Heh. Maybe it's because the people under discussion in this thread have only recently learned to program (i.e. in the last 10 years). Certainly anyone self-taught who learned in the 80s or 90s couldn't avoid learning how to implement data structures or write algorithms.
i don't think that's true. People should be expected to raise themselves to minimum standards, not meet them ahead of time. After all, it's basically effortless to look it up and learn what it means, and lazy evaluation in reading slashdot doesn't have any negative consequences I can think of.
*My* grandmother can use them just fine. My mom and grandmother are both technically inclined. (My mom is 71 now, and is a grandmother herself.) Being elderly does not by itself cause computer illiteracy, just as being young doesn't magically cause someone to understand how computers work.
Great! Now you just need 49 more fiancees to prove GP wrong!
In all seriousness, a list of requirements by state are online here. Although many states do require ID, I didn't find any that required a driver's license.
I can attempt to explain two things. First, you can beat the time-frequency uncertainty principle if you're willing to be wrong sometimes. The ear does this, functioning foremost as a wavefront detector.(*) Second, most sounds including the human voice follow an approximation of the harmonic series. (Always an approximation; sometimes, it's not a very good model at all.) So you can detect the upper partials and reconstruct the fundamental if the audio in question fits the model well enough and the harmonics are present and measurable. Again, this works by being wrong some of the time.
I found an article detailing how the Guinness record was measured here. It was only measured for nine seconds; this gives us a (minimum) bandwidth of.1Hz, which at.0189Hz would be within error around 10 semitones up or 30 semitones down (though I had to clobber the numbers pretty hard with the error bar), keeping in mind semitones are separated by a factor of 2^(1/12). The transform to frequency domain was further inaccurate due to the window size, and the 2270 is only specced down to 3Hz in any case, so the measured numbers probably contained a generous helping of error.
So while I'm no expert, it looks like the the bandwidth of the measured sound definitely exceeds half a semitone in either direction, probably by at least one order of magnitude.
(*) Hartmann, W. H. (1995). "The physical description of signals," in "Hearing," Edited by B. C. J. Moore, San Diego, Academic Press, 1-40.
Quite a lot. I come from a family of readers, and my mother in particular collected science fiction and fantasy for most of her life. She's still alive (and now 71 years old!), but I took a lot of the books with me when I moved out.
On the other hand, my mother listens to nothing but church hymns, and my father nothing but marches. I like a lot of music, but answer to your question is zero in that particular column.
True, though the selection of "difficult" material doesn't fit neatly into "classical stuff or electronica" like you suggest. And of course, 320kbit MP3 usually works pretty well on both of those.
(It's also true that some extremely trained listeners can beat chance in distinguishing 320kbit mp3s from originals. But this is only barely true.)
More usefully, it's nice having uncompressed audio so you can do things to it without noticeable degradation, as many activities involve an encoding step, and MP3 isn't designed for tandem encoding.
I suppose that depends which frequencies you mean by "high".
Noise-induced hearing loss doesn't usually hit the very high frequencies first. Usually it fits Fletcher-Munson, so you get a notch around 4k first. (It varies.) That's still fairly high, of course, but it's distinct from the very high end loss (15k+) that tends to come with age.
MP3 does suck compared to more modern codecs. You haven't done the research yourself, though.
It's true that extremely trained listeners can beat chance comparing a 320kbps MP3 to a CD, but that doesn't mean even they can consistently tell the difference. It's very tough, even for these people. And you're almost certainly not one of them, since you think you can "definitely" hear the difference, which is not supported by any research I'm aware of.
You also meaninglessly specify a bitrate (300+) without mentioning which codec you mean--is it AAC, OGG, or "others"? In the case of AAC, for example, you're unlikely to be able to tell the difference above 160kbit/s.
Not true. The more nonlinear the listening environment, the less accurate the assumptions of the psychoacoustic model used by MP3; more of the quantization noise added by the encoding process will be above masking thresholds.
In a good listening environment, given typical material and a good codec, very few people can hear the difference between 256kbit and the original. Vanishingly few can tell the difference at 320kbit. But 192kbit and below, where many people can tell the difference, does not become magically less degraded because you've added nonlinearities to the system--it becomes more degraded, and is more likely to be noticed, not less.
It's not directly relevant, but you can memorize this fairly easily by breaking it into 3 sets of three, memorizing each set separately, then repeating them in sequence.
What kind of bullshit moderation is this? +1 Informative? And it's not just this comment. Throughout the comments on this story, I see ignorance, racism, and bullshit not only posted but modded up.
This is about 6900 games, and $1.2M / 6900 is about $173. Sure, there are probably some valuable games in there. But that price seems very, very excessive for what it is.
I'm not lying. You impeach your own character when you throw that word around. Your opinion apparently differs, so I can assume you had quite a fast computer in 1997.
Plenty of people felt E was too bloated to run back then. Certainly my computer was fast enough to handle FVWM, but ran dog slow with E. If you search for opinions from the 90s (since your memory is apparently failing you), you'll find other people had similar experiences and opinions. Being bloated was rather the point of E--adding unnecessary eye candy because they valued prettiness over speed.
Personally, I used DR-0.11, which was buggy and crashy, contained a bunch of amusingly tiled nudes, and was all-around pretty ugly. By DR-0.14, it was still pretty slow and buggy. Clearly it's come a long way since then, and obviously computers are much faster now, but I'm sticking to my assessment of what it was:-P
Most people I knew used them for imports. Me, I just got a Japanese PS2.
A store around here briefly sold debug PS2s which were region free but couldn't play DVDs (at least without a memory card that wasn't supplied), but that seemed kind of shady to me.
These days, I'm not interested in a console that's region locked. It instantly halves the value in my mind, and thinking that way, none of them seem like they're worth the money.
Assuming those six variables are independent and random, rather than caused by the same sort of error six times in a row. What do you suppose the odds are on that?
For years, I had email notifications on my Youtube account. Then Google changed it over to a SSO model, and forced to associate my YT account with a Google account.
I stopped getting any email notifications. Half a year later, I discovered they were all in my unused gmail account. As it turns out, Google silently discarded my actual email address, and although you can add it back, it's a no-op, as they won't send notifications to the address you add. So you have to receive everything at a dummy gmail account, then forward to your actual email address.
I've had no problems with Facebook doing anything like this, because I have all of Facebook's domains permanently blocked.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh. Maybe it's because the people under discussion in this thread have only recently learned to program (i.e. in the last 10 years). Certainly anyone self-taught who learned in the 80s or 90s couldn't avoid learning how to implement data structures or write algorithms.
Not true at all. I'd expect anyone who was competently self-taught to understand both.
i don't think that's true. People should be expected to raise themselves to minimum standards, not meet them ahead of time. After all, it's basically effortless to look it up and learn what it means, and lazy evaluation in reading slashdot doesn't have any negative consequences I can think of.
I don't know. I tried a depth-first evaluation, but it's not done yet!
Were you able to change her back!?
*My* grandmother can use them just fine. My mom and grandmother are both technically inclined. (My mom is 71 now, and is a grandmother herself.) Being elderly does not by itself cause computer illiteracy, just as being young doesn't magically cause someone to understand how computers work.
Great! Now you just need 49 more fiancees to prove GP wrong!
In all seriousness, a list of requirements by state are online here. Although many states do require ID, I didn't find any that required a driver's license.
I can attempt to explain two things. First, you can beat the time-frequency uncertainty principle if you're willing to be wrong sometimes. The ear does this, functioning foremost as a wavefront detector.(*) Second, most sounds including the human voice follow an approximation of the harmonic series. (Always an approximation; sometimes, it's not a very good model at all.) So you can detect the upper partials and reconstruct the fundamental if the audio in question fits the model well enough and the harmonics are present and measurable. Again, this works by being wrong some of the time.
I found an article detailing how the Guinness record was measured here. It was only measured for nine seconds; this gives us a (minimum) bandwidth of .1Hz, which at .0189Hz would be within error around 10 semitones up or 30 semitones down (though I had to clobber the numbers pretty hard with the error bar), keeping in mind semitones are separated by a factor of 2^(1/12). The transform to frequency domain was further inaccurate due to the window size, and the 2270 is only specced down to 3Hz in any case, so the measured numbers probably contained a generous helping of error.
So while I'm no expert, it looks like the the bandwidth of the measured sound definitely exceeds half a semitone in either direction, probably by at least one order of magnitude.
(*) Hartmann, W. H. (1995). "The physical description of signals," in "Hearing," Edited by B. C. J. Moore, San Diego, Academic Press, 1-40.
I know what you mean, but I want to clarify your point:
Quite a lot. I come from a family of readers, and my mother in particular collected science fiction and fantasy for most of her life. She's still alive (and now 71 years old!), but I took a lot of the books with me when I moved out.
On the other hand, my mother listens to nothing but church hymns, and my father nothing but marches. I like a lot of music, but answer to your question is zero in that particular column.
True, though the selection of "difficult" material doesn't fit neatly into "classical stuff or electronica" like you suggest. And of course, 320kbit MP3 usually works pretty well on both of those.
(It's also true that some extremely trained listeners can beat chance in distinguishing 320kbit mp3s from originals. But this is only barely true.)
More usefully, it's nice having uncompressed audio so you can do things to it without noticeable degradation, as many activities involve an encoding step, and MP3 isn't designed for tandem encoding.
Just a nit: is nit not? Or is it not?
I suppose that depends which frequencies you mean by "high".
Noise-induced hearing loss doesn't usually hit the very high frequencies first. Usually it fits Fletcher-Munson, so you get a notch around 4k first. (It varies.) That's still fairly high, of course, but it's distinct from the very high end loss (15k+) that tends to come with age.
MP3 does suck compared to more modern codecs. You haven't done the research yourself, though.
It's true that extremely trained listeners can beat chance comparing a 320kbps MP3 to a CD, but that doesn't mean even they can consistently tell the difference. It's very tough, even for these people. And you're almost certainly not one of them, since you think you can "definitely" hear the difference, which is not supported by any research I'm aware of.
You also meaninglessly specify a bitrate (300+) without mentioning which codec you mean--is it AAC, OGG, or "others"? In the case of AAC, for example, you're unlikely to be able to tell the difference above 160kbit/s.
Not true. The more nonlinear the listening environment, the less accurate the assumptions of the psychoacoustic model used by MP3; more of the quantization noise added by the encoding process will be above masking thresholds.
In a good listening environment, given typical material and a good codec, very few people can hear the difference between 256kbit and the original. Vanishingly few can tell the difference at 320kbit. But 192kbit and below, where many people can tell the difference, does not become magically less degraded because you've added nonlinearities to the system--it becomes more degraded, and is more likely to be noticed, not less.
That's nine, not ten!
It's not directly relevant, but you can memorize this fairly easily by breaking it into 3 sets of three, memorizing each set separately, then repeating them in sequence.
What kind of bullshit moderation is this? +1 Informative? And it's not just this comment. Throughout the comments on this story, I see ignorance, racism, and bullshit not only posted but modded up.
I guess I'll be meta-moderating more often.
I don't believe them. I'm not saying they're wrong, but I don't believe their assertion has any connection to the facts, one way or the other.
This is about 6900 games, and $1.2M / 6900 is about $173. Sure, there are probably some valuable games in there. But that price seems very, very excessive for what it is.
I'm not lying. You impeach your own character when you throw that word around. Your opinion apparently differs, so I can assume you had quite a fast computer in 1997.
Plenty of people felt E was too bloated to run back then. Certainly my computer was fast enough to handle FVWM, but ran dog slow with E. If you search for opinions from the 90s (since your memory is apparently failing you), you'll find other people had similar experiences and opinions. Being bloated was rather the point of E--adding unnecessary eye candy because they valued prettiness over speed.
Personally, I used DR-0.11, which was buggy and crashy, contained a bunch of amusingly tiled nudes, and was all-around pretty ugly. By DR-0.14, it was still pretty slow and buggy. Clearly it's come a long way since then, and obviously computers are much faster now, but I'm sticking to my assessment of what it was :-P
I still prefer minimalism.
Most people I knew used them for imports. Me, I just got a Japanese PS2.
A store around here briefly sold debug PS2s which were region free but couldn't play DVDs (at least without a memory card that wasn't supplied), but that seemed kind of shady to me.
These days, I'm not interested in a console that's region locked. It instantly halves the value in my mind, and thinking that way, none of them seem like they're worth the money.
Funny how yesterday's bloated crap becomes today's lean and fast. I still can't stomach Enlightenment, though.
Assuming those six variables are independent and random, rather than caused by the same sort of error six times in a row. What do you suppose the odds are on that?
For years, I had email notifications on my Youtube account. Then Google changed it over to a SSO model, and forced to associate my YT account with a Google account.
I stopped getting any email notifications. Half a year later, I discovered they were all in my unused gmail account. As it turns out, Google silently discarded my actual email address, and although you can add it back, it's a no-op, as they won't send notifications to the address you add. So you have to receive everything at a dummy gmail account, then forward to your actual email address.
I've had no problems with Facebook doing anything like this, because I have all of Facebook's domains permanently blocked.
Thanks for the correction. I'd been ignoring Replaygain based on misinformation, it seems.