This is where sh!t starts to get weird and unfortunately starts to sound eliteist. The idea that a SM58 is going to produce sound quality even remotely similar to a studio condenser is absurd. The 58 is an excellent general purpose microphone but the idea that the only time you would want anything better is when recording an orchestra is pretty wrong. This is the mentality that plagues the home studio. Because the price of the computer hardware has dropped, the home engineer applies this valuation method to other audio apparatus as well. The difference between a $200 microphone and a $3000 microphone is like night and day, the difference between a Mackie preamp and a Great River or Presonus preamp is like night and day. Just because you dont have to buy a $30,000 tape machine anymore in order to get good recordings doesn't mean that anything else has changed.
I keep seeing this "already been there with the portastudio" and it's driving me insane. During the time that the portastudio came out, 2" 24 track tape was the primary recording medium. How does the sound of something recorded on a portastudio compare to something recorded on a professional 2" tape machine? It doesn't.
With the advent of high-quality low-cost multichannel sound cards (actually, as the price of good analog/digital convertors continues to decline), the recording quality of a song recorded at a home studio is now rivalling that of something recorded at the professional studio.
The quality of a portastudio was never even remotely comparable to a professional studio.
I have found that frequently the method you describe is not possible, most noteably when recording bands that do not have much studio experience. The band gets cues off of each other when they are playing live. When you separate them out, the body-language cues are gone, the band looses the "vibe" and "energy" they get when they are playing live, and you end up recording a trillion takes and the end result still sounds like crap.
Also: the web is a big argument when things like this come up. While the web is a great place to store and distribute, it does not (yet, and I believe never will) have a huge and significant impact on the mass purchases done by any given demographic (ok, maybe geeks.. but I digress).
I dont agree with this. Offspring is currently #1 in alternative on mp3.com . I don't listen to them and no "geek" that I know does. So someone is listening to them and its gotta be the same demographic that pushes them to #1 on billboard's charts.
There is no law or regulation that prevents it from happening, aside from the regulation that states "the record label must grease the palm of the programming director before any single gets airplay".
Many radio stations do have 5 or 10 minutes a day in which they feature local artists.
For some reason the AV developers have a hard time wrapping their minds around the relatively simple concepts involved with a centrally-managed system. I have yet to see an antivirus vendor that offers an even remotely acceptable centralized management solution. The idea of an incremental update is JUST NOW being implemented in the various packages. It's not exactly the most complicated developmental task. It's pathetic to see the file-based IPC most of these packages are using for client-server communications. The entire management systems are cobbled-together pieces of crap loaded with this incredible level of lameness. Seeing an antivirus vendor heralding ages old technology as brand-new is of no surprise to me, the entire development effort in that industry seems to be focused on reinventing the wheel and stumbling over problems to which solutions have been devised ages past.
I wasn't referring to a remote-root exploit. The recently announced BIND exploits that are the whole topic of discussion are not remote root either (at least not on a properly-configured BIND installation).
Not sure what the fsck happened with that previous post, it previewed fine. Was supposed to read:
He isn't the author of [insert the name of any widely used *nix-based software that is 10+ years old] , a [insert application use] with many past security problems?
==
Something that has an application front-end with a database back-end would provide better security and other features. The dbase could be replicated to off-line servers for redundancy in case of faults. This could also be used for load-balancing and backups as well. The front-end for administration could be web-based with a php or perl api for ease of expanding the application.
==
Have you ever administered a name server before and do you have any idea how one operates? The "back end database" idea is not displaying a real insight as to the development issues posed by a name server, it's not like resolution requests can be queried against the database so the storage model is not real relevant. It all has to go into memory. The request for an administrative GUI is equally short-sighted. I have administered NT-based DNS systems that used GUIs before and changing IP information on 300+ domains was a real mouse-killer.
You can look at it from a strictly theoretical standpoint, which would be that no one would bother to spam if spam did not generate any results. That's a no-brainer. The "no one I know responds to spam therefore no one must respond to spam" conclusion is kind of short-sighted. The reality of it is exactly as NeMon'ess states. The traffic to a spammer's spamvertised web site does increase as a result of spam. I have terminated many a spammer's accounts and have talked with some of them at great lengths. A few of them were hard core spammers, with networks sitting off of RBLed netblocks that hosted both their web sites and their mail services (thus effectively negating the RBL). After speaking with spammers numerous times, I am certain they are seeing significant results from their spam. Many of the individuals I spoke with stated this and their statements were supported by the lengths some went to and the trouble they took to be able to spam repeatedly coupled with the size of their overall operation.
There are a couple of flaws in your commentary. First, an ISP (in the US) can terminate a user's service for any reason, so the addition of "ADV:" would not create a legal challenge to this. Second, spam does have a much higher response rate than you are estimating. It's probably about equal to that of a postal bulk mailing, which is 2%. It's enough of a response to motivate spam.
It essentially comes down to the fact that, in the case of most spam runs, there is a percentage of business leads generated. This is why spam will not go away of its own accord.
On the "penalties" note, most spammers just move from ISP to ISP. Charging them an administrative fee for spamming doesn't work, the spammers typically dispute the credit card charges. I saw the dispute paperwork for one spammer at an ISP I worked at and there were 10 charges from 10 ISPs in a 30 day period and the guy was disputing all of them. Without a signature, the complainant always wins.
That's one of the problems, there are really only a couple of credible named implementations. It's not like there is a wide choice, it's pretty much either BIND or DJB-DNS.
For an organization of that small size, it would be better to use netware over NT. It's really a "set it and forget it" OS. It's cheap to have someone come in and set up and it is fast and reliable. There should be no need to have any technical staff in an organization that small.
Extreme Programming also suggests using two programmers per computer. Suggesting that to upper management would fly like a lead kite in every organization I have been in. Heck, I'd questions it's effectiveness myself.
I spent about 2-1/2 hours one day reading the Extreme Programming web site when someone else mentioned it here in the past. I had to stop after I read about using two programmers per computer. It was just too extreme.
==
MySQL have for many years been been considered as a very unstable product and that it have been (still are probably) lacking a lot of really useful features.
==
I have never heard of any complaint of stability with mysql whereas postgres versions prior to 7 were well known for eating databases. As for useful features, how about the blob support in postgres? Oh yeah, it's nonexistent. I can argue this factually because I prefer postgres but let's not turn a blind eye to its shortcomings. As for interbase, with the backdoor discovery being so recent, it would be hard to consider that platform seriously until a complete security audit was performed on the code.
==
Postgres is trying for speed and MySQL for correctness.
==
What are you talking about? I read your post five times and still can't figure out exactly what you are saying. With an opening statement of "Postgres is a mostly complete DB, with some things that need work. MySQL is a fast hack with little overhead.", one is left scratching one's head from the start. What makes Postgres "more complete" than mysql? How does one determine how much "overhead" mysql has? It looks like you might be trying to imply that postgres's SQL implementation is more complete than MySQL's but the statement is too vague to know for certain. Finishing up with "Postgres is trying for speed and MySQL for correctness", the post closes with the reader trying to figure out what "correctness" would mean as it would supposedly apply to an RBDMS. Could you be any more vague in your assessment and comparison of the two systems? All this in a +5 post... argh!
Slashdot Mirror
This is where sh!t starts to get weird and unfortunately starts to sound eliteist. The idea that a SM58 is going to produce sound quality even remotely similar to a studio condenser is absurd. The 58 is an excellent general purpose microphone but the idea that the only time you would want anything better is when recording an orchestra is pretty wrong. This is the mentality that plagues the home studio. Because the price of the computer hardware has dropped, the home engineer applies this valuation method to other audio apparatus as well. The difference between a $200 microphone and a $3000 microphone is like night and day, the difference between a Mackie preamp and a Great River or Presonus preamp is like night and day. Just because you dont have to buy a $30,000 tape machine anymore in order to get good recordings doesn't mean that anything else has changed.
maru
I keep seeing this "already been there with the portastudio" and it's driving me insane. During the time that the portastudio came out, 2" 24 track tape was the primary recording medium. How does the sound of something recorded on a portastudio compare to something recorded on a professional 2" tape machine? It doesn't.
With the advent of high-quality low-cost multichannel sound cards (actually, as the price of good analog/digital convertors continues to decline), the recording quality of a song recorded at a home studio is now rivalling that of something recorded at the professional studio.
The quality of a portastudio was never even remotely comparable to a professional studio.
maru
I have found that frequently the method you describe is not possible, most noteably when recording bands that do not have much studio experience. The band gets cues off of each other when they are playing live. When you separate them out, the body-language cues are gone, the band looses the "vibe" and "energy" they get when they are playing live, and you end up recording a trillion takes and the end result still sounds like crap.
maru
Also: the web is a big argument when things like this come up. While the web is a great place to store and distribute, it does not (yet, and I believe never will) have a huge and significant impact on the mass purchases done by any given demographic (ok, maybe geeks.. but I digress).
I dont agree with this. Offspring is currently #1 in alternative on mp3.com . I don't listen to them and no "geek" that I know does. So someone is listening to them and its gotta be the same demographic that pushes them to #1 on billboard's charts.
maru
There is no law or regulation that prevents it from happening, aside from the regulation that states "the record label must grease the palm of the programming director before any single gets airplay".
Many radio stations do have 5 or 10 minutes a day in which they feature local artists.
maru
For some reason the AV developers have a hard time wrapping their minds around the relatively simple concepts involved with a centrally-managed system. I have yet to see an antivirus vendor that offers an even remotely acceptable centralized management solution. The idea of an incremental update is JUST NOW being implemented in the various packages. It's not exactly the most complicated developmental task. It's pathetic to see the file-based IPC most of these packages are using for client-server communications. The entire management systems are cobbled-together pieces of crap loaded with this incredible level of lameness. Seeing an antivirus vendor heralding ages old technology as brand-new is of no surprise to me, the entire development effort in that industry seems to be focused on reinventing the wheel and stumbling over problems to which solutions have been devised ages past.
maru
I've actually witnessed this before, in the opensrs mailing list.
maru
I wasn't referring to a remote-root exploit. The recently announced BIND exploits that are the whole topic of discussion are not remote root either (at least not on a properly-configured BIND installation).
maru
Why in the heck do sendmail and BIND keep appearing together in these messages? They were not written by the same person.
maru
Not sure what the fsck happened with that previous post, it previewed fine. Was supposed to read:
He isn't the author of [insert the name of any widely used *nix-based software that is 10+ years old] , a [insert application use] with many past security problems?
maru
==
Something that has an application front-end with a database back-end would provide better security and other features. The dbase could be replicated to off-line servers for redundancy in case of faults. This could also be used for load-balancing and backups as well. The front-end for administration could be web-based with a php or perl api for ease of expanding the application.
==
Have you ever administered a name server before and do you have any idea how one operates? The "back end database" idea is not displaying a real insight as to the development issues posed by a name server, it's not like resolution requests can be queried against the database so the storage model is not real relevant. It all has to go into memory. The request for an administrative GUI is equally short-sighted. I have administered NT-based DNS systems that used GUIs before and changing IP information on 300+ domains was a real mouse-killer.
maru
Isn't the author of , a with many past security problems?
maru
You can look at it from a strictly theoretical standpoint, which would be that no one would bother to spam if spam did not generate any results. That's a no-brainer. The "no one I know responds to spam therefore no one must respond to spam" conclusion is kind of short-sighted. The reality of it is exactly as NeMon'ess states. The traffic to a spammer's spamvertised web site does increase as a result of spam. I have terminated many a spammer's accounts and have talked with some of them at great lengths. A few of them were hard core spammers, with networks sitting off of RBLed netblocks that hosted both their web sites and their mail services (thus effectively negating the RBL). After speaking with spammers numerous times, I am certain they are seeing significant results from their spam. Many of the individuals I spoke with stated this and their statements were supported by the lengths some went to and the trouble they took to be able to spam repeatedly coupled with the size of their overall operation.
maru
Since qmail has already had one exploit in its history, why should we believe that the rest of DJB's software is any more secure?
maru
There are a couple of flaws in your commentary. First, an ISP (in the US) can terminate a user's service for any reason, so the addition of "ADV:" would not create a legal challenge to this. Second, spam does have a much higher response rate than you are estimating. It's probably about equal to that of a postal bulk mailing, which is 2%. It's enough of a response to motivate spam.
It essentially comes down to the fact that, in the case of most spam runs, there is a percentage of business leads generated. This is why spam will not go away of its own accord.
On the "penalties" note, most spammers just move from ISP to ISP. Charging them an administrative fee for spamming doesn't work, the spammers typically dispute the credit card charges. I saw the dispute paperwork for one spammer at an ISP I worked at and there were 10 charges from 10 ISPs in a 30 day period and the guy was disputing all of them. Without a signature, the complainant always wins.
maru
The simple fact that qmail has been exploitable (DoS, not permissions elevation) in the past invalidates the majority of your arguments.
maru
That is pretty odd (in light of the situation).
maru
I theorize that if DJB-DNS and qmail were as widely used as BIND and sendmail that both of the former applications would see their share of exploits.
maru
==
Using different DNS BIND implementations,
==
That's one of the problems, there are really only a couple of credible named implementations. It's not like there is a wide choice, it's pretty much either BIND or DJB-DNS.
maru
For an organization of that small size, it would be better to use netware over NT. It's really a "set it and forget it" OS. It's cheap to have someone come in and set up and it is fast and reliable. There should be no need to have any technical staff in an organization that small.
maru
=
...William Dafoe is astounding as the vampire Count Orlock
=
Unlike the actor, whose name is Willem, William Dafoe is my father.
badtz-maru
Extreme Programming also suggests using two programmers per computer. Suggesting that to upper management would fly like a lead kite in every organization I have been in. Heck, I'd questions it's effectiveness myself.
I spent about 2-1/2 hours one day reading the Extreme Programming web site when someone else mentioned it here in the past. I had to stop after I read about using two programmers per computer. It was just too extreme.
badtz-maru
==
MySQL have for many years been been considered as a very unstable product and that it have been (still are probably) lacking a lot of really useful features.
==
I have never heard of any complaint of stability with mysql whereas postgres versions prior to 7 were well known for eating databases. As for useful features, how about the blob support in postgres? Oh yeah, it's nonexistent. I can argue this factually because I prefer postgres but let's not turn a blind eye to its shortcomings. As for interbase, with the backdoor discovery being so recent, it would be hard to consider that platform seriously until a complete security audit was performed on the code.
badtz-maru
==
Postgres is trying for speed and MySQL for correctness.
==
What are you talking about? I read your post five times and still can't figure out exactly what you are saying. With an opening statement of "Postgres is a mostly complete DB, with some things that need work. MySQL is a fast hack with little overhead.", one is left scratching one's head from the start. What makes Postgres "more complete" than mysql? How does one determine how much "overhead" mysql has? It looks like you might be trying to imply that postgres's SQL implementation is more complete than MySQL's but the statement is too vague to know for certain. Finishing up with "Postgres is trying for speed and MySQL for correctness", the post closes with the reader trying to figure out what "correctness" would mean as it would supposedly apply to an RBDMS. Could you be any more vague in your assessment and comparison of the two systems? All this in a +5 post... argh!
badtz-maru
==
Sometimes, I receive junkmail that is manually put in my mailbox (ie: no address on it, I receive the same as everyone else).
==
That type of mailing is referred to as "carrier route sort".
badtz-maru