Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Public Radio Streaming Ogg Vorbis
d00dman writes "CBC Radio, Canada's major national public broadcaster is now streaming in ogg/vorbis. Recently CBC had switched from realmedia streams to windows media streams for their radio broadcasts. After receiving a plethora of complaints, suggesting ogg/vorbis as an alternative, CBC has begun a test ogg stream of the toronto stations. They boast in their ogg FAQ that they're encoding with oddcast and streaming with icecast."
That a publicly funded organization is actually trying to cut costs. Too bad it doesn't happen more often.
Now, if that makes sense to anyone, could you please explain it to me? I think I've confused myself.
Now this is the way to go. Public radio accessible to the public; not just the part of the public that pays for .
Let's hear what they are broadcasting, anyway. BTW, anyone aware of a cooperative streaming solution (i.e. clients serve to one another, like Bittorrent)? I've worked one myself (StreamDist), but it's not really production-ready and I haven't worked on it for some time now.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
We had a few extra years on that one. America came out of the oven under done.
Deleted
That tirade actually proofs why same-sex marriages are not so good idea.
STFU.
What's wrong with gay marriages? I don't get it. And what's with all that racism I see everywhere? Words like "nigger" and "chink" flying all around game channels?
What, the American youth today has shitty upbringing?
Anyhow, if the American govt would just outlaw the LLC, and force disclosure of all proprietry software into the public domain... well, that'd be the great act of mankind. Who cares about gay marriages!
Online backup with Mozy, sounds like Ozzie, but more!
On Slashdot you confuse free as in beer with free as in speach? Still, lets look at the freedom as in rights part.
You see the people freely elect a governement that does this, and if they don't like it they are free to elect one that will change it. Strangely enough, in countries with private health care, you don't find many politicians campaigning against it.
In a perfect world, a government wouldn't need to provide these things, people would never be unfortunate or short sigted enough to need them. Hell, in a perfect world you wouldn't need Governments or taxes.
In the real world you have a choice, let everyone decide and some suffer (both those who could have avoided it and those who couldn't).
All societies require a compromise on freedoms. You have to give some stuff up so everyone, including you, can benefit. Which freedom is more important? Your freedom to spend every bit of your money as you wish, or other people's freedom to live their lives free(er) from sickness?
Sure, some people will then be lazy and take advantage, won't get private healthcare they could afford, but surely to anyone with some basic humanity it is better than letting them become sick or die. That's before you even count
If you feel compelled to put self interest first, consider this. It is in everyone's interest to stop the spread of disease, it isn't like a virus cares if you have health insurance, and some will make you sick and kill you anyway. Good free healthcare benfits everyone, even those with private health insurance.
OK so providing less wealthy (for no fault of their own) citizens is a crime? I don't get your logic. I would rather be 'forced' to pay taxes to maintain a balanced society rather than be ripped off by some corporation.
The US gets a lot of guff about Kyoto, but while Canada ratified the treaty two years ago, it hasn't actually put a plan in place to meet any of the targets. No laws to curb emissions on vehicles, no powerplant switches, nada.
Kyoto requires that greenhouse gas levels drop 6% below 1990 levels. In 2001, Canada's greenhouse gas levels were 18.5% above 1990 levels. So you're talking about dropping greenhouse gas emissions by 25% in 8 years (assuming they haven't increased since 2001).
Canada has been fighting to get credits for all of their forests as greenhouse gas sinks. That seems to be their plan on meeting Kyoto. Make everyone else agree they don't have to do anything.
As far as I can tell, Kyoto was a feel good measure.
The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
CBC Radio kicks ass - yes.
CBC as a news organization kicks ass - yes.
CBC Television - as a populist TV channel - sorry, there they fail miserably.
My God! You're right! The CBC is reporting on what the governments of Canada (local, provincial, and federal) are doing!
Um...what else is news, precisely? Their international stuff is usually pretty good--less slanted than the U.S. outlets, close to the BBC's level of quality. Are you complaining that there's not enough emphasis on entertainers? Not enough sports coverage (hockey excepted)? Not enough saccharine 'human interest' stories?
Shame on them for emphasizing the news that actually affects the lives of Canadians, rather than pandering to a desire for cheap thrills, vicarious living, and Kobe Bryant?
If the CBC were just a 'government news agency'--in the derisive sense that you meant the phrase--then they wouldn't include reaction from Opposition politicians, critics, and protestors.
~Idarubicin
It's called "marriage" and it costs more than you know.
Is Samantha Bennett by any chance a pseudonym for the Daily Show's Samantha Bee? The names are similar, and the article's content sounds a lot like Samantha Bee's schtick....
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Actually, given how wired Canada is, it makes perfect sense to put content on the net even if it's only intended for local consumption. People often have net access in places they don't even have a radio, or where radio reception is poor. At the very least, they're increasing coverage over their intended audience.