>Someone will have to source a decent GPL spellchecker library or write one and a dictionary before Mozilla will have anything similar.
This was done before Linux even existed (I believe I read about ispell in a book that was printed before the Linux "revolution").
Newer stuff like aspell and pspell would be well suited to Mozilla. It should be in there, and I'd help do it, but my skillset is currently limited to simple TurboC, Assembly, Turing, and Visual Basic (and another language I won't speak of).:-/
Well, working at a college built in the 50's and 60's has a bonus. Much of the staff furniture is from that era, and as long as the padding is still good, the stuff is very comfy. My back is happy in it.
At home I sit in a 70's "Operator's Chair" with a nice wide seat. It's great: Unlike those ergo chair loving people I can actually sit like a man on the seat. Take a look at how women and men normally sit one day and you'll notice I'm not being a chauvinist (sp?) pig...:-)
And, to top it off, I have two steel 60's teacher's desks. These things still work like the day they were made. Drawers even slide fine. The things didn't even bend when I was standing on them to do some wiring in the ceiling (and I'm a big guy...). While I did that it also supported two 20" late 80's trinitron Fixed Frequency beasts (another good find -- and over 100 lbs each). Unless they rust I'll never need new furniture. Best part is the colours are starting to come back into fashion!:-D
Hmmm, maybe _that's_ why new furniture is made out of particle board and plastic -- it breaks faster and you need to buy it more often...
What if I take a photograph of each page from my monitor? This is an analong process and therefore introduces an (very small if any) amount of noise.
You can take your "master" 35 mm film shots, blow 'em up to 8.5x11 and photocopy in an unlimited fashion (your time, and to a certan extent, money, limit you, just as with digitally copying an ebook). With today's high speed copiers the entire city could have the book in no time. It takes quite a few generations for photocopies to be unreadable...
Besides, you'd be surprised how many generations an SVHS master [or, per a previous slashdot discussion, Betacam master;-) ] can go through before it becomes unnacceptable (or even noticeable) to the consumer. Just look at how long it takes to catch the "professional" bootleggers with hundreds of VCRs in their shops. Its often months before investigations even start...
- Can no longer rent it
- Must report it stolen
- Has increased insurance fees
- Must buy a new car if I never return it
Whereas a rented e-book that is cracked by you for keeps:
- Is still fully rentable by the company
- Is not reported stolen by the company
- Does not directly result in increased insurance fees for the company
- Does not require the writing of a new e-book for the company
You see, one is grand larceny (car stealing), the other is copyright violation (cracking e-books).
I like putting it the legal way -- it makes it sound the same as the crime is generally regarded by society -- as a simple violation. Cracking the e-book makes you as bad as the guy that parks in the no-parking zone (annoying, unlawful [not illegal!], hardly anything to write home about, hardly anything to have a criminal record for). Unfortunately, cracking in the eyes of the law makes you almost as bad as an armed bank robber if one looks at the sentences and fines imposed. I fail to see the comparison between how people like Kevin Mitnick and Dimitry Skylarov hurt others and how a gun wielding maniac holds up a bank. I do, however, clearly see the public nuisance comparison to an illegally parked vehicle. I can also (just barely) see how copyright violation could be considered harassment to the author.
But taking cracking your e-book to look at it longer to be stealing is like saying looking through the author's window while they write the book is stealing (since at that point they had no intention of letting you look at the book).
But full blown larceny? No way. Even the dictionary agrees on this.
I do apologize for mistaking bandwidth and center frequencies, but I still don't understand why people constantly bring BetaCam in the VHS vs Beta wars. These were NOT part of the format wars -- As a kid I remember seeing the tail end of them and I never once saw a pre-recorded BetaCam rental at my local shop. It was all standard old Beta, and, frankly, pre-recorded fresh rentals would be the closest a consumer would get to high quality back then (unless you paid $100 for a prerecorded tape). It was unlikely a consumer would be willing to spend the thousands necessary (in those days) to get the quality we enjoy from even modern cable TV.
SuperBeta, the "normal" Beta compatible high quality format was not release until the war was almost over, in 1985.
SVHS was introduced not 5 years later, but two. Hi-Fi was released only 1 month later than Hi-Fi Beta. The VHS public never waited very long to enjoy improvements to the tape quality that rivaled Beta.
Whereas SVHS makes do with tapes that cost slightly more (double coated), Beta ED (the real competitor) requires the most expensive tapes known to man: Pure Metal.
Unfortunately, your link depicts BetaCam, not plain everyday household Beta. Betacam does 400 lines, and that accounts for the obviously impossibly inflated bandwidth (which appears to be more than 100%) shown in the pictures. Also, it was introduced nearly a decade after the Beta wars started. It is about as much a competitor to VHS as it was a competitor to standard Beta!
Since you doubt me, I will back up my claim that there are websites that agree with me. Since you doubt that the signal to noise ratio on VHS is comparable to beta, please read this link:
http://www.techtronics.com/uk/shop/87-00-video-f or mats-comparison.html
According to that site the signal to noise ratio is identical. A lower signal to noise ratio for VHS would indicate that extra 30% of bandwidth was put to good use. It appears it was not so, as they calculate an identical Signal to Noise range. I might suggest that the extra 30% must offer something... Unfortunately I am still unconvinced it offers a 30% better picture.
I think at the time of the wars a recording made by a home viewer would not be an adequate comparison. The likelyhood of an average consumer at that point even having a 4 head VCR was nearly nil, and therefore anything not pre-recorded was expected to be of poor quality.
In my entire lifetime of my family renting VHS tapes I have only ever seen one recorded in LP mode. Ever. SP looks good. LP and EP suck, but really, since VHS casettes have geerally cost so much less than Beta (from my limited memory of the time), why the heck would you not pick up a T-160 to tape a movie? How many movies are over 160 mins? If you use LP or EP it isn't for keeps. Even joe schmoe could tell that. And 160 mins is just a smidgen away from the 3 hours at which Beta is supposed to keep its quality.
Beta might look better in the slower speeds, but at the time due to lower quality equipment (electrically, not physically) and S/N ratios, no one cared unless they were willing to spend, spend, spend. And even now, no one cares because you can pick up tapes at ridiculously low prices (I can get a 10 pack of name brand tapes for $4 US). Playtime past the length of a movie isn't much of a factor as far as I can tell. But I will give you that: If you were willing to spend the most on equipment to squeeze some better video over a very long period of time without swapping tapes, Beta beats all.
With SP Pre-Recorded tapes (the only way to reliably compare the technologies -- consumer VCRs even today simply have a much to low qualty control level as compared to professional duplicating equipment) the difference was unviewable to the untrained eye, IMHO. I've seen old rants on the net from Beta lovers who would break down on that point as well.
I'm sure you meant Khz for the audio figures. 500 khz is a complete waste for audio. It would take 20 tracks of audio before this would even be close to being used up. 125 khz would provide 62.5 khz per channel, which is way out of the human hearing range. [These figures are incorrect, right?]
VHS Hi-Fi, while using companding which does limit dynamic range, still allows a full 20-20 kHz of sound. Not a single audible sound should be dropped. Dynamic range should not be a problem for videotapes unless you tape classical concerts on your VHS tapes often (I know I don't).
I'm looking for more sites showing the SNR of Beta and VHS but the going's very tough for Beta.
This Beta advocacy site:
http://www.geocities.com/videoholic2000/Frameind ex p.htm
displays Sony's flagrant dislike of consumers (God only knows why). Elimination of dubbing features in 1976 models, lieing to them about the "impossibility" of these features that were quickly implemented in VHS anyhow: Picture search (implemented in VHS weeks after Sony's lie), Hi-Fi (implemented within monthts), and Super Quality (VHS HQ within months again).
Oh, and the timeline also shows VHS pioneered multispeed tapes. VHS also pioneered stereo recordings. VHS VCRs also sold with full remote controls first.
VHS was not only the most viable format, in my opinion, the lower quality difference of it was negligible at the time, and still is when economics are applied to the equation.
Prove you are correct about the bandwidths. Beta has a higher bandwidth. Beta is possibly slightly better than VHS. Colour is also slightly better. But the difference isn't even as wide as the already small gap between Laserdisc and DVD. We are talking 10 lines and a little better colour. The signal itself on Beta and VHS has a generally similar Signal to Noise ratio. (if the other site is correct).
Basically, while Beta was (admittedly) somewhat better, the differences were so minimal you would have to run both decks side by side on the same TV to even begin to see the difference. The Beta is better is the same argument you hear for the latest-and-greatest YC/Comb filters and line-quintuplers (or whatever) the salesman at the shop tries to sell you on the latest TVs. Side by side, with a handpicked clip, the difference is somewhat evident. At home, you'd never, ever, be able to see the difference, unless you were nuts for quality.
Saying Beta is better is like telling the world that 100 ISO film produces higher definition pictures than 200 ISO (it does). Did you ever notice that? Probably not. Neither did I until I read about it. And I still am hard pressed to tell the difference.
That's the reaction of me and most people to the 10 lines and sightly better chroma argument.
If I'm largely wrong on facts or figure, please let me know.:-)
That's a whole 4% better horizonal resolution. 4% is not worth all this argument.
The proof is availiable here (scroll down): http://www.ee.washington.edu/conselec/CE/kuhn/vcr/ vcr.htm (remove the slashdot impregnated space)
Searches for other sites will also show the same results. Remember folks, we're talking 1970's beta formats, not the super duper new stuff on the market.
I'm sorry Beta lovers, the numbers can't lie. If you can tell the difference then I guess your eyes are 4% better than mine.
Plain Beta is not more than even 10% better than plain VHS (check the specs -- they should be on google somewhere). You'd better check up on the details of the tapes you're feeding those professional recorders.
They probably say something like "SuperBeta" on them (or whatever that enhanced Beta format is). Which is to Beta what Super VHS is to VHS.
Apples and Oranges, me thinks...
>Second, I've always heard that it was Sony's licensing problems that killed Beta.
This I agree with.
>Maybe someday they will learn...
Nahh, they've been doing it for so long its second nature to them. You've gotta squeeze MiniDisc and SDDS in there...
And my SVHS machine records similar quailty for 1/4 the price. And it seeks more than fast enough for me. Oh, and I bought it at a chain store and brought it home that nite.:-)
>Why do all USA wireless phone providers charge for incoming calls
Here's why:
Get a second line after you buy the cellphone. Some simple electronics (PIC chip + DTMF Generator) will get it to dial your cellphone if the line rings; Once you pick up it needs to conference the lines (a 600 ohm isolation transformer should do this) and viola! you can phone anywhere you like, for as long as you like, for nothing using your cellphone! Please note: Building this may or may not be in violation of your local laws. Please check before attempting to do so.
If this really is the way cellphones work in Europe, I have an electronics project to bring over to my cousins next time I visit.:-)
>you need to stop using the WWW to deliver it and look into a medium that's adequately protected by the DMCA.
You can still use the WWW and your site can be DMCA protected. And, using this method, it will also be fully compatible with the most popular browsers:
Your site starts a javascript popup Agree/Disagree window asking the user to agree to some terms.
Your javascript multiplies their answer by 13. It then adds (or subtracts) that to all the letters in the javascript-embedded HTML-in-a-variable.
Spit the output to the browser window.
Instant DMCA encryption protection, fully popular browser compatible (although not standard HTML). Life is good.
If the article isn't too important but still belongs on slashdot I believe it gets posted to the section itself rather than the homepage (for an example of this as a common occurrence, check the ask slashdot section).
Click the censorship section and you'll see the story listed.
If you are bored and want more hot stories try: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl
Slashdot has all sorts of hidden stuff, alas this story was just hard to find (IMO). For hidden stuff, try to find the trolltalk sid.
Ok, you make a good point, but the problem is people are lazy. Most people would think I'm nuts for working for a radio station for free, never mind suing someone under the DMCA...
Your idea is good, but good luck convincing more than 10 people to do it. Besides, as a student, even the $1000 I'd need to spend to fight a case myself would break me. I am considering, however, donating to the EFF.
And I'd still try to help, but as a Canadian I really can't do anything about the DMCA because it doesn't affect me directly (although indirectly it scares the pants off me). I understand that most countries(probably including mine) are willing to extradite people for the slightest DMCA offense, but then its too late.
Plus, what with the media companies being in the pockets of the entirity of North America you can expect them to try to consolidate all the lawsuits into one so they can fight it easier.
Ho Hum.
>P.S. Autechre sucks. Have you heard of Plastikman?
Yup. My show's pretty new so I haven't spun any of that yet (it's hard enough getting the music never mind finding out about artists -- I think I'll have to start sending out requests to the indie labels). Autechre was once pretty good (around 1995) but I agree, their latest stuff doesn't work just right.
>However, it has absolutely nothing to do with the crackdown on actual illegal activity, which is what this whole article and thread is about.
You are right, but really my post was meant as a reply to the comment just above mine in the thread. I don't like being whitewashed with the brush of piracy, yet I was told as a slashdotter and a techie I am:
- Full of bullshit
- Of low moral standards
- Willing to steal from restaurants
- Willing to steal anything I can get my hands on (therefore willing to steal from my own mother)
First of all, it's copyright violation, not stealing (I won't get into that), second of all all the above are a set of extreme untruths. I have never stolen anything, my moral standards are so high I even gave up my religion to stick with them (oh, that's another story I won't get into), and while I do occasionally bullshit people it's for fun and they usually get the joke.
I guess I fell for the troll. Oh well -- at least the troll kept the spelling mistakes to a minimum.:-)
>I bet most/. readers would try to escape from restaurants without paying if they get the chance.
I bet that if you consider yourself "normal", most psychologists would say the same about you. "Normal" people don't give their money away that easily. A sense of ethics and physical barries stops "normal" people from doing illegal things.
But ethics, like trust, is a two way street. If you look at me like a criminal everyday, I'll be disheartened (piracy tax on blank media). If you come straight out and accuse me of being a criminal (Degrade your CDs so I can't even use it in my car), in the real world I have two choices: Fight it (sue you for slander) or be it (if you think I'm a criminal I may as well be one). Well, there's a third choice for the apathetic, ignore it.
The first choice (fight it) isn't viable against media companies. They are so big you won't take them down. The third choice just makes you their patsy. So that leaves you with a shortage of options.
Now, the question is, when was the last time the restaurant fed you a poison with your meal and said you had to pay them to receive the antidote? Wether or not you consider this is what the new "copy proof" CDs are like I'll let you know this: After talking to people who only touch a computer at work to write up word docos, even they are disgusted by that behaviour. In fact, many consider it so heinous that they think I'm lying. Of course, as a fellow slashdot reader, you know I'm not.
BTW: I'm from Canada, and I have to pay $0.21 piracy tax on every CD-R I buy. I therefore don't cosider myself a pirate if I burn music onto those discs -- It's already paid for. My morals are in the right place. I benefit musicians I care about more than the RIAA ever has -- I run an unpaid 2 hour radio show in the KW area showcasing hard to find electronic music (pretty much all of it is hard to find). I do more for the artists I play than the RIAA ever will... Unless you can point me to some recent RIAA adverts for "Mouse on Mars" or "Autechre".
First two are obvious. Third one is for discussion. Fourth is the "real deal" where the people running the newsgroup select the submissions from the pool based on the sumitted reviews. Why not just make these groups?
Cost? $10/monthly for usenet access. Free if you are a working for a University.
No server cost, no real bandwidth costs, just time and effort...
The best part is everyone can get the journals anytime, no problem. All you would have to do (as a university, for example) is keep a running log of everything posted to sci.journal.xyz.published.moderated
Places like cheapbytes could sell a copy of the group for the same price as their Linux distros. $5 for everything ever posted to that group? I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of non-scientists got their hands on that!
>I don't understand how 30/200 and 4/200 translate to near certainty of death.
As a pessimist, that's still too high for me...
>the second by a broken rail.
The fun of taking the train. You put your trust into the upkeep of the tracks, since there's no way the train can stop in time. In a car, if you pay attention, you generally can stop within seconds. I'd like to see a train stop in seconds...
Yes, most mass transit can crumple more. But most mass transit has more inertia to crumple. For example, if I throw a paper airplane at 10 mph at a wall, the tip is slightly bent out of shape. Now, drive a Jumbo Jet at a concrete wall at even 10 mph.
Which one is damaged beyond repair?
Now, the fun thing with crumple zones is the decelleration speed. I've been told that, without seat belts, even crashes at 10 mph are dangerous (imagine running flat out into a brick wall). Are you willing to bet your safety that the train will decellerate through its crumple zone at under 10 mph?
If you want safety, I think you want Volvo. This, unfortunately, is just a plain personal decision. Without stats to back it up (and I'm too lazy to find them) my argument is unfounded.
I'd venture that all public transport accidents usually make it into the local newspaper. Except for the time our local bus driver squished someone underneath the tires, I've never heard of a bus accident where someone didn't go to hospital for something.
Accidents in cars that don't send people to hospital happen so frequently here we have a walk-in accident reporting station.
All of the buses I've seen do not have seatbelts. Till then, I'll take my chances with my safety on my own four wheels, and watch out for Big Stuff (tm).:-)
I've even been to England. The bus service there isn't too bad, IMHO. I'd even extend that to much of the rest of Europe. And the price is reasonable.
Here, gas is 1/4 what you pay ($0.58 CAN per liter). Bus fares are just a few pennies under UK prices (about $2 CAN for a local city ride) unless they've changed recently. That adds up to not as much savings as you'd need to see (Monthly bus passes are $150 CAN per person. Our entire family uses about $100 CAN total in gas for two cars monthly). You can lease a cheapo car here for $200 a month. Add in gas and insurance and you are up to $300 a month. Two or three bus passes. Or share one car. I know what option I'd pick...
>Hardly huge cities. Yet public transport works a treat there.
Yes, it seems there is another time when public transport can work well -- when the city is well designed. That didn't happen in a LOT of North America, sad to say. And you won't be uprooting me and my house just to get the bus service working.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
>Someone will have to source a decent GPL spellchecker library or write one and a dictionary before Mozilla will have anything similar.
:-/
This was done before Linux even existed (I believe I read about ispell in a book that was printed before the Linux "revolution").
Newer stuff like aspell and pspell would be well suited to Mozilla. It should be in there, and I'd help do it, but my skillset is currently limited to simple TurboC, Assembly, Turing, and Visual Basic (and another language I won't speak of).
Well, working at a college built in the 50's and 60's has a bonus. Much of the staff furniture is from that era, and as long as the padding is still good, the stuff is very comfy. My back is happy in it.
:-)
:-D
At home I sit in a 70's "Operator's Chair" with a nice wide seat. It's great: Unlike those ergo chair loving people I can actually sit like a man on the seat. Take a look at how women and men normally sit one day and you'll notice I'm not being a chauvinist (sp?) pig...
And, to top it off, I have two steel 60's teacher's desks. These things still work like the day they were made. Drawers even slide fine. The things didn't even bend when I was standing on them to do some wiring in the ceiling (and I'm a big guy...). While I did that it also supported two 20" late 80's trinitron Fixed Frequency beasts (another good find -- and over 100 lbs each). Unless they rust I'll never need new furniture. Best part is the colours are starting to come back into fashion!
Hmmm, maybe _that's_ why new furniture is made out of particle board and plastic -- it breaks faster and you need to buy it more often...
What if I take a photograph of each page from my monitor? This is an analong process and therefore introduces an (very small if any) amount of noise.
;-) ] can go through before it becomes unnacceptable (or even noticeable) to the consumer. Just look at how long it takes to catch the "professional" bootleggers with hundreds of VCRs in their shops. Its often months before investigations even start...
You can take your "master" 35 mm film shots, blow 'em up to 8.5x11 and photocopy in an unlimited fashion (your time, and to a certan extent, money, limit you, just as with digitally copying an ebook). With today's high speed copiers the entire city could have the book in no time. It takes quite a few generations for photocopies to be unreadable...
Besides, you'd be surprised how many generations an SVHS master [or, per a previous slashdot discussion, Betacam master
If I take that car after the deadline Hertz:
- Can no longer rent it
- Must report it stolen
- Has increased insurance fees
- Must buy a new car if I never return it
Whereas a rented e-book that is cracked by you for keeps:
- Is still fully rentable by the company
- Is not reported stolen by the company
- Does not directly result in increased insurance fees for the company
- Does not require the writing of a new e-book for the company
You see, one is grand larceny (car stealing), the other is copyright violation (cracking e-books).
I like putting it the legal way -- it makes it sound the same as the crime is generally regarded by society -- as a simple violation. Cracking the e-book makes you as bad as the guy that parks in the no-parking zone (annoying, unlawful [not illegal!], hardly anything to write home about, hardly anything to have a criminal record for). Unfortunately, cracking in the eyes of the law makes you almost as bad as an armed bank robber if one looks at the sentences and fines imposed. I fail to see the comparison between how people like Kevin Mitnick and Dimitry Skylarov hurt others and how a gun wielding maniac holds up a bank. I do, however, clearly see the public nuisance comparison to an illegally parked vehicle. I can also (just barely) see how copyright violation could be considered harassment to the author.
But taking cracking your e-book to look at it longer to be stealing is like saying looking through the author's window while they write the book is stealing (since at that point they had no intention of letting you look at the book).
But full blown larceny? No way. Even the dictionary agrees on this.
I do apologize for mistaking bandwidth and center frequencies, but I still don't understand why people constantly bring BetaCam in the VHS vs Beta wars. These were NOT part of the format wars -- As a kid I remember seeing the tail end of them and I never once saw a pre-recorded BetaCam rental at my local shop. It was all standard old Beta, and, frankly, pre-recorded fresh rentals would be the closest a consumer would get to high quality back then (unless you paid $100 for a prerecorded tape). It was unlikely a consumer would be willing to spend the thousands necessary (in those days) to get the quality we enjoy from even modern cable TV.
f or mats-comparison.html
d ex p.htm
5 6/ betaspec.html
:-)
SuperBeta, the "normal" Beta compatible high quality format was not release until the war was almost over, in 1985.
SVHS was introduced not 5 years later, but two. Hi-Fi was released only 1 month later than Hi-Fi Beta. The VHS public never waited very long to enjoy improvements to the tape quality that rivaled Beta.
Whereas SVHS makes do with tapes that cost slightly more (double coated), Beta ED (the real competitor) requires the most expensive tapes known to man: Pure Metal.
Unfortunately, your link depicts BetaCam, not plain everyday household Beta. Betacam does 400 lines, and that accounts for the obviously impossibly inflated bandwidth (which appears to be more than 100%) shown in the pictures. Also, it was introduced nearly a decade after the Beta wars started. It is about as much a competitor to VHS as it was a competitor to standard Beta!
Since you doubt me, I will back up my claim that there are websites that agree with me. Since you doubt that the signal to noise ratio on VHS is comparable to beta, please read this link:
http://www.techtronics.com/uk/shop/87-00-video-
According to that site the signal to noise ratio is identical. A lower signal to noise ratio for VHS would indicate that extra 30% of bandwidth was put to good use. It appears it was not so, as they calculate an identical Signal to Noise range. I might suggest that the extra 30% must offer something... Unfortunately I am still unconvinced it offers a 30% better picture.
I think at the time of the wars a recording made by a home viewer would not be an adequate comparison. The likelyhood of an average consumer at that point even having a 4 head VCR was nearly nil, and therefore anything not pre-recorded was expected to be of poor quality.
In my entire lifetime of my family renting VHS tapes I have only ever seen one recorded in LP mode. Ever. SP looks good. LP and EP suck, but really, since VHS casettes have geerally cost so much less than Beta (from my limited memory of the time), why the heck would you not pick up a T-160 to tape a movie? How many movies are over 160 mins? If you use LP or EP it isn't for keeps. Even joe schmoe could tell that. And 160 mins is just a smidgen away from the 3 hours at which Beta is supposed to keep its quality.
Beta might look better in the slower speeds, but at the time due to lower quality equipment (electrically, not physically) and S/N ratios, no one cared unless they were willing to spend, spend, spend. And even now, no one cares because you can pick up tapes at ridiculously low prices (I can get a 10 pack of name brand tapes for $4 US). Playtime past the length of a movie isn't much of a factor as far as I can tell. But I will give you that: If you were willing to spend the most on equipment to squeeze some better video over a very long period of time without swapping tapes, Beta beats all.
With SP Pre-Recorded tapes (the only way to reliably compare the technologies -- consumer VCRs even today simply have a much to low qualty control level as compared to professional duplicating equipment) the difference was unviewable to the untrained eye, IMHO. I've seen old rants on the net from Beta lovers who would break down on that point as well.
I'm sure you meant Khz for the audio figures. 500 khz is a complete waste for audio. It would take 20 tracks of audio before this would even be close to being used up. 125 khz would provide 62.5 khz per channel, which is way out of the human hearing range. [These figures are incorrect, right?]
VHS Hi-Fi, while using companding which does limit dynamic range, still allows a full 20-20 kHz of sound. Not a single audible sound should be dropped. Dynamic range should not be a problem for videotapes unless you tape classical concerts on your VHS tapes often (I know I don't).
I'm looking for more sites showing the SNR of Beta and VHS but the going's very tough for Beta.
This Beta advocacy site:
http://www.geocities.com/videoholic2000/Framein
displays Sony's flagrant dislike of consumers (God only knows why). Elimination of dubbing features in 1976 models, lieing to them about the "impossibility" of these features that were quickly implemented in VHS anyhow: Picture search (implemented in VHS weeks after Sony's lie), Hi-Fi (implemented within monthts), and Super Quality (VHS HQ within months again).
Oh, and the timeline also shows VHS pioneered multispeed tapes. VHS also pioneered stereo recordings. VHS VCRs also sold with full remote controls first.
VHS was not only the most viable format, in my opinion, the lower quality difference of it was negligible at the time, and still is when economics are applied to the equation.
Specifications:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/75
Prove you are correct about the bandwidths. Beta has a higher bandwidth. Beta is possibly slightly better than VHS. Colour is also slightly better. But the difference isn't even as wide as the already small gap between Laserdisc and DVD. We are talking 10 lines and a little better colour. The signal itself on Beta and VHS has a generally similar Signal to Noise ratio. (if the other site is correct).
Basically, while Beta was (admittedly) somewhat better, the differences were so minimal you would have to run both decks side by side on the same TV to even begin to see the difference. The Beta is better is the same argument you hear for the latest-and-greatest YC/Comb filters and line-quintuplers (or whatever) the salesman at the shop tries to sell you on the latest TVs. Side by side, with a handpicked clip, the difference is somewhat evident. At home, you'd never, ever, be able to see the difference, unless you were nuts for quality.
Saying Beta is better is like telling the world that 100 ISO film produces higher definition pictures than 200 ISO (it does). Did you ever notice that? Probably not. Neither did I until I read about it. And I still am hard pressed to tell the difference.
That's the reaction of me and most people to the 10 lines and sightly better chroma argument.
If I'm largely wrong on facts or figure, please let me know.
To close the "Beta is much better than VHS myth" here are some documented stats:
/ vcr.htm (remove the slashdot impregnated space)
- VHS: 240 Lines, 3.4 Mhz bandwidth
- Beta: 250 Lines, 3.5 Mhz bandwidth
That's a whole 4% better horizonal resolution. 4% is not worth all this argument.
The proof is availiable here (scroll down): http://www.ee.washington.edu/conselec/CE/kuhn/vcr
Searches for other sites will also show the same results. Remember folks, we're talking 1970's beta formats, not the super duper new stuff on the market.
I'm sorry Beta lovers, the numbers can't lie. If you can tell the difference then I guess your eyes are 4% better than mine.
Plain Beta is not more than even 10% better than plain VHS (check the specs -- they should be on google somewhere). You'd better check up on the details of the tapes you're feeding those professional recorders.
They probably say something like "SuperBeta" on them (or whatever that enhanced Beta format is). Which is to Beta what Super VHS is to VHS.
Apples and Oranges, me thinks...
>Second, I've always heard that it was Sony's licensing problems that killed Beta.
This I agree with.
>Maybe someday they will learn...
Nahh, they've been doing it for so long its second nature to them. You've gotta squeeze MiniDisc and SDDS in there...
And my SVHS machine records similar quailty for 1/4 the price. And it seeks more than fast enough for me. Oh, and I bought it at a chain store and brought it home that nite. :-)
That and I can buy the tapes at the 'Shack.
But hey, different strokes for different folks...
>Why do all USA wireless phone providers charge for incoming calls
:-)
Here's why:
Get a second line after you buy the cellphone. Some simple electronics (PIC chip + DTMF Generator) will get it to dial your cellphone if the line rings; Once you pick up it needs to conference the lines (a 600 ohm isolation transformer should do this) and viola! you can phone anywhere you like, for as long as you like, for nothing using your cellphone! Please note: Building this may or may not be in violation of your local laws. Please check before attempting to do so.
If this really is the way cellphones work in Europe, I have an electronics project to bring over to my cousins next time I visit.
>There is this amazing other concept that if no one buys a product, that product will either improve, or die.
Thanks for proving that copyright violation, whereby you don't buy the product, is a correct method of fighting a company.
What were your other two points again?
http://slashdot.org/search.pl?topic=censorship
:-)
Next time you see the guy eating the black square beside an article, give him a click.
Not a section, really, more like a topic search. Same thing, more load. Isn't slashcode wonderful?
Then again, I can't complain. I can't even begin to imagine how complicated the slashcode was to write...
>Support for all video cards right off of the shelf, from day one.
Oh, I see, now DirectX works with the ISA Apollo video card that functions just fine driving a 20" monitor for my Linux box?
If you are going to make broad generalizations, you should at least qualify them. Sheesh!
>you need to stop using the WWW to deliver it and look into a medium that's adequately protected by the DMCA.
You can still use the WWW and your site can be DMCA protected. And, using this method, it will also be fully compatible with the most popular browsers:
Your site starts a javascript popup Agree/Disagree window asking the user to agree to some terms.
Your javascript multiplies their answer by 13. It then adds (or subtracts) that to all the letters in the javascript-embedded HTML-in-a-variable.
Spit the output to the browser window.
Instant DMCA encryption protection, fully popular browser compatible (although not standard HTML). Life is good.
I think I'm going to do that right now...
Awww, be fair. Don't you know I always do this after getting an attachment in pine (or mutt or whatever):
./<attachment name>
- Save the attachment.
- Exit pine.
- chmod a+x the attachment.
- sudo
How about this for fast?
;-), fortunately I don't know anyone who's been infected...
dd if=virus.doc.pif of=clean.doc bs=137216 skip=1
I don't care to see if it works
The worm's payload is to delete things on your computer once out of every twenty times. I don't play russian roulette with my machine.
>I'm trying to imagine how long it would take to print out on the teletype.
Yes. This is the future. Forget the past. It is wrong to know of the past. It is wrong to support the past. The future is always.
If the article isn't too important but still belongs on slashdot I believe it gets posted to the section itself rather than the homepage (for an example of this as a common occurrence, check the ask slashdot section).
Click the censorship section and you'll see the story listed.
If you are bored and want more hot stories try: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl
Slashdot has all sorts of hidden stuff, alas this story was just hard to find (IMO). For hidden stuff, try to find the trolltalk sid.
Ahhh, hidden sids... That's pointlessly fun.
Ok, you make a good point, but the problem is people are lazy. Most people would think I'm nuts for working for a radio station for free, never mind suing someone under the DMCA...
Your idea is good, but good luck convincing more than 10 people to do it. Besides, as a student, even the $1000 I'd need to spend to fight a case myself would break me. I am considering, however, donating to the EFF.
And I'd still try to help, but as a Canadian I really can't do anything about the DMCA because it doesn't affect me directly (although indirectly it scares the pants off me). I understand that most countries(probably including mine) are willing to extradite people for the slightest DMCA offense, but then its too late.
Plus, what with the media companies being in the pockets of the entirity of North America you can expect them to try to consolidate all the lawsuits into one so they can fight it easier.
Ho Hum.
>P.S. Autechre sucks. Have you heard of Plastikman?
Yup. My show's pretty new so I haven't spun any of that yet (it's hard enough getting the music never mind finding out about artists -- I think I'll have to start sending out requests to the indie labels). Autechre was once pretty good (around 1995) but I agree, their latest stuff doesn't work just right.
>However, it has absolutely nothing to do with the crackdown on actual illegal activity, which is what this whole article and thread is about.
:-)
You are right, but really my post was meant as a reply to the comment just above mine in the thread. I don't like being whitewashed with the brush of piracy, yet I was told as a slashdotter and a techie I am:
- Full of bullshit
- Of low moral standards
- Willing to steal from restaurants
- Willing to steal anything I can get my hands on (therefore willing to steal from my own mother)
First of all, it's copyright violation, not stealing (I won't get into that), second of all all the above are a set of extreme untruths. I have never stolen anything, my moral standards are so high I even gave up my religion to stick with them (oh, that's another story I won't get into), and while I do occasionally bullshit people it's for fun and they usually get the joke.
I guess I fell for the troll. Oh well -- at least the troll kept the spelling mistakes to a minimum.
>I bet most /. readers would try to escape from restaurants without paying if they get the chance.
I bet that if you consider yourself "normal", most psychologists would say the same about you. "Normal" people don't give their money away that easily. A sense of ethics and physical barries stops "normal" people from doing illegal things.
But ethics, like trust, is a two way street. If you look at me like a criminal everyday, I'll be disheartened (piracy tax on blank media). If you come straight out and accuse me of being a criminal (Degrade your CDs so I can't even use it in my car), in the real world I have two choices: Fight it (sue you for slander) or be it (if you think I'm a criminal I may as well be one). Well, there's a third choice for the apathetic, ignore it.
The first choice (fight it) isn't viable against media companies. They are so big you won't take them down. The third choice just makes you their patsy. So that leaves you with a shortage of options.
Now, the question is, when was the last time the restaurant fed you a poison with your meal and said you had to pay them to receive the antidote? Wether or not you consider this is what the new "copy proof" CDs are like I'll let you know this: After talking to people who only touch a computer at work to write up word docos, even they are disgusted by that behaviour. In fact, many consider it so heinous that they think I'm lying. Of course, as a fellow slashdot reader, you know I'm not.
BTW: I'm from Canada, and I have to pay $0.21 piracy tax on every CD-R I buy. I therefore don't cosider myself a pirate if I burn music onto those discs -- It's already paid for. My morals are in the right place. I benefit musicians I care about more than the RIAA ever has -- I run an unpaid 2 hour radio show in the KW area showcasing hard to find electronic music (pretty much all of it is hard to find). I do more for the artists I play than the RIAA ever will... Unless you can point me to some recent RIAA adverts for "Mouse on Mars" or "Autechre".
Bandwidth and distribution solution in one:
sci.journal.xyz.submissions
sci.journal.xyz.submissions.review
sci.journal.xyz.d
sci.journal.xyz.published.moderated
First two are obvious. Third one is for discussion. Fourth is the "real deal" where the people running the newsgroup select the submissions from the pool based on the sumitted reviews. Why not just make these groups?
Cost? $10/monthly for usenet access. Free if you are a working for a University.
No server cost, no real bandwidth costs, just time and effort...
The best part is everyone can get the journals anytime, no problem. All you would have to do (as a university, for example) is keep a running log of everything posted to sci.journal.xyz.published.moderated
Places like cheapbytes could sell a copy of the group for the same price as their Linux distros. $5 for everything ever posted to that group? I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of non-scientists got their hands on that!
$3000...
That's only a little under 5 times more expensive than this 35" normal TV.
Let's see: 3 times the resolution, 5 times the price. 3/5 of the benefit isn't going to make me rush out and buy one anytime soon.
>I don't understand how 30/200 and 4/200 translate to near certainty of death.
:-)
As a pessimist, that's still too high for me...
>the second by a broken rail.
The fun of taking the train. You put your trust into the upkeep of the tracks, since there's no way the train can stop in time. In a car, if you pay attention, you generally can stop within seconds. I'd like to see a train stop in seconds...
Yes, most mass transit can crumple more. But most mass transit has more inertia to crumple. For example, if I throw a paper airplane at 10 mph at a wall, the tip is slightly bent out of shape. Now, drive a Jumbo Jet at a concrete wall at even 10 mph.
Which one is damaged beyond repair?
Now, the fun thing with crumple zones is the decelleration speed. I've been told that, without seat belts, even crashes at 10 mph are dangerous (imagine running flat out into a brick wall). Are you willing to bet your safety that the train will decellerate through its crumple zone at under 10 mph?
If you want safety, I think you want Volvo. This, unfortunately, is just a plain personal decision. Without stats to back it up (and I'm too lazy to find them) my argument is unfounded.
I'd venture that all public transport accidents usually make it into the local newspaper. Except for the time our local bus driver squished someone underneath the tires, I've never heard of a bus accident where someone didn't go to hospital for something.
Accidents in cars that don't send people to hospital happen so frequently here we have a walk-in accident reporting station.
All of the buses I've seen do not have seatbelts. Till then, I'll take my chances with my safety on my own four wheels, and watch out for Big Stuff (tm).
I've even been to England. The bus service there isn't too bad, IMHO. I'd even extend that to much of the rest of Europe. And the price is reasonable.
Here, gas is 1/4 what you pay ($0.58 CAN per liter). Bus fares are just a few pennies under UK prices (about $2 CAN for a local city ride) unless they've changed recently. That adds up to not as much savings as you'd need to see (Monthly bus passes are $150 CAN per person. Our entire family uses about $100 CAN total in gas for two cars monthly). You can lease a cheapo car here for $200 a month. Add in gas and insurance and you are up to $300 a month. Two or three bus passes. Or share one car. I know what option I'd pick...
>Hardly huge cities. Yet public transport works a treat there.
:-)
Yes, it seems there is another time when public transport can work well -- when the city is well designed. That didn't happen in a LOT of North America, sad to say. And you won't be uprooting me and my house just to get the bus service working.