The last Gaiman Sandman story was _The Dream Hunters_ with Yoshitaka Amano. I know this, because I bought the book for my wife. That was October of 1999 (from the copyright of the book), which was only about 4 years ago.
Um, exit polls are not "counting votes". They're counting what people say they voted, but they could be lying (I know I'd lie to an exit poller for fun).
Exactly. I know folks who do nothing but go to their library when they want music. A CDR later, they're the proud owner of that old Edgar Winter CD without paying anything for it.
Y'all are fools. Hardly any OS comes with a manual any more. Try showing me the manual that comes with Windows XP. All the i* apps on Mac are shipped with the OS (or downloadable). They have some online help, but a book explaining the details calling itself "the missing manual" is just playing with words and pointing out that some people prefer written paper manuals to online help.
I don't think it takes into account other factors. I have bought a couple of the flourescent "twist" bulbs that burned out in nothing flat; seems most likely the starter element went, but of course it's not replaceable. Not a very effective alternative unless you go with particular brands. Whereas I've never noticed a particular brand related correlation of how long my standard bulbs last.
The split up would have prevented Microsoft from using their OEM deals to push "middleware" like IE and WMP. And that's the primary benefit they get from their monopoly.
Which has absolutely no bearing on this case, does it? In case you missed it, this is about the WMP people trying to steal Burst's tech.
Bottom line is different model drives treat audio (offsets, error correction, caching etc..) in different ways.
Yes, I pointed out the exact same thing by doing two different drives in the same system.
Among the millions of CD Rippers sharing their music, how many different model drives are there, after all? If the machine itself *also* changes the rip values, then the likelihood is that a given MD5 hash does uniquely identify a particular rip by a particular individual. However, if it's just a function of the drive + the software, independant of the machine, then the likelihood of finding two seperate rips with the same hash is reasonably high; certainly among a population of millions....
I got consistent results on my old-ish Plextor CD-R as well, so it's not just DVD precision. I spose argument could be made that CD-R is more precise as well, but I'd expect it's more likely that there are simply brand differences in amount of jitter.
The ISO format has error corrections in it that are not/may not be in the CDDA spec. You're right, a data CD must be the same every time. That's not true for audio, a few bits here or there aren't that big a deal, at least as spec'd. It's clear from the testing done by various people in this thread that same software, same machine different drive leads to different rips. The real question is whether same software, same drive, different machine leads to different rips. If not, then there's still a high likelihood of two independant rips out of millions having the same hash. If so, I will have to join the Cow Herd in questioning how likely it really is that two people doing independant rips could have the same hash.
As for "not truely digital quality", I think you're going to have a hard time selling that, since it's still digital quality on playback from the same machine and different drives. There may be enough difference to affect the MD5 hash, but that doesn't take much. If there isn't enough difference to hear it, their argument still holds water.
Initial results of testing. Since I do not have the same drive in both machines, there's more to look at. However, it's interesting that despite the fact that some results from other people show different reads every time on the same machine, I get consistent results every time when I use the same software on the same drive:
PC #1
Ripper: AudioGrabber
Drive: Pioneer DVD-ROM DVD 106 1.22 Both rips identical: c4461f79faab359238d461e78656ee7f
Drive: Plextor CD-R PX-W8432T1.09 Both rips identical: 8a5389b272d8c926b37b0cd07563ba22
but obviously different from each other.
Ripper: Buzzsaw
Drive: Pioneer DVD-ROM DVD 106 1.22 Different from AG but both rips identical:
3a9eca5be5a22f84edace9682b7bf8df
PC #2
Ripper: RealOne Player
Drive: Toshiba DVD-ROM SD-M1402 Both rips identical: 4fbb0a29effe52a444cb517f69f3122b
Ripper: Buzzsaw
Drive: Toshiba DVD-ROM SD-M1402 Different from RealOne, but both rips identical:
927b5068c6070c564f9a7c8f4cfe9845
This was the first track from Dark Side of the Moon, though I forgot to verify it was the same version used by the previous poster. At some point this long weekend I will have an opportunity to swap a DVD drive to the other machine so I can see if the difference is "just" the drive, or the drive and the machine together. But it seems to me that the "jitter" issue is probably particular to specific drives. The final question is, will the same drive with the same software on different machines get the same results? I'm certainly not as confident as I was, but I won't rule it out until I see it....
P.S. Yes, these are running windows 98SE, so sue me. My linux boxes are in pieces strewn across my work area for completely unrelated reasons, and were not handy.
And continued to assert that it was the facts as well.
Unfortunately, I have no way to mind-meld with you through slashdot to tell whether you had "read your facts somewhere reliable" or were just making shit up. I don't know you from the wild man of borneo, why would I trust completely unsupported statements you made were likely to have any reliable backing, especially when they didn't make sense? If you wanted to assert that, you could have taken 15 minutes to go google for some facts.
Now that there are some facts behind your assertion, I see how it does make sense, though I still don't buy that it is as unlikely as all that to have two CD drives come up with the same data from the same source. But we shall see what happens after some testing.
So if the difference is the error correction strategy, then what about two different drives that are the same model, same manufacturer, same firmware level? Hurm. Way too many variables to control reliably.
If you had bothered to cite some evidence (as those others have) instead of saying, as you did "I don't have a reference I just think this way" I would not have ridiculed you. If you're going to make assertions which don't make sense to those you're addressing, you have to back them up. Otherwise don't flippin waste our time.
I will acknowledge that some CD drives do appear to have enough jitter to produce different files on subsequent tries; personally, I think those are likely the cheap ass ones. It's also obvious that some people are getting the same results every time. What's really germaine here is what the likelihood is of two different CD drives producing the same WAV.
Unlike you, now that I see there is room for doubt in my position, instead of simply continuing to assert I intend to actually do some research before I make further assertions. I have 3 or 4 easily accessable CD drives at home, and intend to check them out (with the Pink Floyd track from earlier so I can also compare to those results).
I suspect that drives that can consistently provide the same file time and again have a reasonable likelihood of providing the same file as a different, similarly stable drive. Which leads us back to a high likelihood that Jane Doe's files are indeed her own. But that's clearly only a working hypothesis; I'll get back to you when I have real results.
I'd have to say that the problem with this approach is that it's easily reversable. I suppose "easily" is perhaps the wrong sense, when you're talking about the RIAA having to reverse all the possible ways it could be done, but the fact remains, if they suspect it's the same file, it doesn't strike me as too hard to write a tool that ignores the ID3 tags and does an MD5 hash on just the "data payload". And then you're back where you started.
The only way that the MD5 hashes could be identical is if the two files are absolutely identical in every single bit.
So let's see. You rip a song from a CD (where every copy of the CD has an identical bit-for-bit copy of the song). You compress it with a particular codec at a particular bit rate, which is deterministic and produces the same compressed output every time. You add id tags, very likely compiled from the same source--cddb--and therefore letter-for-letter identical down to capitalization & punctuation. Where exactly are these "different bits" going to come from?
It sounds to me like it is quite reasonable to assume that two people ripping the same song off their own legal copy of the same CD are very likely to have files which are bit-for-bit identical, if they rip at the same bit rate. Even moreso if they use the same ripping software. Given the millions of people using ripping software, I'd say that I'd be amazed if this DIDN'T happen regularly.
Slashdot Mirror
The last Gaiman Sandman story was _The Dream Hunters_ with Yoshitaka Amano. I know this, because I bought the book for my wife. That was October of 1999 (from the copyright of the book), which was only about 4 years ago.
Really?
who watches the watchmen.
Um, exit polls are not "counting votes". They're counting what people say they voted, but they could be lying (I know I'd lie to an exit poller for fun).
Last time I checked, Danny boy was indeed from Chicago.
In a voting system, the obvious "backup" is on paper. For a database, it's on tape or other removable media.
But Oracle DOES say to make backups....
Exactly. I know folks who do nothing but go to their library when they want music. A CDR later, they're the proud owner of that old Edgar Winter CD without paying anything for it.
Y'all are fools. Hardly any OS comes with a manual any more. Try showing me the manual that comes with Windows XP. All the i* apps on Mac are shipped with the OS (or downloadable). They have some online help, but a book explaining the details calling itself "the missing manual" is just playing with words and pointing out that some people prefer written paper manuals to online help.
I don't think it takes into account other factors. I have bought a couple of the flourescent "twist" bulbs that burned out in nothing flat; seems most likely the starter element went, but of course it's not replaceable. Not a very effective alternative unless you go with particular brands. Whereas I've never noticed a particular brand related correlation of how long my standard bulbs last.
The split up would have prevented Microsoft from using their OEM deals to push "middleware" like IE and WMP. And that's the primary benefit they get from their monopoly.
Which has absolutely no bearing on this case, does it? In case you missed it, this is about the WMP people trying to steal Burst's tech.
I hope that's irony. The only thing the split up would have fixed is the app people using private interfaces on the OS to beat out the competition.
Really. I didn't get that far into it, and had assumed they just had a staff geek who did it in perl. How sad.
Yes, I pointed out the exact same thing by doing two different drives in the same system.
Among the millions of CD Rippers sharing their music, how many different model drives are there, after all? If the machine itself *also* changes the rip values, then the likelihood is that a given MD5 hash does uniquely identify a particular rip by a particular individual. However, if it's just a function of the drive + the software, independant of the machine, then the likelihood of finding two seperate rips with the same hash is reasonably high; certainly among a population of millions....
I got consistent results on my old-ish Plextor CD-R as well, so it's not just DVD precision. I spose argument could be made that CD-R is more precise as well, but I'd expect it's more likely that there are simply brand differences in amount of jitter.
As for "not truely digital quality", I think you're going to have a hard time selling that, since it's still digital quality on playback from the same machine and different drives. There may be enough difference to affect the MD5 hash, but that doesn't take much. If there isn't enough difference to hear it, their argument still holds water.
PC #1
Ripper: AudioGrabber
Drive: Pioneer DVD-ROM DVD 106 1.22 Both rips identical: c4461f79faab359238d461e78656ee7f
Drive: Plextor CD-R PX-W8432T1.09 Both rips identical: 8a5389b272d8c926b37b0cd07563ba22
but obviously different from each other.
Ripper: Buzzsaw
Drive: Pioneer DVD-ROM DVD 106 1.22 Different from AG but both rips identical: 3a9eca5be5a22f84edace9682b7bf8df
PC #2
Ripper: RealOne Player
Drive: Toshiba DVD-ROM SD-M1402 Both rips identical: 4fbb0a29effe52a444cb517f69f3122b
Ripper: Buzzsaw
Drive: Toshiba DVD-ROM SD-M1402 Different from RealOne, but both rips identical: 927b5068c6070c564f9a7c8f4cfe9845
This was the first track from Dark Side of the Moon, though I forgot to verify it was the same version used by the previous poster. At some point this long weekend I will have an opportunity to swap a DVD drive to the other machine so I can see if the difference is "just" the drive, or the drive and the machine together. But it seems to me that the "jitter" issue is probably particular to specific drives. The final question is, will the same drive with the same software on different machines get the same results? I'm certainly not as confident as I was, but I won't rule it out until I see it....
P.S. Yes, these are running windows 98SE, so sue me. My linux boxes are in pieces strewn across my work area for completely unrelated reasons, and were not handy.
And continued to assert that it was the facts as well.
Unfortunately, I have no way to mind-meld with you through slashdot to tell whether you had "read your facts somewhere reliable" or were just making shit up. I don't know you from the wild man of borneo, why would I trust completely unsupported statements you made were likely to have any reliable backing, especially when they didn't make sense? If you wanted to assert that, you could have taken 15 minutes to go google for some facts.
Now that there are some facts behind your assertion, I see how it does make sense, though I still don't buy that it is as unlikely as all that to have two CD drives come up with the same data from the same source. But we shall see what happens after some testing.
So if the difference is the error correction strategy, then what about two different drives that are the same model, same manufacturer, same firmware level? Hurm. Way too many variables to control reliably.
I will acknowledge that some CD drives do appear to have enough jitter to produce different files on subsequent tries; personally, I think those are likely the cheap ass ones. It's also obvious that some people are getting the same results every time. What's really germaine here is what the likelihood is of two different CD drives producing the same WAV.
Unlike you, now that I see there is room for doubt in my position, instead of simply continuing to assert I intend to actually do some research before I make further assertions. I have 3 or 4 easily accessable CD drives at home, and intend to check them out (with the Pink Floyd track from earlier so I can also compare to those results).
I suspect that drives that can consistently provide the same file time and again have a reasonable likelihood of providing the same file as a different, similarly stable drive. Which leads us back to a high likelihood that Jane Doe's files are indeed her own. But that's clearly only a working hypothesis; I'll get back to you when I have real results.
I think the Cow Herd thinks everyone has crappy CD drives with lots of jitter :-)
I'd have to say that the problem with this approach is that it's easily reversable. I suppose "easily" is perhaps the wrong sense, when you're talking about the RIAA having to reverse all the possible ways it could be done, but the fact remains, if they suspect it's the same file, it doesn't strike me as too hard to write a tool that ignores the ID3 tags and does an MD5 hash on just the "data payload". And then you're back where you started.
I think the moon is made of green cheese, but don't ask me to prove it.
So let's see. You rip a song from a CD (where every copy of the CD has an identical bit-for-bit copy of the song). You compress it with a particular codec at a particular bit rate, which is deterministic and produces the same compressed output every time. You add id tags, very likely compiled from the same source--cddb--and therefore letter-for-letter identical down to capitalization & punctuation. Where exactly are these "different bits" going to come from?
It sounds to me like it is quite reasonable to assume that two people ripping the same song off their own legal copy of the same CD are very likely to have files which are bit-for-bit identical, if they rip at the same bit rate. Even moreso if they use the same ripping software. Given the millions of people using ripping software, I'd say that I'd be amazed if this DIDN'T happen regularly.
Clevo actually, but I know several people who own Sager's resold Clevo laptops who are extremely happy with them.