Slashdot Mirror

How 2 ma3k yuor 0wnzor w4r3z sYt3!!!!11!@!

(Note to mods: RTFL before modding me down)

Quoth the parent and grandparent:

Subliminal messages are in the range above conscious hearing. This is generally agreed to be 20KHz. Therefore, you would take the spoken portion, and boost it by 20KHz, then add in the music at the normal frequencies.

Don't forget the sample rate; according to nyquist, the sample rate must be at least twice the highest frequency represented. CD sample rate is 44 KHz... therefore this method CANNOT be used to record to CD; there isn't enough representational accuracy in the 20 - 22 KHz range

Quoth malachid69:

Hmmm. well you are still talking about a single stereo source to go through the headphones. Why would you need to change the sample rate?

It all comes down to the Nyquist Theorem, which basically states that in order to accurately represent any sound, it's frequency must be less than half the sample rate. Even for sounds less than half the sample rate, to get true high fidelity, they must be far less than half the sample rate, or the consequences are poor representation. I would imagine that any subliminal messaging occuring in the ultrasound spectrum would have to be relatively high fidelity, considering that the ear is not physically well-suited to pick up ultrasound...

Well, CDs are sampled at 44,100 Hz. As mentioned in the above "consequences" link, a 20 KHz tone would only be represented by 2.205 samples per period; not an incredibly high quality recording. The nuances, the voice itself, would be lost to the sampling process. The engineers that designed the CD spec chose it specifically for that feature; this is the lowest sample rate that can reproduce all the sounds audible to a human (up to about 16 KHz) without any appreciable loss in quality. Sounds just barely above the threshold are recorded, but the loss in quality becomes quite rapid as you approach 22 KHz. Above 22 KHz, any sound comes out as a bunch of mid-range noise, and nothing else.

• Is the first bitfield the same as mine?
  • No? Shoot the packet out the outbound interface.
  • Yes? Keep processing.
• Is the second bitfield the same as mine?
  • No? Shoot the packet out the outbound interface.
  • Yes? Keep processing.
• OK, this packet is going to one of my customers. Their network is identified by the next bitfield. Use that bitfield as a key in a hash table of interfaces, and shoot the packet out that interface.

There's none of the current stuff like "well, this packet matches six different network masks. Which one is the smallest subnet?".

IPv6 is built for speed. It's not just IPv4-but-longer.

The posting for Semiconductor Tarrifs

Steel Tarrifs declared Illegal by the WTO

OJ Tarrifs, though they seem to be being phased out

Ok, to start with its the nyquist theorem. I suggest you look it up before asking others to. Second its a theorem that states that the highest possible reproducible frequency is half the sample frequency. So a 44,100 Hz sample frequency could possibly reproduce a 22,050 Hz frequency. That makes sense, however, it does not take into account all the data that is lost by sampling every 1/44,100 times a second. Analog creates a continuous function. If you've ever read up on calculus or precalc limits you'd understand what I mean by this. No matter what detail you can get out of digital sampling it will still be digital and lose data from the original analog source. Now maybe you can't hear the difference but I sure can when it is played on loudspeakers. Perhaps one day when we quadruple our sampling rate and bit depth we may surpass the capabilities of the human ear, but we have yet to do that with current 44.1Khz/16-bit technology and don't forget mp3s take that digital source and then losslessly encode it losing more data. Just stick with analog for a few years you won't be disappointed.

I like some of the tools listed on this page, it an ISP based out of tucson, AZ.

Here is a VPN Pointer Page that has a IPSec config files for FW-1 & FreeS/WAN Haven't had a chance to test it yet, but I too am very keen to see this work, seeing as we're implmenting FW-1 here & I want to roll out S/WAN Internationally...