I remember reading once that the British Colonies in America were very litigious.
Some colonies were worse than others. The Salem Witch Trials are definitely part of that tradition.
Historians often point out that many of the accusers & accused in the witch trials had a history of litigation and disagreement - property lines, grazing rights, etc. The witch trials were a great opportunity to fabricate evidence and settle scores against a rivals.
Among the many legacies and lessons from the witch trials are among the most badass last words ever uttered: "More weight" (Giles Corey)
The guy was innocent; he knew it, and refused to take part in that corrupt little charade, and effectively have them the finger with his dying breath.
Unfortunately governments over time adopt the attitude that they are allowed to do things if it's not prohibited by law.
I'd say that viewpoint is remarkably ignorant of history; the notion that governments are "constrained" is a neologism at best.
In the US, the Bill of Rights is dominated by a list of restrictions on the government's abilities. The government won't restrict free speech, it won't favor a religion, it won't prevent weapon ownership, it won't house soldiers in your home, won't take your property without due process... a large portion of it expresses that there were restrictions on the government, not a list of permissions for what is allowed.
Even in the US, the federal government has the full ability to enlarge its abilities or restrict ours. The catch, of course, is that many cases would require a constitutional amendment - a high bar, to be sure, but not impossible.
Governments print their own money. In that situation, a monetary "reward" is utterly meaningless.
As a result, government agencies are interested in the information on a device.
On the "commercial" side, think about it for a second: There's no legal requirement I'm aware of that compels a hacker to tell Apple anything; so if Apple finds out you didn't share exploit information with them, what are they gonna do? Ask nicely the next time?
In contrast, if a crime boss you've worked with finds out you sold the hack to Apple instead of him, well...
I hope you like concrete shoes.
Being able to make a name for yourself while being simultaneously anonymous... it's a lot harder than using TOR and Bitcoin with a pseudonym. It's made doubly difficult as you're dealing with people who have the resources and motivation to unmask you.
It's just the classic trade off of cost vs capability. Solid boosters have traditionally been much cheaper, and have a very good record for reliability.
(Yes, yes, the shuttle SRB's failed when launched in conditions way outside of their design limits... and the same will happen if you abuse a liquid booster as badly)
Only Stalin's Russia was so harsh as to demand gulag time for a rocket failure. (And to his credit, Korolev took the full blame, knowing he was indispensable)
I'm not even convinced Norh Korea would be so shortsighted as to send a rocket scientist to a salt mine over a launch failure.
China definitely wouldn't... they save that for dissidents
I'm not sure if you are referring to lossy compression or dynamic compression
I totally get people buying lossy compression - the simple fact is that AAC and MP3 compressed music is indistinguishable from the original in double blind studies.
Dynamic (volume) compression, on the other hand, is another matter entirely. Consumers have no choice over its use. It's most striking when you compare an old (1980's) album vs a new (2011 "remastered" version. You have to turn up the volume on the old version, but you immediately hear the difference.
The YouTube Channel Production Advice has many, many videos from a mastering engineer and goes into the subject at length, and in detail.
IIRC, many MP3 encoders had a 'brick wall' liter at ~16 kHz at lower nitrates — which isn't a bad trade off for compression: higher frequencies take more bits to record. And the VAST majority of humans above 18 years can't hear past 16 kHz at safe volumes.
(In general, the threshold volume to even hear 20 kHz is also roughly the same as the pain threshold (and well above the damage level)
AAC is a huge improvement over MP3 at low bitrates, and does not have the brick wall at 16 kHz; it's a moot point as most people use bitrates over 256 job/s. HE-AAC further improves low bitrate performance. (But few use it, because efficiency be damned, more bits must be better!)
FLAC and Apple Lossless are lossless: its raw PCM bitstream compressed like a zip file - when decompressed, they are bit for bit identical to each other and the original.
DAT, on the other hand, is a pure PCM: IIRC DAT had even better frequency capabilities than CD (48 kHz vs 44.1). DAT was one of the primary recording mediums for live music, as well as the low end of the professional recording industry. There are no limitations to DAT's recording and playback capabilities; the only thing the CD does better is skip songs.
The music industry did kill the DAT as a consumer medium — they required a form of DRM which included audible garbage. Of course, they tried to kill pretty much every consumer recordable format (MiniDisc, DCC, MP3 players, burning your own mix CD's, and even compact cassettes.
Overall, the world of consumer audio is full of charlatans selling expensive snake oil. A lot of people claim loud & long they have golden ears, but nobody's been able to demonstrate it in double blind testing.
Far, far fewer have taken a basic signal processing course (and have learned the actual science of sound). I die a little every time I see the step-sine vs smooth curve "comparison" for digital vs analog audio. (Including in a recent issue of Popular Mechanics).
I do not miss the needle noise, premature wear, groove distortion, wow & flutter, or compromised frequency response.
Give the Loudness War its due: Many CD's are mastered so badly that in spite of the problems with needle noise, premature wear, groove distortion, wow & flutter, and a compromised frequency response, it's quite easy to find a CD that still sounds worse than its Vinyl pressing.
The deciding factor is how the music is mastered for the medium.
Vinyl records are limited by physics - the acceleration of the stylus in the groove. If the recording goes beyond its limits, the stylus will skip, ruin needles, and cause distortion. Since vinyl is an old format, its limits are very well understood, and engineers know to stay away from them.
This generally makes Vinyl immune to the Loudness War (and in spite of lip service to the contrary, it's still being waged).
A well-mastered CD will sound better than a well-mastered Vinyl record; it has more dynamic range, and isn't limited by the physics of the needle, dirt, etc.
The problem is the Loudness War makes it easy to find a CD that is mastered so badly that the Vinyl version is unquestionably better.
We already pay $60,000/year for the generic version of some drugs -- and those drugs were priced at $19k/year while they were still patent protected in 1997. It's insane, but yes, prices have gone up several hundred percent for an old and outdated drug. The market has reached the point where instead of trying to undercut the competition, a company will raise its prices to match the competitor's. And the same is true for surgeries, X-Ray's, hospital stays, doctor visits, etc.
By that logic, we'll soon shovel over $10 to use an unmaintained app which cost $1 when it was released in 2007.
So is the notion that advertisers will somehow decide to spend 3x more for the same pair of eyeballs.
I'm flattered, really, but advertisers already know the trash my eyes are used to seeing. They know I ain't picky, and spending 300% more to reach my eyeballs is a waste of money.
How is this different from any other article that amounts to vapid sensationalism?
While there is definitely room to grow, it's not in markets which are already developed - North America & the EU, for example, have pretty high market penetration for 'apps' - to the point where many homeless in the US have phones with 'apps'.
Expanding into high population areas like China (and the rest of Asia) will certainly help growth - but just because there are more users does not mean a poor farmer in China or India has the ability to pay the same amount of money as a poor farmer in the US or EU.
The distinction between what people are, and what they choose to believe is not the basis of Constitutional protections. The protections specifically listed in the Bill of Rights were made not based of whether the traits were objective or subjective, but based on which traits had historically been the target of unfair discrimination. Religious persecution has a rather ugly history behind it (and in fact was the reason a lot of the early colonists moved from Europe to the Americas), so religious freedom was enshrined in the Constitution.
Constitutional protections on the freedom of religion either mean something, or they don't. If they don't mean anything, then what good is any other part of that document?
I don't see those handling being dragged across concrete, asphalt, and dirt all that well. Probably just get grit stuck in the bearing and it'd seize up.
We need a safety standard for luggage wheels, people get their backs hurt from this problem
Ahh, first world problems.
I mean, you've got a point, but still... I can see it now:
Luggage caster safety act of 2153:
- Luggage casters shall be capable of withstanding the weight of the luggage when all available volume is filled with Osmium. - Luggage shall resist tipover while filled with Osmium - Luggage shall automatically call emergency services should luggage tip over.
Just don't ask why I'm wheeling 4,000 kg of osmium through the airport. Those airline bastards charged me $25 for that bag, and I'm getting my money's worth.
Slashdot Mirror
There are many words to describe Comic Sans, but humorous has never been one of them. It's less "comic" than it is "drunk and desperate."
Calibri was "released" with Windows Vista's rather large semi-public beta program as early as 2005.
That possibility is the point any competent defense would try to make.
That doesn't mean it was likely, which is prosecution's logical counterpoint.
I remember reading once that the British Colonies in America were very litigious.
Some colonies were worse than others. The Salem Witch Trials are definitely part of that tradition.
Historians often point out that many of the accusers & accused in the witch trials had a history of litigation and disagreement - property lines, grazing rights, etc. The witch trials were a great opportunity to fabricate evidence and settle scores against a rivals.
Among the many legacies and lessons from the witch trials are among the most badass last words ever uttered: "More weight" (Giles Corey)
The guy was innocent; he knew it, and refused to take part in that corrupt little charade, and effectively have them the finger with his dying breath.
Unfortunately governments over time adopt the attitude that they are allowed to do things if it's not prohibited by law.
I'd say that viewpoint is remarkably ignorant of history; the notion that governments are "constrained" is a neologism at best.
In the US, the Bill of Rights is dominated by a list of restrictions on the government's abilities. The government won't restrict free speech, it won't favor a religion, it won't prevent weapon ownership, it won't house soldiers in your home, won't take your property without due process... a large portion of it expresses that there were restrictions on the government, not a list of permissions for what is allowed.
Even in the US, the federal government has the full ability to enlarge its abilities or restrict ours. The catch, of course, is that many cases would require a constitutional amendment - a high bar, to be sure, but not impossible.
Your experience differs from mine. I loathed the Jawbone headset I was given - by a relative who absolutely hated it too.
The only positive thing about the experience is that it didn't cost me anything.
Does "per person" matter in this case? The jockeys rode as cargo - they weren't interested in the destination.
Another thing to consider:
Governments print their own money. In that situation, a monetary "reward" is utterly meaningless.
As a result, government agencies are interested in the information on a device.
On the "commercial" side, think about it for a second: There's no legal requirement I'm aware of that compels a hacker to tell Apple anything; so if Apple finds out you didn't share exploit information with them, what are they gonna do? Ask nicely the next time?
In contrast, if a crime boss you've worked with finds out you sold the hack to Apple instead of him, well...
I hope you like concrete shoes.
Being able to make a name for yourself while being simultaneously anonymous... it's a lot harder than using TOR and Bitcoin with a pseudonym. It's made doubly difficult as you're dealing with people who have the resources and motivation to unmask you.
When does a firearm's "caliber" *not* refer to the inner diameter of the barrel, or external diameter of the bullet?
Otherwise, I agree completely; the amount of propellant matters...
The Soyuz rocket discards liquid boosters.
It's just the classic trade off of cost vs capability. Solid boosters have traditionally been much cheaper, and have a very good record for reliability.
(Yes, yes, the shuttle SRB's failed when launched in conditions way outside of their design limits... and the same will happen if you abuse a liquid booster as badly)
Only Stalin's Russia was so harsh as to demand gulag time for a rocket failure. (And to his credit, Korolev took the full blame, knowing he was indispensable)
I'm not even convinced Norh Korea would be so shortsighted as to send a rocket scientist to a salt mine over a launch failure.
China definitely wouldn't... they save that for dissidents
I'm not sure if you are referring to lossy compression or dynamic compression
I totally get people buying lossy compression - the simple fact is that AAC and MP3 compressed music is indistinguishable from the original in double blind studies.
Dynamic (volume) compression, on the other hand, is another matter entirely. Consumers have no choice over its use. It's most striking when you compare an old (1980's) album vs a new (2011 "remastered" version. You have to turn up the volume on the old version, but you immediately hear the difference.
The YouTube Channel Production Advice has many, many videos from a mastering engineer and goes into the subject at length, and in detail.
IIRC, many MP3 encoders had a 'brick wall' liter at ~16 kHz at lower nitrates — which isn't a bad trade off for compression: higher frequencies take more bits to record. And the VAST majority of humans above 18 years can't hear past 16 kHz at safe volumes.
(In general, the threshold volume to even hear 20 kHz is also roughly the same as the pain threshold (and well above the damage level)
AAC is a huge improvement over MP3 at low bitrates, and does not have the brick wall at 16 kHz; it's a moot point as most people use bitrates over 256 job/s. HE-AAC further improves low bitrate performance. (But few use it, because efficiency be damned, more bits must be better!)
FLAC and Apple Lossless are lossless: its raw PCM bitstream compressed like a zip file - when decompressed, they are bit for bit identical to each other and the original.
DAT, on the other hand, is a pure PCM: IIRC DAT had even better frequency capabilities than CD (48 kHz vs 44.1). DAT was one of the primary recording mediums for live music, as well as the low end of the professional recording industry. There are no limitations to DAT's recording and playback capabilities; the only thing the CD does better is skip songs.
The music industry did kill the DAT as a consumer medium — they required a form of DRM which included audible garbage. Of course, they tried to kill pretty much every consumer recordable format (MiniDisc, DCC, MP3 players, burning your own mix CD's, and even compact cassettes.
Overall, the world of consumer audio is full of charlatans selling expensive snake oil. A lot of people claim loud & long they have golden ears, but nobody's been able to demonstrate it in double blind testing.
Far, far fewer have taken a basic signal processing course (and have learned the actual science of sound). I die a little every time I see the step-sine vs smooth curve "comparison" for digital vs analog audio. (Including in a recent issue of Popular Mechanics).
I do not miss the needle noise, premature wear, groove distortion, wow & flutter, or compromised frequency response.
Give the Loudness War its due: Many CD's are mastered so badly that in spite of the problems with needle noise, premature wear, groove distortion, wow & flutter, and a compromised frequency response, it's quite easy to find a CD that still sounds worse than its Vinyl pressing.
I have no idea if vinyl sounds any better
The deciding factor is how the music is mastered for the medium.
Vinyl records are limited by physics - the acceleration of the stylus in the groove. If the recording goes beyond its limits, the stylus will skip, ruin needles, and cause distortion. Since vinyl is an old format, its limits are very well understood, and engineers know to stay away from them.
This generally makes Vinyl immune to the Loudness War (and in spite of lip service to the contrary, it's still being waged).
A well-mastered CD will sound better than a well-mastered Vinyl record; it has more dynamic range, and isn't limited by the physics of the needle, dirt, etc.
The problem is the Loudness War makes it easy to find a CD that is mastered so badly that the Vinyl version is unquestionably better.
Well, maybe they're using healthcare logic:
We already pay $60,000/year for the generic version of some drugs -- and those drugs were priced at $19k/year while they were still patent protected in 1997. It's insane, but yes, prices have gone up several hundred percent for an old and outdated drug. The market has reached the point where instead of trying to undercut the competition, a company will raise its prices to match the competitor's. And the same is true for surgeries, X-Ray's, hospital stays, doctor visits, etc.
By that logic, we'll soon shovel over $10 to use an unmaintained app which cost $1 when it was released in 2007.
So is the notion that advertisers will somehow decide to spend 3x more for the same pair of eyeballs.
I'm flattered, really, but advertisers already know the trash my eyes are used to seeing. They know I ain't picky, and spending 300% more to reach my eyeballs is a waste of money.
How is this different from any other article that amounts to vapid sensationalism?
While there is definitely room to grow, it's not in markets which are already developed - North America & the EU, for example, have pretty high market penetration for 'apps' - to the point where many homeless in the US have phones with 'apps'.
Expanding into high population areas like China (and the rest of Asia) will certainly help growth - but just because there are more users does not mean a poor farmer in China or India has the ability to pay the same amount of money as a poor farmer in the US or EU.
The distinction between what people are, and what they choose to believe is not the basis of Constitutional protections. The protections specifically listed in the Bill of Rights were made not based of whether the traits were objective or subjective, but based on which traits had historically been the target of unfair discrimination. Religious persecution has a rather ugly history behind it (and in fact was the reason a lot of the early colonists moved from Europe to the Americas), so religious freedom was enshrined in the Constitution.
Constitutional protections on the freedom of religion either mean something, or they don't. If they don't mean anything, then what good is any other part of that document?
True, but unlike gold, they'd probably think it's just some heavy metal that's way too heavy to get past the supervisor.
Regulation in this administration/congress/senate? Why don't you just go punch out God while you're at it?
Yeah, I'd go with neither - agencies from both nations are going to do the same thing, for the same reasons.
You mean like how they sell a "1/4" pound hamburger based on the uncooked weight?
Selling "1/4 lb" of cooked hamburger is the equivalent to selling a dressed 2x4.
Roller balls... like a supersized version of a ball point pen?
I don't see those handling being dragged across concrete, asphalt, and dirt all that well. Probably just get grit stuck in the bearing and it'd seize up.
We need a safety standard for luggage wheels, people get their backs hurt from this problem
Ahh, first world problems.
I mean, you've got a point, but still... I can see it now:
Luggage caster safety act of 2153:
- Luggage casters shall be capable of withstanding the weight of the luggage when all available volume is filled with Osmium.
- Luggage shall resist tipover while filled with Osmium
- Luggage shall automatically call emergency services should luggage tip over.
Just don't ask why I'm wheeling 4,000 kg of osmium through the airport. Those airline bastards charged me $25 for that bag, and I'm getting my money's worth.
So what this is telling me is that I need to install coilovers on my suitcase.
Just how badly do you want some homeless guy/gal to steal your suitcase from baggage claim? A suitcase like that signals they are a somebody.