I recall seeing a report about bats being found near the bases of wind turbines - dead, but the cause wasn't immediately apparent. You'd imagine bats' echo-location would be sufficient to avoid blades.
Autopsies revealed severe lung damage, burst capillaries, etc, leading to the supposition of a sudden localised pressure drop, i.e. the vortices near wind turbine blades.
Yeah, 'home', as in 'family' - not a bunch of enthusiasts who will readily saturate a connection with ISOs or GoT torrents. I've figured out how to throttle my linux torrents and let them run overnight or off-peak, instead of causing problems for the other people sharing my connection.
Anyway, if you're using that kind of bandwidth, shouldn't you be looking at a commercial solution, and not a hacked domestic router/modem?
So do it with a laptop instead. Find a used but serviceable core2duo or core i3, replace the HDD with a small SSD, and make sure the power management is set to as low a usage as it can be without affecting performance (mostly make sure the screen turns off ASAP - you could even run it headless, how 'bout dat?). One ethernet and one wi-fi interface makes it perfect for home use.
You might even get away without an SSD - run a live distro off a bootable USB. Generous RAM, no swap needed.
Yep, pretty far away from the movie theater business, and we'll keep it that way. There's suggestions from time to time of funding a dedicated cinema, but no-one wants to lose the "dinner and a show" vibe. Maybe we should send a delegation to the Alamo Drafthouse on a fact-finding mission.:-)
Just pointing out that alternatives to the mainstream exist, and it's possible to make a profit by running a cinema, you just can't do it while you're stuck on the Hollywood bandwagon.
OK. I run the projection system for a local film society. It has a 2K projector, a 6.1 sound system, and it's done in a renovated community hall, so less than optimum audio, it's uncomfortably warm in summer, and needs heaters in winter. We show a film every 2 weeks on a Saturday night, and sometimes a children's matinee.
Features and shorts are chosen by a committee of movie-lovers, but it's generally "world cinema", sometimes straying into Hollywood territory. IME 7 out 10 films shown are good entertainment. If it doesn't grab me in the first 10 minutes, I retreat to the projection box and read a book. I get paid whether I like it or not.
It's a social event - not only is it a movie night with a chance to watch something generally more thoughtful than what comes out of Hollywood, but there's a cash bar, and three local restaurants are on roster to provide pre-dinner meals, there's a tea and coffee stand, with home-baked snacks - slices, cake, etc.
People come for a night out, dinner, drinks, chat with friends, and to watch something that ISN'T (usually) hollywood/mainstream. Tickets are AUD$8 members, AUD$13 non-members, meals are about AUD$16 mains, AUD$8 dessert, drinks aren't the cheapest, but all the volunteers (and me) get a free meal and 2x free drinks.
Hall capacity is 220 seats, and it's rare to not have a full house. Late-comers are often told "sorry, we're full".
I wouldn't call myself a shill for the movie industry. What I get paid doesn't cover the time, effort, and skills that I apply to the job.
Tell me, how do you make a movie (film or digital), without lenses?
Hint, it's in the name - "lens flare". It's got nothing to do with the capture medium, and everything to do with the Director's aesthetics (or the DoP).
You know what you'll see if you stand next to a screen observing a film being projected? Grain. Sometimes more, sometimes less, depending on what the film-makers have decided, but limited by the state of the technology.
You know what you'll see if you stand next to a screen observing a digital file being projected? Pixels. Sometimes more, sometimes less, depending on what the film-makers have decided, but limited by the state of the technology.
The "cinematic experience" means different things to different people, but one popularly-accepted view (by no means the only one) is that the storytelling experience requires a boundary between the audience and the story-teller (i.e. the screen and speakers). When that boundary starts to become indistinct - via 3D, higher frame rates, surround-sound, etc, in other words a more immersive experience, then the storytelling experience is weakened and becomes less satisfactory to the audience. YMMV.
That's a good idea, but two minutes should be enough to generate interest. Five minutes of cut scenes will spoil the anticipation, because editors will put the biggest, baddest, most awsome action scenes in the trailer.
Also, ads generate revenue for the cinema, ditto snack prices, otherwise your ticket price would be higher. Cinemas have to hand over most of the ticket revenue for the first two weeks of a run, and they won't make a profit otherwise. Perhaps cinemas could charge a premium for some ad-free sessions?
At our local film society, we've started showing shorts from a nearby film school before the feature - I haven't heard any complaints about that (and our members are VERY vocal about such things - you should have heard the grumbling when the new president decided we should include ONE trailer of the upcoming feature - "a preview of our next attraction").
I've suggested they show a Bugs Bunny cartoon before children's matinees, but I don't think it was favourably received.
What's the equivalent resolution figure for 70mm film, say, in 100ISO? AFAIK, a frame of 100ISO 35mm film is good for a bit over 4K, so a 70mm frame, ~4x the size of a 35mm frame, should be good for 16K, yes?
Grain is not the issue. Artificial grain has been an option in digital post-processing for years. Filmmakers choose film for aesthetic reasons (and because they have enough clout to demand the budget for it. Film stock ain't cheap.)
Are you implying that it is (also) the borrower's responsibility to track sale and re-sale of the debt from corp A to corp B to corp C, and verify correct paperwork each time?
Yes, there's a moral obligation to pay your debts, but if the contract between borrower and lender can't be proven, then there's nothing to enforce.
If the borrower didn't enter the contract intending to find a loophole to skip repayment, but there's a failure on the other side to perform due diligence, then the lender can't really complain about having to write off the debt. It's the lender's problem, not the borrower's. Perhaps next time they purchase a debt from a bank/whatever, they'll remember to not cut corners and not do it on the cheap.
Not enough politicians are prepared to hold the security services to account, and I mean prison time for executives who fail.
"You assured me that this backdoor wouldn't get into the hands of criminals.'
1. "Well, yes, but we didn't take into account that the russians would pay one of our trusted staff to sell them the secrets." OR 2. "Well, yes, but we thought that the NSA would take better precautions to safeguard the information."
"Ok, well, it's prison for you, then. And forget about your pension. We'll put it to use trying to clean up this mess"
Tell me again, how did Philby, Burgess, and MacLean manage for so long?
At least you'll have developed an immunity to that vendor.
Mind you, some vendors don't care. We had a run of defective hard drives in some HP/Compaq PCs bought from one of our preferred vendors. They came back with new hard drives, but no Windows 95. I rang and asked why they weren't returned to the state they were in when originally supplied (i.e. with a working installation of W95), and they said that HP weren't paying them to re-install Windows along with the new hard drive. I suggested that we, as one of their largest customers, should be afforded some consideration. They shrugged. I said it would affect our consideration when the contract came up. Another shrug. So we stopped buying from them, and Dell got the money instead. Last I heard, they had "downsized" and specialised in contract photocopier maintenance.
To this day, I tell people to steer clear of them.
Much like other jurisdictions, some Australians of certain political faiths *hate* the opposition and its leaders with a passion approaching that of, well, conservatives' hate for liberals, and find it difficult to engage in civil debate, preferring to lash out in personal attacks. I admit I held Rudd and Swan in contempt for their smug, "we know best" attitude, and I think Gillard was a breath of fresh air. I despaired when the LNP put Abbott into the leadership, knowing it would set us back many years.
For your info, and because you asked nicely, here's a slightly biased nutshell description:
The currently-in-power LNP (Liberal-National Party consisting of centrists or liberals in the true meaning, moderate conservatives, and some far-right conservatives) are a coalition of right-of-centre blue-bloods and farmers. The blue-bloods believe they are born to rule and get all puzzled when they lose elections - "Why aren't we in power? We're the ruling class!" That's the attitude that upsets those who belong to the opposition, and generates the vitriol. Generally sound economic policies, but lousy social and environment policies. Australians, being anti-authoritarian larrikins (convicts) at heart, eventually get upset with increasingly out-of-touch blue bloods and squatters (the farmers) and vote them out.
The opposition (Labor, factions from moderate left-of-centre to quasi-communist, supposedly representing the workers, or the common man/woman) can't seem to govern the nation without raising taxes and/or borrowing large sums to fund their policies, and they just keep borrowing, and we end up in the shitter economically, and people eventually get sick of the debt and high interest rates, and vote them out. Usually *much* more enlightened social and environmental policies than the LNP, but sadly those policies tend to rely on borrowed funds, and they collapse when the remaining dollars have to go to pay off debt.
Outliers are the greens (mostly left of Labor) who would raise taxes to Swedish levels, but also provide social services and environmental support to match. Otherwise, it's fair to say that the greens do not understand economics. I can't hate them, they're so earnest, and they do manage to swing some nice deals when they hold balance of power in the senate.
Other outliers are far-right christians, firearm owners, real communists, and so on. Fortunately most Australians have excellent bullshit detectors, so these small outliers tend to stay that way. Some of them have figured out that they'll have more influence by working their way into the major parties, which is why we have people like Abbott, and Cory Bernardi, who's just broken ranks and formed his own ultra-conservative group. Hopefully he'll be flushed down the bowl at the next election.
The state police forces, the feds, and various other agencies want this, and they have effective lobbying. State police want it, they lobby their minister, he/she takes that to the table when they all present their cases to the federal government (along with vague threats to cause trouble if they don't get their way), and it all begins to sound like that's what the *people* want, unfortunately the *people* only get to have their say every 3-4 years. I suspect MacGibbon's voice is being drowned out by the sheer volume of lobbying from other side.
Turnbull *should* understand that weakened encryption in popular messaging apps will only drive the problem underground, as another poster put it, terrorists only have to develop their own software, and you're worse off than before.
He was also the winning lawyer in the "Spycatcher" case. He's not stupid, and if we get rid of him, who's the next most likely candidate to step up?
Yup, Abbott.
And don't try to convince anyone that the labor party has better talent, or even the ability to pick better talent - remember Stephen Conroy? Neither party has a stellar record of picking talent over popularity.
It makes me uncomfortable to say it, but he's prefereable to 99% of the others. I suspect that statement, made in the UK to a UK paper, was made to impress politicians in the UK that he's being tough and standing up to the cyber-terrorists.
Why, oh, why don't the vested interests here - banks in particular - step in and tell the politicians that they should stop making stupid statements about encryption. If politicians decide that encryption should be weakened to enable interception by law enforcement, they should know that their own secret operations (e.g. offshore bank accounts) will become vulnerable to exploitation.
Slashdot Mirror
I recall seeing a report about bats being found near the bases of wind turbines - dead, but the cause wasn't immediately apparent. You'd imagine bats' echo-location would be sufficient to avoid blades.
Autopsies revealed severe lung damage, burst capillaries, etc, leading to the supposition of a sudden localised pressure drop, i.e. the vortices near wind turbine blades.
Thanks for that. It generated a seg fault and dumped garbage all over the screen.
Yeah, 'home', as in 'family' - not a bunch of enthusiasts who will readily saturate a connection with ISOs or GoT torrents. I've figured out how to throttle my linux torrents and let them run overnight or off-peak, instead of causing problems for the other people sharing my connection.
Anyway, if you're using that kind of bandwidth, shouldn't you be looking at a commercial solution, and not a hacked domestic router/modem?
So do it with a laptop instead. Find a used but serviceable core2duo or core i3, replace the HDD with a small SSD, and make sure the power management is set to as low a usage as it can be without affecting performance (mostly make sure the screen turns off ASAP - you could even run it headless, how 'bout dat?). One ethernet and one wi-fi interface makes it perfect for home use.
You might even get away without an SSD - run a live distro off a bootable USB. Generous RAM, no swap needed.
Yep, pretty far away from the movie theater business, and we'll keep it that way. There's suggestions from time to time of funding a dedicated cinema, but no-one wants to lose the "dinner and a show" vibe. Maybe we should send a delegation to the Alamo Drafthouse on a fact-finding mission. :-)
Just pointing out that alternatives to the mainstream exist, and it's possible to make a profit by running a cinema, you just can't do it while you're stuck on the Hollywood bandwagon.
OK. I run the projection system for a local film society. It has a 2K projector, a 6.1 sound system, and it's done in a renovated community hall, so less than optimum audio, it's uncomfortably warm in summer, and needs heaters in winter. We show a film every 2 weeks on a Saturday night, and sometimes a children's matinee.
Features and shorts are chosen by a committee of movie-lovers, but it's generally "world cinema", sometimes straying into Hollywood territory. IME 7 out 10 films shown are good entertainment. If it doesn't grab me in the first 10 minutes, I retreat to the projection box and read a book. I get paid whether I like it or not.
It's a social event - not only is it a movie night with a chance to watch something generally more thoughtful than what comes out of Hollywood, but there's a cash bar, and three local restaurants are on roster to provide pre-dinner meals, there's a tea and coffee stand, with home-baked snacks - slices, cake, etc.
People come for a night out, dinner, drinks, chat with friends, and to watch something that ISN'T (usually) hollywood/mainstream. Tickets are AUD$8 members, AUD$13 non-members, meals are about AUD$16 mains, AUD$8 dessert, drinks aren't the cheapest, but all the volunteers (and me) get a free meal and 2x free drinks.
Hall capacity is 220 seats, and it's rare to not have a full house. Late-comers are often told "sorry, we're full".
I wouldn't call myself a shill for the movie industry. What I get paid doesn't cover the time, effort, and skills that I apply to the job.
Tell me, how do you make a movie (film or digital), without lenses?
Hint, it's in the name - "lens flare". It's got nothing to do with the capture medium, and everything to do with the Director's aesthetics (or the DoP).
You know what you'll see if you stand next to a screen observing a film being projected? Grain. Sometimes more, sometimes less, depending on what the film-makers have decided, but limited by the state of the technology.
You know what you'll see if you stand next to a screen observing a digital file being projected? Pixels. Sometimes more, sometimes less, depending on what the film-makers have decided, but limited by the state of the technology.
The "cinematic experience" means different things to different people, but one popularly-accepted view (by no means the only one) is that the storytelling experience requires a boundary between the audience and the story-teller (i.e. the screen and speakers). When that boundary starts to become indistinct - via 3D, higher frame rates, surround-sound, etc, in other words a more immersive experience, then the storytelling experience is weakened and becomes less satisfactory to the audience. YMMV.
That's a good idea, but two minutes should be enough to generate interest. Five minutes of cut scenes will spoil the anticipation, because editors will put the biggest, baddest, most awsome action scenes in the trailer.
Also, ads generate revenue for the cinema, ditto snack prices, otherwise your ticket price would be higher. Cinemas have to hand over most of the ticket revenue for the first two weeks of a run, and they won't make a profit otherwise. Perhaps cinemas could charge a premium for some ad-free sessions?
At our local film society, we've started showing shorts from a nearby film school before the feature - I haven't heard any complaints about that (and our members are VERY vocal about such things - you should have heard the grumbling when the new president decided we should include ONE trailer of the upcoming feature - "a preview of our next attraction").
I've suggested they show a Bugs Bunny cartoon before children's matinees, but I don't think it was favourably received.
What's the equivalent resolution figure for 70mm film, say, in 100ISO? AFAIK, a frame of 100ISO 35mm film is good for a bit over 4K, so a 70mm frame, ~4x the size of a 35mm frame, should be good for 16K, yes?
Grain is not the issue. Artificial grain has been an option in digital post-processing for years. Filmmakers choose film for aesthetic reasons (and because they have enough clout to demand the budget for it. Film stock ain't cheap.)
that kind of transparency generates a social pressure for high earners to justify their income.
Hmmmm, I get peers when I add publicbt and openbittorrent to the trackers.
Tracker announce: transamrit.net: error.
FWIW, other torrents are working.
Yes, I know this isn't tech support.
No.
Foxtel not available where you live?
Not that I would recommend Foxtel to anyone, but it is the legitimate GoT channel in Australia.
My password consists of eight asterisks, so there!
Are you implying that it is (also) the borrower's responsibility to track sale and re-sale of the debt from corp A to corp B to corp C, and verify correct paperwork each time?
Yes, there's a moral obligation to pay your debts, but if the contract between borrower and lender can't be proven, then there's nothing to enforce.
If the borrower didn't enter the contract intending to find a loophole to skip repayment, but there's a failure on the other side to perform due diligence, then the lender can't really complain about having to write off the debt. It's the lender's problem, not the borrower's. Perhaps next time they purchase a debt from a bank/whatever, they'll remember to not cut corners and not do it on the cheap.
Not enough politicians are prepared to hold the security services to account, and I mean prison time for executives who fail.
"You assured me that this backdoor wouldn't get into the hands of criminals.'
1. "Well, yes, but we didn't take into account that the russians would pay one of our trusted staff to sell them the secrets."
OR
2. "Well, yes, but we thought that the NSA would take better precautions to safeguard the information."
"Ok, well, it's prison for you, then. And forget about your pension. We'll put it to use trying to clean up this mess"
Tell me again, how did Philby, Burgess, and MacLean manage for so long?
At least you'll have developed an immunity to that vendor.
Mind you, some vendors don't care. We had a run of defective hard drives in some HP/Compaq PCs bought from one of our preferred vendors. They came back with new hard drives, but no Windows 95. I rang and asked why they weren't returned to the state they were in when originally supplied (i.e. with a working installation of W95), and they said that HP weren't paying them to re-install Windows along with the new hard drive. I suggested that we, as one of their largest customers, should be afforded some consideration. They shrugged. I said it would affect our consideration when the contract came up. Another shrug. So we stopped buying from them, and Dell got the money instead. Last I heard, they had "downsized" and specialised in contract photocopier maintenance.
To this day, I tell people to steer clear of them.
Much like other jurisdictions, some Australians of certain political faiths *hate* the opposition and its leaders with a passion approaching that of, well, conservatives' hate for liberals, and find it difficult to engage in civil debate, preferring to lash out in personal attacks. I admit I held Rudd and Swan in contempt for their smug, "we know best" attitude, and I think Gillard was a breath of fresh air. I despaired when the LNP put Abbott into the leadership, knowing it would set us back many years.
For your info, and because you asked nicely, here's a slightly biased nutshell description:
The currently-in-power LNP (Liberal-National Party consisting of centrists or liberals in the true meaning, moderate conservatives, and some far-right conservatives) are a coalition of right-of-centre blue-bloods and farmers. The blue-bloods believe they are born to rule and get all puzzled when they lose elections - "Why aren't we in power? We're the ruling class!" That's the attitude that upsets those who belong to the opposition, and generates the vitriol. Generally sound economic policies, but lousy social and environment policies. Australians, being anti-authoritarian larrikins (convicts) at heart, eventually get upset with increasingly out-of-touch blue bloods and squatters (the farmers) and vote them out.
The opposition (Labor, factions from moderate left-of-centre to quasi-communist, supposedly representing the workers, or the common man/woman) can't seem to govern the nation without raising taxes and/or borrowing large sums to fund their policies, and they just keep borrowing, and we end up in the shitter economically, and people eventually get sick of the debt and high interest rates, and vote them out. Usually *much* more enlightened social and environmental policies than the LNP, but sadly those policies tend to rely on borrowed funds, and they collapse when the remaining dollars have to go to pay off debt.
Outliers are the greens (mostly left of Labor) who would raise taxes to Swedish levels, but also provide social services and environmental support to match. Otherwise, it's fair to say that the greens do not understand economics. I can't hate them, they're so earnest, and they do manage to swing some nice deals when they hold balance of power in the senate.
Other outliers are far-right christians, firearm owners, real communists, and so on. Fortunately most Australians have excellent bullshit detectors, so these small outliers tend to stay that way. Some of them have figured out that they'll have more influence by working their way into the major parties, which is why we have people like Abbott, and Cory Bernardi, who's just broken ranks and formed his own ultra-conservative group. Hopefully he'll be flushed down the bowl at the next election.
Kryten?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
He was just as stupid. And it wasn't Turnbull who KO'd the all-fibre NBN, but he hasn't got a hope of funding it now (and neither does labor).
The state police forces, the feds, and various other agencies want this, and they have effective lobbying. State police want it, they lobby their minister, he/she takes that to the table when they all present their cases to the federal government (along with vague threats to cause trouble if they don't get their way), and it all begins to sound like that's what the *people* want, unfortunately the *people* only get to have their say every 3-4 years. I suspect MacGibbon's voice is being drowned out by the sheer volume of lobbying from other side.
Turnbull *should* understand that weakened encryption in popular messaging apps will only drive the problem underground, as another poster put it, terrorists only have to develop their own software, and you're worse off than before.
He was also the winning lawyer in the "Spycatcher" case. He's not stupid, and if we get rid of him, who's the next most likely candidate to step up?
Yup, Abbott.
And don't try to convince anyone that the labor party has better talent, or even the ability to pick better talent - remember Stephen Conroy? Neither party has a stellar record of picking talent over popularity.
Sadly, Turnbull is one of the smarter ones.
It makes me uncomfortable to say it, but he's prefereable to 99% of the others. I suspect that statement, made in the UK to a UK paper, was made to impress politicians in the UK that he's being tough and standing up to the cyber-terrorists.
Why, oh, why don't the vested interests here - banks in particular - step in and tell the politicians that they should stop making stupid statements about encryption. If politicians decide that encryption should be weakened to enable interception by law enforcement, they should know that their own secret operations (e.g. offshore bank accounts) will become vulnerable to exploitation.