How about instead of boycotting the **AA, we just pirate everything for a month, instead? That would be an interesting experiment. Make it your business to give your friends CDs of your favorite music in MP3 format, only watch cams of movies, etc. etc... I'm not saying it would be right, I'm saying it would be interesting. Plus, I'm saying I don't think I can keep from seeing the new LOTR movie when it's on the IMAX screen in town. Wait until January and you'll be lucky to get Dolby Digital!
I want to, and am currently able to, record TV shows (World Rally Championships, World Superbike, and Formula One, to name a few) to my computer in MPG format, burn them to CD, and take the CDs and watch them on another computer. They say they're not taking any rights away from me, but you think I'll be able to do this with their new TV laws? If not, I'll resort to piracy, and won't feel bad about it.
It seems that they didn't choose to use the same frequency out of spite or anticompetitiveness, but they use the same frequency everywhere on their network, and in this location, another wireless provider happens to use the same frequency. Is it T-Mobile's fault that their corporate policy is inflexible when the channel they use in a certain area is already being used by another service? Only in as much as it degrades performance for both parties, benefitting neither. The way I see it, if Personal Telco refuses to change frequencies, as the FCC puts it, they must accept any interference... I don't see anybody being at fault here, except maybe Personal Telco being a bit standoffish. I don't see 11 wireless channels filling up any time soon, and even if there's that possibility, why make a stand at channel 1? C'mon, guys, give a little!
PS: You don't see news articles about Starbucks complaining about how their performance is degraded by Personal Telco, do you? Y'all are hypocrites. You drink their coffee, get all hyped up with caffeine pumping through your blood, and then go typing all willy-nilly about how evil they are!:)
I share your distrust of the Rio products (now sold by SonicBlue). I bought a Rio Volt, their mid-level CD/MP3 player (now no longer sold in favor of the low-end and the high-end models), and I've had lots of problems with it. It's seen it's fair share of bumps and grinds, but I've had the same problem with two of them now: it simply decides to stop recognizing any CDs. Says "No Disc". The first one worked for a good 6 months. It's replacement started doing it within about 2 weeks. It's still basically new. The third one they sent me, and it seems to be working fine. Support was horrible, and while I finally managed to get it RMA'd twice, my next hardware device will not be made by them.
I think you're confusing materialism with success. Certainly, successful parents will be able to teach their offspring the skills of their success, and possibly provide directly for their children, insuring their success. But materialism is fundamentally different. Buying diamond rings doesn't make you more able to provide, saving does. The 19" rims on your Audi may make you more attractive to materialistic women, but so what? It's so much more complicated than just stuff = sex. Women who demand diamond rings aren't doing their kids, or their kids' kids, a favor. I see your point, and it's valid in general, but not here specifically. Evolutionary advantage is gained by security. Security, for some, is obtained through material posessions. But that does not put materialistic people at an advantage, it puts secure people at an advantage. There's much more to security than materialism, and the most materialistic people, are, imo, the least secure.
Re:Good idea for nuclear waste?
on
Going Up?
·
· Score: 2
In that case, we need a carbon-nanotube earth to sun elevator.
Re:Impact on the environment (and the ground)
on
Going Up?
·
· Score: 2
The article describes the "elevator" as: a 100,000-kilometre-long ribbon about one metre wide with the thickness of a sheet of paper
So there goes the air-tight theory...
Re:Impact on the environment (and the ground)
on
Going Up?
·
· Score: 2
The biggest problem is figuring out how to move cargo fast enough.
I say use compressed air. Pressurize below the cargo and let it shoot up the elevator. You could use any power source you wanted to power the air compressors. And if that weren't enough, the elevator "car" could also have wheel-type-things, so that it could climb up the elevator.
What are the chances that whatever the elevator was tied to out in space would throw Earth's orbit off, ever-so-slightly? Would this affect us in any major way?
If you can't break through it, simply go around it. If the content itself is encrypted, then if the unlocking key can only be provided via an encrypted communication, wait for it to decrypt the communication that contains the key, on your machine, so that it can decrypt the content. Or wait until the content has been decrypted, and capture that. Or whatever. PKI will not be the weakest link in the chain between my content and me. I will find a way to get at it. If you're desparate, there's always the analog hole.
Content providers don't get as much value from re-broadcasts. There's no point in showing a movie five times a weekend if everyone time-shifts it from the first broadcast.
The value gained from showing the same thing over is that maybe the people that couldn't watch it the first time can watch it the second, third, or fourth time. So if everybody can watch their show and they only have to play it once or twice, the network has more time for infomercials, or Mr. Ed reruns, or The Real World: Compton.
Another good thing about time-shifting content: prime-time happens when you want it. I record Sports Night at 1:30am despite the fact that I'm sleeping at that time. If I couldn't record it, I wouldn't be able to watch it. Is this a bad thing?
Yes, I skip over the commercials, but I watch more tv, and I usually at least catch a glimpse of them. And I usually stop to watch that Captain Morgan's commercial, if only for a few seconds.
OT: who says commercials don't work? That Captain Morgan's Gold stuff tastes like Sprite with... caramel or something in it. It's okay I guess. I don't feel like an alcoholic when I drink it in front of my computer at 1:15pm on a Wednesday.
Can we use the american Disabiltys act, to force them to let people like me replay what we cant hear the first time?
That's a good idea -- even if you lose, you paint them as being against folks with disabilities, which nobody in their right mind would want to be against. And just like there's nobody stopping me from walking up the wheelchair ramp or hitting the big blue button that opens the door or using the big bathroom stall, I too will benefit. Yay!
A web browser IMHO has reached the point where it should be included as part of the OS: there isn't a single OS on the market today that doesn't bundle one.
Yes, this is true, a modern OS needs a web browser, but which one? The one you(r company) want(s) or the one MS wants? The issue here isn't whether windows should come with a TCP/IP stack, the issue is whether you should have a choice whose TCP/IP stack you want to include. And to some extent, whether you should have to pay for MS's TCP/IP stack if you're not going to use it.
captured my movie or television program using AVI... then I took some software that came on my computer and I rerendered the presentation as an MPEG
That's not the best way it can be done, though. The best way to watch TV is being able to schedule recordings from a searchable listing, and schedule recurring recordings and recordings that match a certain field, say actor, show name, sport, or language. The best way to watch TV is having a list of tv shows on your computer that you can watch at any time. Not whatever's on now. To be able to automatically burn them to CD, or automatically transfer to your laptop, or or auto pc, or handheld PC in a lower bitrate form(snapstream does this). Being able to schedule these things from the web so you can do it from another computer, and even being able to stream the files to another computer. I have a friend who has DSL but not cable. If I had the same, I would want him to be able to schedule tv shows on my computer that he wanted to watch, and then be able to watch them from his computer by streaming them over the internet. Content, free and legal. The new snapstream quartz is supposed to do this.
Here is how I do PVR, and I can ensure you, it is more logical than buying a $299 package
More logical? Only when your logic is that you don't want to spend any money. My motivation, OTOH, is to not spend all the time looking up, recording, encoding and copying TV shows that I want to watch. I just want to watch them. The ability to do that is worth something to me, and if it's not worth it to you then so be it, but I have to respectfully disagree.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go scan in and archive and index all my pictures to my FTP site. I wish I had a program that would do that for me, too.
In case you weren't paying attention, you signed up with them and gave them your e-mail address, and there's a nice link at the bottom where you can unsubscribe. You are currently subscribed to snapstream-announce as: xxx@xxx.xxx To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-snapstream-announce-xxxxxxxx@lyris.dundee.ne t
So, you gave them your e-mail address, probably to beta-test Quartz or whatever, they sent you an e-mail saying that there was a 20% discount, and you have a problem with that? It's not like it was HTML with big graphics. I got one (that's why I'm here) that's 5K, with three links. And two of them are to Slashdot.org.
It's beta still. Was released to beta testers recently, and is supposedly at the end of testing and soon to be released, however they've been saying that for months. Typical software design, 1 month out today, 3 weeks out a month from now. But if you buy their current software they'll give you a free upgrade. The downside is it's going to be part of.net, and while you'll have tivo-like listings and integration, it'll come at a monthly cost.
2. design the gui for a 3 year old -- make the boot screen look more like palm o/s
The problem I see with that is that there are so many different configurations, everyone's needs are so different, that it makes creating a nice, clean gui difficult. Making the PC more like a TV is a noble attempt, but to be able to do everything you can do with your PC as easily as you can do things with your TV, that'll take a lot of work. Not to mention I have a bunch of buttons on my TV that I don't really think do anything.
Indeed, I was just replying in the style you'd initiated "I think he's full of s**t."
Well, where we differ then is that he's my friend. I tell my friends when I think they're full of shit, and they don't get offended and I don't try to offend them. It goes from, "you're full of shit" to, "look, I'll show you" to, "damn, you're right" or "told ya so", or whatever, but it's a gateway to understanding. But when random people do much the same thing, it's, well, it's just bad etiquette. That's my opinion.
It's because you are passing your opinion on the quality of codecs/bitrates when I would claim that it is blatantly obvious that the lower bitrates sound crap.
If it were blatantly obvious, you wouldn't have people encoding at 128kbps and claiming they can't tell the difference. I can tell the difference btw 128 and 192, but I can't tell the difference btw 192 and 256. Or maybe I just haven't tried hard enough.
I'll spend some time tonight and see if I can figure out what all the fuss is about.
And yes, I have a proud following of freaks too
I saw that. Very amusing. I was actually referring to how you currently post at +0. People don't like to be talked down to, they like to be educated, and they like to be told what a big dick they have, not what a big dick they are. I'm not trying to be a dick here. Can't we all just get along? Or, barring that, agree to disagree?
I'm not going to buy a TLC album, but another poster reccommended Jimi Hendrix, and I have a CD or two of his, so I'll give it a shot when I get home. I'll also see if I can think of any overproduced crap music I might have accidentally bought or been given. I have the same audio hardware (Sony MDR V700 headphones, SB Live) as my friend, so I'll at least be able to replicate his listening environment. So 128, 160, 192, and 320. I'll also throw my default VBR settings in there. I still want to see somebody pass an actual objective test in my presence. I want to see someone pick out the lower quality btw say, 256kbps and 320kbps, 8 times out of 10.
If you can't hear this difference having done exactly what I've said then I suggest you are not qualified to ever post a comment to a thread discussing audio quality again.
If you ever wonder why people don't like you, it's because of rants like this. It's not difficult to get the same message across without trying to offend the person you're talking to. Try it out.
Convenience, convenience, convenience. I've got an MP3 CD in my car that's been in there for nearly a month. It's got all my current favorite tracks/albums on it. When I get tired of it, I'll burn another CD that may last as long. Also, lossy compression is very acceptable for mediums such as speeches, books on ta--MP3, etc. I've got a road trip coming up, and I'm planning on listening to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy that I borrowed from a friend. At 64kbps, I can fit something like 21 hours of audio on one CD. As opposed to the 18 or so CDs that it would take if it were pure CD-Audio. You don't have to get rid of CDs, but MP3s have their place, and they're not going away. Lossy compression or not, you can make an MP3 sound as good as CD Audio. You can. Just turn up the bitrate, play with the settings. Use lossless compression if you want, but I guarantee you can rip an MP3 of almost any track that you won't be able to tell from a ripped wav file from the same disc. For me, the quality of the original sample is usually the smallest factor in the imperfections of the audio. Usually, static from the amplifier, and/or inadequate powering of the speakers, and/or crappy speakers, and/or background noise, are the biggest factors. If I were an audiophile freak, I wouldn't rip MP3, but I'm not. I live in the real world. MP3's imperfections are the least of my audio-related problems out here.
I have a friend who claims to be able to hear the difference between 192kbps and CD audio. Not only that, but he says the only way he can get his music to sound as good as the source is by using LAME, 320KBPS CBR with all the acoustic models turned off. He says that at that point, the differences btw the CD and the MP3 are "negligible", whatever that means. I think he's full of s**t. I use VBR, end up with files less than half the size, and it sounds good to me.
Slashdot Mirror
How about instead of boycotting the **AA, we just pirate everything for a month, instead? That would be an interesting experiment. Make it your business to give your friends CDs of your favorite music in MP3 format, only watch cams of movies, etc. etc... I'm not saying it would be right, I'm saying it would be interesting. Plus, I'm saying I don't think I can keep from seeing the new LOTR movie when it's on the IMAX screen in town. Wait until January and you'll be lucky to get Dolby Digital!
I want to, and am currently able to, record TV shows (World Rally Championships, World Superbike, and Formula One, to name a few) to my computer in MPG format, burn them to CD, and take the CDs and watch them on another computer. They say they're not taking any rights away from me, but you think I'll be able to do this with their new TV laws? If not, I'll resort to piracy, and won't feel bad about it.
It seems that they didn't choose to use the same frequency out of spite or anticompetitiveness, but they use the same frequency everywhere on their network, and in this location, another wireless provider happens to use the same frequency. Is it T-Mobile's fault that their corporate policy is inflexible when the channel they use in a certain area is already being used by another service? Only in as much as it degrades performance for both parties, benefitting neither.
:)
The way I see it, if Personal Telco refuses to change frequencies, as the FCC puts it, they must accept any interference... I don't see anybody being at fault here, except maybe Personal Telco being a bit standoffish. I don't see 11 wireless channels filling up any time soon, and even if there's that possibility, why make a stand at channel 1? C'mon, guys, give a little!
PS: You don't see news articles about Starbucks complaining about how their performance is degraded by Personal Telco, do you? Y'all are hypocrites. You drink their coffee, get all hyped up with caffeine pumping through your blood, and then go typing all willy-nilly about how evil they are!
I share your distrust of the Rio products (now sold by SonicBlue). I bought a Rio Volt, their mid-level CD/MP3 player (now no longer sold in favor of the low-end and the high-end models), and I've had lots of problems with it. It's seen it's fair share of bumps and grinds, but I've had the same problem with two of them now: it simply decides to stop recognizing any CDs. Says "No Disc". The first one worked for a good 6 months. It's replacement started doing it within about 2 weeks. It's still basically new. The third one they sent me, and it seems to be working fine. Support was horrible, and while I finally managed to get it RMA'd twice, my next hardware device will not be made by them.
I think you're confusing materialism with success. Certainly, successful parents will be able to teach their offspring the skills of their success, and possibly provide directly for their children, insuring their success. But materialism is fundamentally different.
Buying diamond rings doesn't make you more able to provide, saving does. The 19" rims on your Audi may make you more attractive to materialistic women, but so what? It's so much more complicated than just stuff = sex. Women who demand diamond rings aren't doing their kids, or their kids' kids, a favor.
I see your point, and it's valid in general, but not here specifically. Evolutionary advantage is gained by security. Security, for some, is obtained through material posessions. But that does not put materialistic people at an advantage, it puts secure people at an advantage. There's much more to security than materialism, and the most materialistic people, are, imo, the least secure.
In that case, we need a carbon-nanotube earth to sun elevator.
The article describes the "elevator" as:
a 100,000-kilometre-long ribbon about one metre wide with the thickness of a sheet of paper
So there goes the air-tight theory...
The biggest problem is figuring out how to move cargo fast enough.
I say use compressed air. Pressurize below the cargo and let it shoot up the elevator. You could use any power source you wanted to power the air compressors. And if that weren't enough, the elevator "car" could also have wheel-type-things, so that it could climb up the elevator.
What are the chances that whatever the elevator was tied to out in space would throw Earth's orbit off, ever-so-slightly? Would this affect us in any major way?
If you can't break through it, simply go around it. If the content itself is encrypted, then if the unlocking key can only be provided via an encrypted communication, wait for it to decrypt the communication that contains the key, on your machine, so that it can decrypt the content. Or wait until the content has been decrypted, and capture that. Or whatever. PKI will not be the weakest link in the chain between my content and me. I will find a way to get at it. If you're desparate, there's always the analog hole.
And if that doesn't work, boycott.
Two wires/contact points on her fingertips, the wires go to the watch on her wrist, and set the watch alarm off when she touches her fingers together.
Content providers don't get as much value from re-broadcasts. There's no point in showing a movie five times a weekend if everyone time-shifts it from the first broadcast.
The value gained from showing the same thing over is that maybe the people that couldn't watch it the first time can watch it the second, third, or fourth time. So if everybody can watch their show and they only have to play it once or twice, the network has more time for infomercials, or Mr. Ed reruns, or The Real World: Compton.
Another good thing about time-shifting content: prime-time happens when you want it. I record Sports Night at 1:30am despite the fact that I'm sleeping at that time. If I couldn't record it, I wouldn't be able to watch it. Is this a bad thing?
Yes, I skip over the commercials, but I watch more tv, and I usually at least catch a glimpse of them. And I usually stop to watch that Captain Morgan's commercial, if only for a few seconds.
OT: who says commercials don't work? That Captain Morgan's Gold stuff tastes like Sprite with... caramel or something in it. It's okay I guess. I don't feel like an alcoholic when I drink it in front of my computer at 1:15pm on a Wednesday.
Does anybody you know believe them when they say stuff like this? Because if so, it's your duty to educate them. Social activism, ho!
Can we use the american Disabiltys act, to force them to let people like me replay what we cant hear the first time?
That's a good idea -- even if you lose, you paint them as being against folks with disabilities, which nobody in their right mind would want to be against. And just like there's nobody stopping me from walking up the wheelchair ramp or hitting the big blue button that opens the door or using the big bathroom stall, I too will benefit. Yay!
Make sure you spell it correctly.
A web browser IMHO has reached the point where it should be included as part of the OS: there isn't a single OS on the market today that doesn't bundle one.
Yes, this is true, a modern OS needs a web browser, but which one? The one you(r company) want(s) or the one MS wants? The issue here isn't whether windows should come with a TCP/IP stack, the issue is whether you should have a choice whose TCP/IP stack you want to include. And to some extent, whether you should have to pay for MS's TCP/IP stack if you're not going to use it.
captured my movie or television program using AVI... then I took some software that came on my computer and I rerendered the presentation as an MPEG
That's not the best way it can be done, though. The best way to watch TV is being able to schedule recordings from a searchable listing, and schedule recurring recordings and recordings that match a certain field, say actor, show name, sport, or language. The best way to watch TV is having a list of tv shows on your computer that you can watch at any time. Not whatever's on now. To be able to automatically burn them to CD, or automatically transfer to your laptop, or or auto pc, or handheld PC in a lower bitrate form(snapstream does this). Being able to schedule these things from the web so you can do it from another computer, and even being able to stream the files to another computer.
I have a friend who has DSL but not cable. If I had the same, I would want him to be able to schedule tv shows on my computer that he wanted to watch, and then be able to watch them from his computer by streaming them over the internet. Content, free and legal. The new snapstream quartz is supposed to do this.
Here is how I do PVR, and I can ensure you, it is more logical than buying a $299 package
More logical? Only when your logic is that you don't want to spend any money. My motivation, OTOH, is to not spend all the time looking up, recording, encoding and copying TV shows that I want to watch. I just want to watch them. The ability to do that is worth something to me, and if it's not worth it to you then so be it, but I have to respectfully disagree.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go scan in and archive and index all my pictures to my FTP site. I wish I had a program that would do that for me, too.
In case you weren't paying attention, you signed up with them and gave them your e-mail address, and there's a nice link at the bottom where you can unsubscribe.e t
You are currently subscribed to snapstream-announce as: xxx@xxx.xxx To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-snapstream-announce-xxxxxxxx@lyris.dundee.n
So, you gave them your e-mail address, probably to beta-test Quartz or whatever, they sent you an e-mail saying that there was a 20% discount, and you have a problem with that? It's not like it was HTML with big graphics. I got one (that's why I'm here) that's 5K, with three links. And two of them are to Slashdot.org.
I'd hardly consider it SPAM.
It's beta still. Was released to beta testers recently, and is supposedly at the end of testing and soon to be released, however they've been saying that for months. Typical software design, 1 month out today, 3 weeks out a month from now. But if you buy their current software they'll give you a free upgrade. The downside is it's going to be part of .net, and while you'll have tivo-like listings and integration, it'll come at a monthly cost.
2. design the gui for a 3 year old -- make the boot screen look more like palm o/s
The problem I see with that is that there are so many different configurations, everyone's needs are so different, that it makes creating a nice, clean gui difficult. Making the PC more like a TV is a noble attempt, but to be able to do everything you can do with your PC as easily as you can do things with your TV, that'll take a lot of work. Not to mention I have a bunch of buttons on my TV that I don't really think do anything.
Indeed, I was just replying in the style you'd initiated "I think he's full of s**t."
Well, where we differ then is that he's my friend. I tell my friends when I think they're full of shit, and they don't get offended and I don't try to offend them. It goes from, "you're full of shit" to, "look, I'll show you" to, "damn, you're right" or "told ya so", or whatever, but it's a gateway to understanding. But when random people do much the same thing, it's, well, it's just bad etiquette. That's my opinion.
It's because you are passing your opinion on the quality of codecs/bitrates when I would claim that it is blatantly obvious that the lower bitrates sound crap.
If it were blatantly obvious, you wouldn't have people encoding at 128kbps and claiming they can't tell the difference. I can tell the difference btw 128 and 192, but I can't tell the difference btw 192 and 256. Or maybe I just haven't tried hard enough.
I'll spend some time tonight and see if I can figure out what all the fuss is about.
And yes, I have a proud following of freaks too
I saw that. Very amusing. I was actually referring to how you currently post at +0. People don't like to be talked down to, they like to be educated, and they like to be told what a big dick they have, not what a big dick they are. I'm not trying to be a dick here. Can't we all just get along? Or, barring that, agree to disagree?
Elitism and snobbery, the mark of an audiophile.
I'm not going to buy a TLC album, but another poster reccommended Jimi Hendrix, and I have a CD or two of his, so I'll give it a shot when I get home. I'll also see if I can think of any overproduced crap music I might have accidentally bought or been given. I have the same audio hardware (Sony MDR V700 headphones, SB Live) as my friend, so I'll at least be able to replicate his listening environment. So 128, 160, 192, and 320. I'll also throw my default VBR settings in there. I still want to see somebody pass an actual objective test in my presence. I want to see someone pick out the lower quality btw say, 256kbps and 320kbps, 8 times out of 10.
If you can't hear this difference having done exactly what I've said then I suggest you are not qualified to ever post a comment to a thread discussing audio quality again.
If you ever wonder why people don't like you, it's because of rants like this. It's not difficult to get the same message across without trying to offend the person you're talking to. Try it out.
Well, I guess we'd still have a few years, but he'd better get around to it!
If you wake up tomorrow next to Cindy Crawford, please, please, warn us.
Convenience, convenience, convenience. I've got an MP3 CD in my car that's been in there for nearly a month. It's got all my current favorite tracks/albums on it. When I get tired of it, I'll burn another CD that may last as long. Also, lossy compression is very acceptable for mediums such as speeches, books on ta--MP3, etc. I've got a road trip coming up, and I'm planning on listening to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy that I borrowed from a friend. At 64kbps, I can fit something like 21 hours of audio on one CD. As opposed to the 18 or so CDs that it would take if it were pure CD-Audio. You don't have to get rid of CDs, but MP3s have their place, and they're not going away. Lossy compression or not, you can make an MP3 sound as good as CD Audio. You can. Just turn up the bitrate, play with the settings. Use lossless compression if you want, but I guarantee you can rip an MP3 of almost any track that you won't be able to tell from a ripped wav file from the same disc. For me, the quality of the original sample is usually the smallest factor in the imperfections of the audio. Usually, static from the amplifier, and/or inadequate powering of the speakers, and/or crappy speakers, and/or background noise, are the biggest factors. If I were an audiophile freak, I wouldn't rip MP3, but I'm not. I live in the real world. MP3's imperfections are the least of my audio-related problems out here.
I have a friend who claims to be able to hear the difference between 192kbps and CD audio. Not only that, but he says the only way he can get his music to sound as good as the source is by using LAME, 320KBPS CBR with all the acoustic models turned off. He says that at that point, the differences btw the CD and the MP3 are "negligible", whatever that means. I think he's full of s**t. I use VBR, end up with files less than half the size, and it sounds good to me.