filed yesterday against boxinghd.net and sportship.org.

    A screengrab from the lawsuit filed yesterday against boxinghd.net and sportship.org.

    In case you hadn’t fallen victim to the pummeling from ads, news stories, and seemingly countless documentaries that have aired in recent weeks, Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Manny Pacquiao are set to square off in a Las Vegas boxing ring this weekend in a bout co-produced by Showtime and HBO. The fight won’t actually be airing live on either network; you’ll have to pony up $100 to watch it on pay-per-view. That’s why the two premium networks, along with the fight’s promoters, have filed suit to preemptively block websites from live-streaming the event.

    The plaintiffs file the complaint [PDF] yesterday in a federal court in California. It accuses the operators of two sites, boxinghd.net and sportship.org of advertising “an unauthorized live Internet stream” of the much-ballyhooed bout.

    One site tells visitors, “[I]f you can’t afford to buy tickets then simply watch Mayweather vs Pacquiao here. We will provide with nothing but the freshest and the most reliable high quality live links,” and claims “there are lots of alternatives that you can watch the fight live… You can watch the full fight via live stream in this website. The live streaming will commence when the fight starts.”

    Clicking on the link for the live stream on boxinghd takes you to the other defendant site, where, according to the suit, “In order to gain access to the stream, users must click through one or more ‘offers’ that promote the goods and services of third parties. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that Defendants use these advertisements to monetize their websites.”

    The plaintiffs say that the sole purpose of these two sites is to infringe on their copyright.

    “[T]he only content on Defendants’ websites promotes and/or monetizes their intention to infringe Plaintiffs’ rights by streaming the Coverage without authorization,” reads the complaint.

    As of this morning, we were unable to access any content on either of the URLs named in the lawsuit.

    The fight is expected to bring in upwards of $300 million for all involved.

    [via Bloomberg]



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uGoogle Launches New Tool To Protect Consumers’ Password Securityr


4 4 4 9
  • Google launched a new tool today that sends alerts to users when they enter their log-in information into a site that isn't actually from Google.

    Google launched a new tool today that sends alerts to users when they enter their log-in information into a site that isn’t actually from Google.

    Sometimes cyber criminals do such a good job camouflaging their ploys to steal consumers’ personal information that you might not recognize that the site you just entered your password on isn’t a legitimate login page. In an effort to combat such ruses, Google has created a new tool for its Chrome browser that aims to ensure users’ passwords don’t end up in the hands of ne’er do wells.

    Unlike other safe browsing tools that judge whether or not a site is malicious, Google’s new Password Alert protects consumers’ personal and business accounts by alerting users they are being targeted by a phishing attack.

    The security feature works when users allow Chrome to remember a “scrambled” version of their Google password, the company says in a blog post.

    Then when users type their password into a site that isn’t a Google sign-in page, Password Alert will show a notice telling account holders they are at risk of being phished and they should update passwords to protect themselves.

    Google says the new tool is designed to cut back on the number of users tricked into providing their log-in information to cyber criminals. In a blog post about the new tool, Google estimates that such phishing attacks are successful up to 45% of the time and that nearly 2% of all Gmail messages are phishing attempts.

    Password Alert is also available for Google for Work customers, including Google Apps and Drive for Work.

    The new tool is just the latest in Google’s arsenal to protect consumers from hackers including two-step verification, security key and safe browsing technology.

    Protect your Google Account with Password Alert [Google]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uShoplifting Suspect Wearing ‘Won’t Be Caught’ T-Shirt Remains At Larger


4 4 4 9
  • mightbecaughtThe Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office in Florida want to make sure that the prediction made on a woman’s t-shirt doesn’t come true. The message in huge white letters on her black t-shirt was clear: “Won’t Be Caught,” it said. Unfortunately, she was caught on camera while allegedly scooping up almost $1,500 worth of perfume and cologne bottle at an Ulta store in Tampa.

    It’s not always nice or legal to profile customers in your store by their appearance, but should a shirt with a message like this invite special scrutiny? This shirt is vague enough that it could be the name of a song or another slogan, but should you follow someone around if they wear a shirt that literally says, “I Love Shoplifting”?

    The crime took place six weeks ago, but the sheriff’s office released these photos the public just now, hoping to find the overconfident shoplifting suspect. If you have any information that could be helpful, contact Crimestoppers of Tampa Bay. If you know where to find one of these t-shirts, please keep that information to yourself.

    Deputies: Tampa shoplifting suspect wore ‘Won’t Be Caught’ shirt [Tampa Tribune]



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uOhio Health Officials: Home-Canned Potatoes To Blame For Botulism Outbreakr


4 4 4 9
  • Canning your own food at home is a fantastic idea for anyone who wants vegetables on-hand all year-round. But health officials are warning people to make sure they stick to proper canning techniques, after a batch of home-canned potatoes used to make potato salad was linked to an outbreak of botulism in Ohio that’s killed one person.

    There have been 21 confirmed cases of botulism and 10 more suspected cases after a potluck at an Ohio church, reports CNN, where all of the victims ate on April 19. A 54-year-old woman died after falling ill, while the others were treated at area hospitals with an antitoxin from the Strategic National Stockpile provided by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Dr. Mark Aebi, Health Commissioner and Medical Director at the Fairfield County Department of Health said in a statement: “This is a difficult time for our community, and our thoughts and prayers are with the affected individuals and their families.”

    The blame is being laid on Clostridium botulinum bacteria, known as botulism, believed to have come from home-canned potatoes, prompting local health officials to remind people to use a pressure canner or cooker when canning foods at home, because that pressure is what kills the germ that causes botulism.

    Botulism can only affect those eating contaminated food and does not spread from person to person. It can cause paralysis, double vision, difficulty swallowing and respiratory failure.

    Home-canned potatoes to blame for botulism outbreak [CNN]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist