or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung Galaxy Note, HTC One caught cheating in benchmarks again
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung Galaxy Note, HTC One caught cheating in benchmarks again - Page 3

post #81 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I believe they call them consumer protection laws, most countries have them.

Completely ignored by Google:

In Dutch, but many more EU countries are taking action as well:

http://www.cbpweb.nl/Pages/pb_20131128-google-privacybeleid.aspx

Totally OT.
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #82 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

From false, misleading and deceptive advertising actually, I believe they call them consumer protection laws, most countries have them.

I'm not sure these benchmarks would qualify.

My reasoning…

1) There is no law that disallows a vendors from optimizing their code, in fact we want them to, but where do you draw the line is much more fuzzy. For instance, Google's Chrome browser is optimized for their V8 test suite, but that's perfectly reasonable since they write their code in such a way that one expect Google to optimize their webcode to run best on their native browser and therefore create a test suite to verify this is the case.

2) These system benchmarks are typically run by owners of the device or those reviewing the device. We've seen vendors advertise them in the past but I don't recall any of that happening since certain vendors started "cheating" on them. If they did then that could be a conflict of interest, but simply optimizing for 3rd-party benchmarks that they don't control and have them get tested independently by others seem so far removed that I can't imagine there are any consumer protection laws that would begin to cover that.
Edited by SolipsismX - 11/28/13 at 1:38pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #83 of 165
Originally Posted by 3Eleven View Post

Protect it's citizens!? From what? the evils of a benchmark? Come on man.

 

YEP. Anyone should be able to say anything to sell their product and never have to face any consequences for it. Ever. At any time. For any reason. 

 

I have some pills here that will make you immortal. Ten bucks a pop. I know, I’m being pretty generous here. I’m actually losing money. But hey, take one a day for the rest of your life and you’ll never, ever die.

 

Shut up.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #84 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

YEP. Anyone should be able to say anything to sell their product and never have to face any consequences for it. Ever. At any time. For any reason.

 

I have some pills here that will make you immortal. Ten bucks a pop. I know, I’m being pretty generous here. I’m actually losing money. But hey, take one a day for the rest of your life and you’ll never, ever die.

 

Shut up.

It's amazing you get this riled up over something so trivial, can't imagine where you go discussing real matters.

The issue is in the grand scheme of things the government has much higher priorities to deal with. A cell phone cheating on a tech benchmark  that enthusiasts use is way down on their list....where it should be.

post #85 of 165
Originally Posted by 3Eleven View Post
It's amazing you get this riled up over something so trivial

 

One of the sole, actual responsibilities of government is trivial? Okay. Sure.

 
The issue is in the grand scheme of things the government has much higher priorities to deal with.

 

Uh huh. Yep. No one can ever be upset about more than one thing at once. Oh, and since it’s not the most important thing conceivable, it’s perfectly fine and totally not illegal at all.


People like you vote, and that bothers me.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #86 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

One of the sole, actual responsibilities of government is trivial? Okay. Sure.

Uh huh. Yep. No one can ever be upset about more than one thing at once. Oh, and since it’s not the most important thing conceivable, it’s perfectly fine and totally not illegal at all.


People like you vote, and that bothers me.

It's not illegal, there's no law against cheating on benchmark tests. People cheat in many ways, performers take beta blockers so they won't be nervous during an audition or performance, students take Adderall so they can study for longer hours than possible. Cheating is done by people of all races, creeds, colors, religions, and social economic status.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #87 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


It's not illegal, there's no law against cheating on benchmark tests. People cheat in many ways, performers take beta blockers so they won't be nervous during an audition or performance, students take Adderall so they can study for longer hours than possible. Cheating is done by people of all races, creeds, colors, religions, and social economic status.

 

Neither of those examples are even close to cheating.

 

A-Rod is a cheater, since there are precise, well-written rules against doing what he did.  I'm not aware of any rules concerning taking beta blockers or Adderall (though the Adderall, if without a prescription, is a different problem -- of course, getting a scrip for Adderall is practically a non-event these days).  Those aren't cheating because there are no sets of rules concerning those activities.

post #88 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Neither of those examples are even close to cheating.

A-Rod is a cheater, since there are precise, well-written rules against doing what he did.  I'm not aware of any rules concerning taking beta blockers or Adderall (though the Adderall, if without a prescription, is a different problem -- of course, getting a scrip for Adderall is practically a non-event these days).  Those aren't cheating because there are no sets of rules concerning those activities.

Of course they are, they all 'enhance performance', and those that take those drugs perform better than those that didn't. A concert violinist loses out on a job because the other person auditioning was able to perform better, a student on Adderall scores better on an exam than someone smarter than them thus getting them a better grade. How is that not cheating? There doesn't need to be rules in order for someone to cheat.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #89 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Neither of those examples are even close to cheating.

A-Rod is a cheater, since there are precise, well-written rules against doing what he did.  I'm not aware of any rules concerning taking beta blockers or Adderall (though the Adderall, if without a prescription, is a different problem -- of course, getting a scrip for Adderall is practically a non-event these days).  Those aren't cheating because there are no sets of rules concerning those activities.

Of course they are, they all 'enhance performance', and those that take those drugs perform better than those that didn't. A concert violinist loses out on a job because the other person auditioning was able to perform better, a student on Adderall scores better on an exam than someone smarter than them thus getting them a better grade. How is that not cheating? There doesn't need to be rules in order for someone to cheat.

 

You have to be a little cautious with that line of reasoning. If cheating extends beyond breaking the rules, then where does it end? Taking those (legal) drugs enhances performance, but so does eating better, or training harder. Is that also cheating?

post #90 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

You have to be a little cautious with that line of reasoning. If cheating extends beyond breaking the rules, then where does it end? Taking those (legal) drugs enhances performance, but so does eating better, or training harder. Is that also cheating?

It ends when drugs are needed to enhance performance. Eating better, and training harder isn't a instant fix, but in many cases PEDs are.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #91 of 165
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
It's not illegal, there's no law against cheating on benchmark tests.

 

It’s illegal to advertise falsely. Misrepresentation of a product in a benchmark is a false representation (advertisement) of the product to said benchmark, and, by extension, the user. QED, it is illegal to fake benchmarks.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #92 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

It ends when drugs are needed to enhance performance. Eating better, and training harder isn't a instant fix, but in many cases PEDs are.

He mentioned legal drugs so we're not talking about something obtained through dubious means even if not currently a controlled substance.

I think it's a fair point. We're not simply talking about an episode of "21 Jump Street" where rich high school kids are taking uppers to study for finals week. If one could take a pill to help concentrate and focus better than one would normally then does that make it wrong if it helps you to be a better you? What if the persons in question suffer from severe ADHD and therefore wouldn't be able to live a normal life without the medication? What about other physical and mental illnesses that can create a domino effect that affects one's ability to learn if not kept in check?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #93 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
It's not illegal, there's no law against cheating on benchmark tests.

It’s illegal to advertise falsely. Misrepresentation of a product in a benchmark is a false representation (advertisement) of the product to said benchmark, and, by extension, the user. QED, it is illegal to fake benchmarks.

I'm not sure about that. It's clearly unethical, but if the device actually runs the benchmark at that speed, and the advertising claim is just related to the benchmark performance, then no false claim is made - technically at least. Misrepresentation by implication might be a tough sell in a court of law.
post #94 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

It’s illegal to advertise falsely. Misrepresentation of a product in a benchmark is a false representation (advertisement) of the product to said benchmark, and, by extension, the user. QED, it is illegal to fake benchmarks.

I haven't seen any evidence that any of these companies marketed the doped results for the devices in question.

There is no evidence of falsifying any benchmark. The results are quite real and are the actual results of the HW being tested, it's just not the results that all apps will get with that HW because it removed limitations put in place on the HW for normal operation. This is very significant, especially if you want to make this a legal matter.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #95 of 165
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
There is no evidence of falsifying any benchmark. The results are quite real and are the actual results of the HW being tested, it's just not the results that all apps will get with that HW because it removed limitations put in place on the HW for normal operation. This is very significant, especially if you want to make this a legal matter.

 

Hmm. Hypothetical: Car company gives model to EPA for testing with software that manages its engine more efficiently, giving lower emissions and higher MPG. Model is physically unchanged when sold to consumers, software has engine run less efficiently. Legal?

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #96 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Hmm. Hypothetical: Car company gives model to EPA for testing with software that manages its engine more efficiently, giving lower emissions and higher MPG. Model is physically unchanged when sold to consumers, software has engine run less efficiently. Legal?

If these smartphone vendors had to give devices to a government agency for testing and they used different SW between the testing facility and consumers it would be an issue, but there is no such agency and the code received by the average consumer and reviewer is the exact same.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #97 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
There is no evidence of falsifying any benchmark. The results are quite real and are the actual results of the HW being tested, it's just not the results that all apps will get with that HW because it removed limitations put in place on the HW for normal operation. This is very significant, especially if you want to make this a legal matter.

Hmm. Hypothetical: Car company gives model to EPA for testing with software that manages its engine more efficiently, giving lower emissions and higher MPG. Model is physically unchanged when sold to consumers, software has engine run less efficiently. Legal?

No, but two differences: (1) the EPA is a regulatory agency and actually approves the vehicle, so it must be the production model, and (2) the phones in question are production models, exactly as sold, and the user can indeed realize the benchmark performance when running the benchmark software.
post #98 of 165
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
If these smartphone vendors had to give devices to a government agency for testing and they used different SW between the testing facility and consumers it would be an issue

 

But different firmware (work with me here; just call it tweaking, I guess) between apps on a device isn’t? If it isn’t (legally), it isn’t; I just think it certainly should be. It’s like how your ISP prioritizes traffic to speed testing websites and lies to you about how fast your connection is.

 

Originally Posted by muppetry View Post
the user can indeed realize the benchmark performance…  when running the benchmark software.
 

Geez, I don’t like that. That’s one big tautological loophole.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #99 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Of course they are, they all 'enhance performance', and those that take those drugs perform better than those that didn't. A concert violinist loses out on a job because the other person auditioning was able to perform better, a student on Adderall scores better on an exam than someone smarter than them thus getting them a better grade. How is that not cheating? There doesn't need to be rules in order for someone to cheat.

 

A group of handsets broke the rules and were delisted under those rules.

 

Futuremark made the rules and police them.

 

Cheats shouldn't prosper and people shouldn't whine about it with bullshit objections and excuses.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #100 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

But different firmware (work with me here; just call it tweaking, I guess) between apps on a device isn’t? If it isn’t (legally), it isn’t; I just think it certainly should be. It’s like how your ISP prioritizes traffic to speed testing websites and lies to you about how fast your connection is.

Geez, I don’t like that. That’s one big tautological loophole.

The thing is it's the same firmware. It gets loaded when it's turned on and it works the same across all device. The difference is it alters how the device performs when it detects certain conditions. If you want to talk firmware (specifically) it's really the same as a higher-end vehicle being able to detect road conditions and then adjust how the vehicle performs when those conditions are present, but that has actual use for the driver. The vehicle performs differently because the firmware tells it to.

I don't think any of this is ethical but it's certainly not illegal, and seems very unlikely there will be a government agency that will be put in place to benchmark smartphones. The best way for this to be handled is for these benchmark test owners to delist them, but overall I can't imagine these tests mean anything to anyone. I don't even care that the iPhone is tops in most categories; I only care that it's feels fast when I use it and I suspect most users would agree.
Edited by SolipsismX - 11/28/13 at 8:45pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #101 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


The thing is it's the same firmware. It gets loaded when it's turned on and it works the same across all device. The difference is it alters how the device performs when it detects certain conditions. If you want to talk firmware it's really the same as a higher-end vehicle being able to detect road conditions and then adjust how the vehicle performs when those conditions are present, but that has actual use for the driver. The vehicle performs differently because the firmware tells it to.

I don't think any of this is ethical but it's certainly not illegal, and seems very unlikely there will be a government agency that will be put in place to benchmark smartphones. The best way for this to be handled is for these benchmark test owners to delist them, but overall I can't imagine these tests mean anything to anyone. I don't even care that the iPhone is tops in most categories; I only care that it's feels fast when I use it and I suspect most users would agree.

 

Hey my car has a 1000hp engine, here's a benchmark to prove it:-

 

 

I wonder how long it would last if I used it like this for everyday driving.

 

This is what Samsung and HTC want people to compare to everyday iPhones, or they wouldn't have done it.


Edited by hill60 - 11/28/13 at 8:50pm
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #102 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Hey my car has a 1000hp engine, here's a benchmark to prove it:-

video: htttp://www.youtube.com/embed/VUWCo3lDjH8

I wonder how long it would last if I used it like this for everyday driving.

This is what Samsung and HTC want people to compare to everyday iPhones, or they wouldn't have done it.

Which makes it very odd when the gains have been so minimal. When you consider it's not standard across a vendor's line it's even more odd. My guess is this practice will end simply because benchmark sites are delisting devices.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #103 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

He mentioned legal drugs so we're not talking about something obtained through dubious means even if not currently a controlled substance.

I think it's a fair point. We're not simply talking about an episode of "21 Jump Street" where rich high school kids are taking uppers to study for finals week. If one could take a pill to help concentrate and focus better than one would normally then does that make it wrong if it helps you to be a better you? What if the persons in question suffer from severe ADHD and therefore wouldn't be able to live a normal life without the medication? What about other physical and mental illnesses that can create a domino effect that affects one's ability to learn if not kept in check?

I kind of vaguely remember reading a quote somewhere about things being legal, though I suspect that your memory about who originally wrote it is better than mine. Many or most of the people taking the drugs were not the ones it was prescribed to.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #104 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

This is what Samsung and HTC want people to compare to everyday iPhones, or they wouldn't have done it.

It's not just iPhones they're competing against.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #105 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Of course they are, they all 'enhance performance', and those that take those drugs perform better than those that didn't. A concert violinist loses out on a job because the other person auditioning was able to perform better, a student on Adderall scores better on an exam than someone smarter than them thus getting them a better grade. How is that not cheating? There doesn't need to be rules in order for someone to cheat.

 

Cheating =/= Giving yourself an advantage over others.

 

This seems to be the part that you're missing.  Cheating means that you BROKE THE RULES.  As I said: I don't know of any rules (if there are, then please cite them) that say, for instance, that a cellist can't have a drink before an audition to settle down.

 

There have to be RULES for cheating to even exist.

post #106 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Cheating =/= Giving yourself an advantage over others.

This seems to be the part that you're missing.  Cheating means that you BROKE THE RULES.  As I said: I don't know of any rules (if there are, then please cite them) that say, for instance, that a cellist can't have a drink before an audition to settle down.

There have to be RULES for cheating to even exist.

If a drink was enough I don't think a cellist would go out of their way to obtain a beta blocker. Most rules for cheating are reactive not proactive. The rules are set after it became known that people were using means to gain an unfair advantage over everyone else.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #107 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


If a drink was enough I don't think a cellist would go out of their way to obtain a beta blocker. Most rules for cheating are reactive not proactive. The rules are set after it became known that people were using means to gain an unfair advantage over everyone else.

 

*headdesk*

 

Honestly, by your definition practice is cheating.  

post #108 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

*headdesk*

Honestly, by your definition practice is cheating.  

It's really simple, if you have to take a drug not prescribed to you to beat me then that's cheating. Answer this. Why has MLB banned substances that are perfectly legal?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #109 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


It's really simple, if you have to take a drug not prescribed to you to beat me then that's cheating. Answer this. Why has MLB banned substances that are perfectly legal?

 

Actually, a high percentage of the drugs banned by MLB are not "perfectly legal" at all.

 

But as to those few that are, it's because there are RULES in place to protect those who aren't taking them.  It's unfair to place a burden of health onto those who want to play fairly.

 

Take modeling for instance.  Now, there are models who just are naturally thin.  They still have to work out (yoga, Pilates, etc.) and seriously watch what they eat.  But someone like Karlie Kloss just looks the way she looks because of genes, for the most part.  Then you have the ones aren't quite that lucky, and do things like throw-up after eating.  Then you have the ones who use either unprescribed legal drugs (amphetamines), or illegal drugs (cocaine, e.g.).

 

Now, when Kate Moss was 16 and walking runways and using coke on a more-than-regular basis (this isn't libel: it's a well-known fact) was she cheating?  Of course not.  She was just a teen millionaire who happened to be a coke head.  Sure, it helped her stay (VERY) thin.  And sure, she got covers and gigs because of her look, which at the time she helped usher in (heroin chic).

 

She wasn't cheating because there was no set of rules in place in the first place.  

 

EDIT:  Anyways, we've obviously drifted pretty far OT here.  It's probably best if we just agree to disagree at this point.


Edited by AaronJ - 11/29/13 at 6:34am
post #110 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

*headdesk*

Honestly, by your definition practice is cheating.  

It's really simple, if you have to take a drug not prescribed to you to beat me then that's cheating. Answer this. Why has MLB banned substances that are perfectly legal?

But that's the entire point we were discussing earlier - if the MLB bans it then it's breaking the rules, and thus cheating. If they don't ban it, then it's within the rules, legitimate, and not cheating. If they decide to ban it later, then it becomes cheating.
post #111 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

But that's the entire point we were discussing earlier - if the MLB bans it then it's breaking the rules, and thus cheating. If they don't ban it, then it's within the rules, legitimate, and not cheating. If they decide to ban it later, then it becomes cheating.

Was it cheating before it was banned? If it wasn't cheating then why ban it?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #112 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

Actually, a high percentage of the drugs banned by MLB are not "perfectly legal" at all.

But as to those few that are, it's because there are RULES in place to protect those who aren't taking them.  It's unfair to place a burden of health onto those who want to play fairly.

Take modeling for instance.  Now, there are models who just are naturally thin.  They still have to work out (yoga, Pilates, etc.) and seriously watch what they eat.  But someone like Karlie Kloss just looks the way she looks because of genes, for the most part.  Then you have the ones aren't quite that lucky, and do things like throw-up after eating.  Then you have the ones who use either unprescribed legal drugs (amphetamines), or illegal drugs (cocaine, e.g.).

Now, when Kate Moss was 16 and walking runways and using coke on a more-than-regular basis (this isn't libel: it's a well-known fact) was she cheating?  Of course not.  She was just a teen millionaire who happened to be a coke head.  Sure, it helped her stay (VERY) thin.  And sure, she got covers and gigs because of her look, which at the time she helped usher in (heroin chic).

She wasn't cheating because there was no set of rules in place in the first place.  

The big difference being is that Kate Moss didn't take cocaine specifically to stay thin.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #113 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


The big difference being is that Kate Moss didn't take cocaine specifically to stay thin.

 

I think what you mean is that, "Kate Moss didn't take cocaine SOLELY to stay thin."

 

A lot of models -- though it's gotten better now -- use illegal drugs to remain a size 2.  It's not that easy when you're 5'11" to weigh 105 or 110 lbs.  I mean, Karlie is 6'1" and weighs about 120 lbs.  But as I said, in her case, it's natural.  But in a lot of cases, it is a lot less natural and lot more drug-induced.

post #114 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

I think what you mean is that, "Kate Moss didn't take cocaine SOLELY to stay thin."

A lot of models -- though it's gotten better now -- use illegal drugs to remain a size 2.  It's not that easy when you're 5'11" to weigh 105 or 110 lbs.  I mean, Karlie is 6'1" and weighs about 120 lbs.  But as I said, in her case, it's natural.  But in a lot of cases, it is a lot less natural and lot more drug-induced.

In that case I would consider that cheating. People that don't stick to their diets are said that they 'cheat', but they're not harming anyone but themselves.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #115 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


In that case I would consider that cheating. People that don't stick to their diets are said that they 'cheat', but they're not harming anyone but themselves.

 

Yeah, well, most models' careers last about 4 years tops.  So they can quit with the bulimia and cocaine and amphetamine use when they "age out" out of the system at the ancient age of ~22-23. :)

post #116 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

But that's the entire point we were discussing earlier - if the MLB bans it then it's breaking the rules, and thus cheating. If they don't ban it, then it's within the rules, legitimate, and not cheating. If they decide to ban it later, then it becomes cheating.

Was it cheating before it was banned? If it wasn't cheating then why ban it?

Rules often change in sports, for all kinds of reasons, and that doesn't mean that everyone who ever played by the earlier rules was cheating. Those rules may cover equipment (for example changes in allowed equipment to prevent certain advantages), clothing, drugs/supplements, or tactics. At any given time, cheating is only defined by law and the current rules of a sport.
post #117 of 165
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
It's really simple, if you have to take a drug not prescribed to you to beat me then that's cheating.

 

So if I drink coffee and beat you, that’s cheating. See, you don’t get to define what a “drug” is.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #118 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So if I drink coffee and beat you, that’s cheating. See, you don’t get to define what a “drug” is.

It depends on who is making the rules. I don't think any SAT or ACT testing facility would turn away anyone who uses any performance enhancing drug (aka has a cup of coffee in hand or pops a pill before a test) as I don't think those are (yet) a consideration. I'd think they only care about looking at other people's tests, getting someone else to take the test for you, and other ways one can answer questions that aren't coming from one's own brain.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #119 of 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So if I drink coffee and beat you, that’s cheating. See, you don’t get to define what a “drug” is.

Sure I do, I'm talking about an either illegal substance or a drug not prescribed to the one taking it, but on the other hand if you and I were in a stay awake contest and coffee isn't supposed to be consumed and you do then you cheated.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #120 of 165
Cheating or whatever you want to call it is legit because Apple needs competition. /s

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Samsung Galaxy Note, HTC One caught cheating in benchmarks again