4 ms·

After a quick little look through the Terms of Service... >IT IS ALSO SOLELY YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO EVALUATE THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, USEFULNESS OR VALIDITY

After a quick little look through the Terms of Service... >IT IS ALSO SOLELY YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO EVALUATE THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, USEFULNESS OR VALIDITY OF ALL OPINIONS, ADVICE, SERVICE, PROMOTIONS, ADVERTISEMENTS, AWARDS, PRIZES OR OTHER INFORMATION, AND THE QUALITY AND MERCHANTABILITY OF ALL SERVICES AND/OR MERCHANDISE, PROVIDED BY OR THROUGH BRAIN.FM. BRAIN.FM MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES OR ENDORSEMENTS, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED AS TO THE ACCURACY, QUALITY, COMPLETENESS, NON‑INFRINGEMENT, OWNERSHIP, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR OTHERWISE OF ANY INFORMATION, GOODS OR SERVICES ACCESSED THROUGH BRAIN.FM. I guess this is a helpful disclaimer in many ways, because this allows me to presume that all their claims are invented, all their peer reviews are suspect, and that their entire product line is inferior to a generic recording of waves hitting the beach, crickets at night, or a babbling brook.

cLeEOGPw 11y ago
This belongs to the same drawer as binaural beats.
ahewett 11y ago
It's just a standard TOS, man. Here's the Terms Of Service for Yale: I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING ANY WRITTEN CONFIRMATION STATEMENTS PROVIDED TO ME (ON PAPER OR IN ELECTRONIC FORM) REGARDING ANY INSTRUCTIONS, CHOICES, OR REQUESTS THAT I MAKE THROUGH THIS WEB SITE. I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING FOR INACCURACIES ALL OF THE INFORMATION TRANSMITTED TO ME. IF THERE ARE INACCURACIES, I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECTING THEM USING THE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO ME ON THE WEB SITE OR BY CONTACTING THE BENEFITS CENTER TO POINT THEM OUT. Here's Amazon: AMAZON ATTEMPTS TO BE AS ACCURATE AS POSSIBLE. HOWEVER, AMAZON DOES NOT WARRANT THAT PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS OR OTHER CONTENT OF ANY AMAZON SERVICE IS ACCURATE, COMPLETE, RELIABLE, CURRENT, OR ERROR-FREE. IF A PRODUCT OFFERED BY AMAZON ITSELF IS NOT AS DESCRIBED, YOUR SOLE REMEDY IS TO RETURN IT IN UNUSED CONDITION. And here's Pfizer: PFIZER MAKES NO WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY KIND AS TO THE ACCURACY, CURRENCY, OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED IN SUCH WEB SITES AND SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR INJURIES OF ANY KIND ARISING FROM SUCH CONTENT OR INFORMATION. I mean, I can talk to my lawyer about changing it if you really think it's that bad. :)
- 6stringmerc 11y ago
  Nah I mean I just read it and it basically gives the impression that there's no merit to the claims and any and all results are subject to personal interpretation. Or, to put it in more simple terms pending peer reviewed, refereed scientific findings, Brain.Fm is the HeadOn of audio.
  - ahewett 11y ago
    OK fair enough, I'll see if we can get a better one then. Honest to god we just used a standard one we got over a decade ago, and customized it with our name. We might have even gotten it off of legal zoom or something. - The HRV/(stress/anxiety) study is peer-reviewed (and independent, we had no part in it). - All our other papers are pending publication. - Giovanni's work on acoustic stimulation is peer reviewed, and from Northwestern. Again, we had no part in that. - The meta-analysis one of our previous neuroscientists made is also peer reviewed. - Dr. Olmstead's paper is peer reviewed, so's the Fatigue one we have up there, and all the other ones in our bibliography: https://www.brain.fm/pdfs/ResearchLibrary.pdf https://www.brain.fm/pdfs/ResearchLibrary.pdf - Hell, we're even having our statistical user analysis peer reviewed, the one we have up (before we got popular) and the new one we're making now. Tryin' our best here :) - Adam

cLeEOGPw 11y ago

This belongs to the same drawer as binaural beats.

ahewett 11y ago

It's just a standard TOS, man. Here's the Terms Of Service for Yale: I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING ANY WRITTEN CONFIRMATION STATEMENTS PROVIDED TO ME (ON PAPER OR IN ELECTRONIC FORM) REGARDING ANY INSTRUCTIONS, CHOICES, OR REQUESTS THAT I MAKE THROUGH THIS WEB SITE. I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING FOR INACCURACIES ALL OF THE INFORMATION TRANSMITTED TO ME. IF THERE ARE INACCURACIES, I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECTING THEM USING THE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO ME ON THE WEB SITE OR BY CONTACTING THE BENEFITS CENTER TO POINT THEM OUT. Here's Amazon: AMAZON ATTEMPTS TO BE AS ACCURATE AS POSSIBLE. HOWEVER, AMAZON DOES NOT WARRANT THAT PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS OR OTHER CONTENT OF ANY AMAZON SERVICE IS ACCURATE, COMPLETE, RELIABLE, CURRENT, OR ERROR-FREE. IF A PRODUCT OFFERED BY AMAZON ITSELF IS NOT AS DESCRIBED, YOUR SOLE REMEDY IS TO RETURN IT IN UNUSED CONDITION. And here's Pfizer: PFIZER MAKES NO WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY KIND AS TO THE ACCURACY, CURRENCY, OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED IN SUCH WEB SITES AND SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR INJURIES OF ANY KIND ARISING FROM SUCH CONTENT OR INFORMATION. I mean, I can talk to my lawyer about changing it if you really think it's that bad. :)

6stringmerc 11y ago
Nah I mean I just read it and it basically gives the impression that there's no merit to the claims and any and all results are subject to personal interpretation. Or, to put it in more simple terms pending peer reviewed, refereed scientific findings, Brain.Fm is the HeadOn of audio.
- ahewett 11y ago
  OK fair enough, I'll see if we can get a better one then. Honest to god we just used a standard one we got over a decade ago, and customized it with our name. We might have even gotten it off of legal zoom or something. - The HRV/(stress/anxiety) study is peer-reviewed (and independent, we had no part in it). - All our other papers are pending publication. - Giovanni's work on acoustic stimulation is peer reviewed, and from Northwestern. Again, we had no part in that. - The meta-analysis one of our previous neuroscientists made is also peer reviewed. - Dr. Olmstead's paper is peer reviewed, so's the Fatigue one we have up there, and all the other ones in our bibliography: https://www.brain.fm/pdfs/ResearchLibrary.pdf https://www.brain.fm/pdfs/ResearchLibrary.pdf - Hell, we're even having our statistical user analysis peer reviewed, the one we have up (before we got popular) and the new one we're making now. Tryin' our best here :) - Adam