Hammerfall is top notch and I didn't realize it had solid Linux support, so I'll look into it. I know numerous people who had problems with alsa and HDSP even very recently.
M-Audio Delta I know has been supported for years (4Front? Can't look it up easily from my PDA) but I didn't think it was pro quality. Did they get ADAT support stable yet? I figured they lost the battle with PT at the highend and were going to chase the LT market. I've seen numerous studios dump Midiman over the years due to product constraints and limited end user support.
AudioScience seems very friendly for the not-for-profit studios (and churches) on a budget, but I think the higher end hardware is priced out of the picture. Radio stations and high budget companies seem to love it. I don't know anyone in my area using it in the studio, Win nor Lin.
I guess that's my problem with many of the companies I've seen supporting Linux: end user support problems. PT's end user support is fantastic even for small budget studios. The interface is known by every producer and engineer.
For me, initial cost means little. Low training costs, good support, and user friendliness are just as important as sound quality.
Ardour is a good product with, IMHO, the brightest future. We've screwed with it, and I believe are integrating it in a cheap portable studio.
I've read Day and it isn't a bad read, but I sense a lot of future poverty in that plan.
I advocate true deregulation due to what I see in markets and industries with little regulation: more choice, lower prices, better quality.
It is when regulations are incorporated that the consumers suffer. Regulations reduce businesses able to navigate the mandates, increase costs and sometimes enforce a monopoly.
IMO, Ardour is my least favorite but has the brightest future.
I know 2 Pro studios that made the switch from Pro Tools and both were financially unstable. Pro Tools still reigns supreme for me for the moment.
The 4 figures for software is worth it when the $150/hour mastering engineer spends 2 days at the studio and works with what he knows. The 2 studios I know running Ardour have released relatively mediocre sounding albums that had great content. I can tell they didn't have a good engineer handling the mastering.
Remember, $2500/album pays off Pro Tools in 8 weeks. Many bands and engineers are familiar with Pro Tools, which is a huge selling point.
My brother owns a recording studio, and Linux wouldn't compete in that arena. For a home studio, these apps + a SB Audigy are fine, but no talented band, producer, editor or mastering engineer will look twice. The midlevel sound cards don't approach the quality and power of the high end (even rotools HD) vehicles.
For me, I want to see Linux drivers adapted for the high end hardware. Windows isn't an issue as most high end studio apps offload the processing to the hardware. The software is just a window to what the hardware is doing in the recording.
If you're just mixing tracks for a garage demo, this software looks great. I paid a fortune 3 years ago for Win32 software that didn't approach this level. I see great things ahead as hardware gets better.
For now, though, the SB cards don't offer the best input quality. I can tell the difference in noise floor, transparency, and soundprint signature. When I've listened to demos, I can pinpoint quality gear versus prosumer gear.
In the end though, a 4track tape is enough if you have talent. Most bands don't.
So what do you support in terms of economic theory? Marx? Supply-side? Tax-and-spend?
I've looks at every theory. Most accepted ones are adjusted and shoehorned to fit unexpected results. the Austrian view predicts and explains inflation, bubbles, recessions and market growth.
There isn't easy empirical evidence or equations to be had.
The Austrians (Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Rockwell) point to the fact that money is a commodity affected by supply and demand and that prices are as well.
When you involve a million regulations, tariffs, taxes and fees, it is very difficult to scientifically attribute prices to reality. Fox example, gas. The price of gas is affected by too many government mandates to set an equation to. Mandated blends, refinery monopoly, distribution restrictions, price controls, etc. Did you know we sell our oil to Iraq for pennies a gallon? Government gas needs also raise prices by reducing supply.
In a free and unregulated market, the best quality and best price occur from billions of consumers making unique choices.
Economics to me is philosophical today. How else can you account for nearly every American putting faith in legal counterfeiting (inflation) and legal bubble-building (artificially low interest rates and artificially high loan acceptance due to FNMA)?
Don't read Mises for junk science, read Mises to better understand those you put in public office.
So basically we're going back to the days of IRC, albeit in a different front-end format.
It does sound good, in some ways, but I worry about rogue servers and rogue clients. IM has been virtually free of direct spam attacks (I have only received one in my entire life), and I fear that without having some corporation's control in their propietary medium, we'll see more spam and less usefulness.
Look what happened with the "open standard" of Usenet. It is SO informative and so readily useful, isn't it? I'm not a fan of most Yahoo Groups but the ones I read are generally spam free (moderators) instead of being spam magnets.
Yes, there is a place for open source, but I don't think this is it. I'm willing to hear reasons why Google's desire to have a open server-to-server federation will be good for a product that already offers me everything I need (at the moment). What new features are going to replace the current text-to-text feature that is probably used by 100% of IM's users. Is VoIP really an extension to IM or is it a different product? Aren't there enough programmers added on features to the propietary AIM program that is doesn't seem to warrant the need for a more open standard? Does the propietary standard offer manufacturers more reason to police their networks of abusers, and is it wrong for these companies to assume to make a profit in order to pay for the massive infrastructure needed to provide IM services?
I do understand the need to open the standard for client-server interaction. More clients means more features, more stability, and more control over your applications on your computer. It also means more clients for lesser-used operating systems, better integration into non-PC stations (media centers, phones, etc), and possibly more people using the IM system.
Though I would rather have tax break, if I have to pay the money anyway let the government spend it on improving our community (i.e. better schools, etc.) than on feeding corporate greed! Ahh, so you'd rather have the money go towards union greed from a monopoly (the public education system) rather than go to a company that puts billions of dollars into the economy through no coercion like taxation?
My hard earned money comes from supporting products by Microsoft and Oracle (and Linux and OOo and others). I'm far happier with my customers that run MS products and don't have to call with problems than I am with the few customers who have implemented Open Source programs and consistently need support. That's just my experience (and no, I didn't implement those Open Source programs).
I believe you're wrong. The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the documents that discuss the philosophies of the founding fathers make up a standard - the American government is in fact based on that standard, a 'Role Model'. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were not philosophical by any means, and did not create a standard 'Role Model' by any means. The Constitution and its Amendments were created to enforce a Federalist Republic of Independent States by requiring that the Federal government be restrained from trampling on the rights of the people.
If government were a reflection of the people governed, ID would be taught in science class and attending church would be mandatory, and the will of the majority would reign - otherwise known as 'mob rule' - because we'd have a Democracy. This is possibly true at the state level, but not the federal level. Education enforcement/standardization and Religious enforcement/standardization are not explicit powers of the federal government. Therefore, ninth and tenth Amendments assures that these rights are kept by the people, or by the individual state if the citizens of that state want it that way. The Constitution was not intended to control the state governments, just the federal government.
The US is a Republic - not a Democracy, and more and more people seem to misunderstand this basic fact. Yes, some officers are elected in a democratic process - but not a pure democratic process. We WERE a Republic, until the 16th and 17th Amendments were created. The 16th Amendment allowed the federal government to lay taxes deemed unconstitutional without the Amendment. The 17th Amendment destroyed the 9th and 10th amendment providing for states' rights by making the Senate a democratically elected federal body, rather than one elected by the state itself. I believe that the 17th Amendment should be repealed immediately.
I believe you are right in saying that more people seem to misunderstand that our federal government is a Federalist Republic, but it seems to me as though you misunderstand what it means to be Federalist and a Republic.
Massachusetts (Constitutionally) does have the right to incur these standards, but I don't understand why they are needed when my business isn't affected at all by the Microsoft "monopoly." I haven't had one single problem opening one single file in almost 8 years.
The MGIS program was not "online for free" by any means. In fact, its tragic that you applaud government for giving away something paid for by taxpayers when there are numerous companies out there providing a similar product (at a very reasonable price).
I tried to navigate Mass.gov's website to decipher the budget expended on the MGIS program, but that site is a mess of odd links.
As for the $0 per workstation, I'd like to see that happen. In reality, there will be a cost to implement the software (at taxpayer expense), handle the various compatibility problems that are sure to pop up, and enforce that the customers of the State can open the documents originated by the State.
I'm all for PDF being the standard by which we exchange documents, and I'm all for the free market implementing these changes as budgets and time constraints allow. I'm just against government telling making a mandate that doesn't reflect what the constituents of the State currently use.
The State should be a reflection of the people governed, not a role model. Choosing to support a standard virtually ignored by the constituents is callous and ignorant.
We, the State, acknowledge that our reign is supreme. We require you, the citizens, to modify your actions to comply with Our new standard. As this is law, those unwilling to accept Our freedom will be branded criminals.
No thanks. Every one of my customers is unwilling to change formats. Massachusetts will likely learn that even the most open format is considerably more proprietary if your customers don't use it.
FWIW, My company has subcontracted for numerous projects that attracted State interest. When the project required changes to our customers' standards, by State Decree, the costs ballooned.
And if she's making it on her own fine before you start dating? How does that rule out her moving in before you actually get married?
My rule doesn't say it is doom to cohabitate, just that cohabitating before you can monitor another's codependent tendencies can be detrimental.
I've seen numerous friends' lives destroyed by cohabitating with a girlfriend who had never been alone, living without the support of others. Roommates are ok, but always needing to live with family or a significant other can be a codependency alarm.
My rule is probably flexible for others, but not for me. My life would be very different if I had noticed codependencies in some relationships that really affected me.
Also, you yourself might have codependent tendencies. Move out of the house for a year to see if you do.
Regulation has nothing to do with it either. There is a finite amount of bandwidth available at a price people are willing to pay.
But how much wired bandwidth could be added if more providers could run connections? Overregulation prevents that.
How much wireless bandwidth goes unused any given moment? Look at the entire spectrum and see the waste of separating it, regulating it into TV, radio, wifi, GSM, etc.
Analog wireless is dying. Combine the bandwidth into a large pool. Maximize the use of it all.
Regulations are restricting prices and bandwidth, thereby restricting information.
I was "lucky" to run a very successful BBS starting at age 12. By 14 I was earning enough to move it to a commercial space, basically moving out from home.
I don't know how old you are, but I can give you some advice...
First, if you have even the slightest desire to marry some day, NEVER live with a girlfriend . Ever. Even a fiance. Live together after the wedding.
Why? Cohabitating can create very bad codependencies. You need to test your girlfriend's ability to make it on her own. Don't seriously date girls who live at home. Casual dating is fine with them.
Don't date girls in massive debt. Don't date girls with all guy friends and 1 girlfriend, or girls who say "I hate girls." Don't date girls that your friends don't like or that don't like your friends. Don't date girls who can only have a good time drinking or smoking up.
With that out of the way, it shouldn't be hard to find a girl who can handle your PC "addiction," or in my case, gadget addiction. The "no" girls I listed above will have a propensity towards jealousy -- over friends, family and even toys.
My lady met me when I had 7 PCs at home. Now I only have 1 media PC and 1 PDA, but not because of her. I'm bored with technology. I know she'd love a new notebook at home:)
If you can use your PC skills to strike out on your own (consult), she'll see value. Even better, build a tech bench with a power strip on a timer -- have it force you off between 5pm and 8pm for spouse time!
A few years ago I listened to a PC app that was destined for hardware that was ahead of its time.
It upconverted/upsampled, analyzed the headroom and expanded/compressed as needed, analyzed the noise floor and reduced it, analyzed the spectrum and EQ'd it, analyzed the stereo separation and expanded it.
After 9x the WAV (or was it VOC?) length, it sounded "better" 99% of the time.
They never got funding and the project died.
With powerful hardware, you'll definitely get a more aurally pleasant and more dynamic sound.
The MS IPTV business model does not involve sending anything over the Internet; all the video stays within each ISP's network. Thus no changes to the Internet backbone are needed./i> Which is why this is doomed to fail amongst the ever-growing geek and neogeek crowd.
This crowd wants both big media shows and RSS-fed indymedia shows. They want it when they need it, not when Nielson says it should be show. They want it funny/interesting/insightful 52 weeks a year, not just 4 weeks of sweeps and troll the other 48.
Information will combine better through Google rather than MS. I am so close to not separating my TV/radio/net/Phone data, but I'm just waiting for the Next Big Thing to combine it for me.
They'll keep a 30 minute show to 30 minutes, but real programming will be sped up 1.4x from 22 minutes to 16 minutes, offering them 6 additional minutes of ads. The extra ads will be performed on the TV shows' sets by the actors, to confound the commercial skippers.
"Buy Irish Spring Soap, it even makes me smell good!" Malcolm Reynolds
Verizon and SBC have been having some problems licensing TV channels, but they'll probably just spend their way through the problem. There are also local franchise problems that are being slowly solved in various legislatures. Both over-regulation consequences.
IP multicast cuts down on the backbone traffic a lot. Maybe, but true IPTV would be on-demand rather than scheduled, IMO. Of course, if the back-end is closed and licensed, its doomed to fail. iTunes picks RSS feeds for podcasting from anyone, but IPTV will likely give us "what we don't want, when we don't want it."
TiVo is an equipment/software provider, so they can survive in an IPTV world by making IPTV boxes instead of cable boxes. Fox is a content company, so IPTV will just be another distribution channel for their content. Only if its scheduled, not on-demand, and only if its a closed backend to only be used by big media corporations.
IPTV is the needed "invention" to roll faster connections for less money. IPTV can offer a variable payment method - subscription (show, channel or all channels), pay per view, or ads. IPTV can bring low budget vids to a wide audience, and it can tell advertisers, content creaters and others who is really watching their shows.
But will government, cable distributors and Hollywood allow it? I already foresee the "monopoly monopoly!" posts, but I think only a few big players could start the ball rolling.
I am very interested in seeing what MS can do to overcome bandwidth concerns at the backbone, ISP and user level (TFA only eludes to it).
IPTV could destroy Tivo, Comcast and Fox if the content is broadcast quality or better. I fear blog production quality, though.
Will this eventually be a separately managed "Internet" bridged at the DSLAM or ISP level? Will MS involve enough big players to keep regulators off their back? Will it run Linux? Err...
Then again, it could be a WebTV failure as well.
We need to stop separating media into cable, POTS, cell, radio, Internet, etc. Its all just packets and it needs massive cohesion in order to be truly at-will. Use all that bandwidth for AnyPacket services and bandwidth will skyrocket while prices will plummet. Why is MS forced to chase landlines? Overregulation.
Funny though that MS is digging their own grave. IPTV = more bandwidth = more client-server software implementation.
10. Not that worried...use a condom, and common sense to avoid potential VD'ers
True, but nothing is 100%. In my years of dating I met a few psychopaths, too, so I'm glad to be out of that situation.
9. I can do my own laundry..usually easier and not expensive though, to take it all to the cleaners and them launder and iron it.
True, but its nice having it off my list of responsibilities.
6. Always good...better with different ones on occasion, unless you want to subscribe to the new Playboy for Married Men....every month.....SAME CHICK
Hasn't bothered me. There's so many ways to keep it fresh, and so many times when you just want to be selfish and not have to keep up appearances. I'm more satisfied now than ever.
5. Hot chicks are always great, but, they do start getting older...I like to trade them in periodically for a newer, hotter model, and not give up half my shit I own...(see #6 in italics for reading material)
My lady was financially self sufficient before me, so I don't fear the future. I think divorce comes from codependence and financial issues. As for aging, I age, too. Her mom stayed hot into her 50s (when she died in an accident).
2. Ok...please explain what "non-AnCap views" are...? Politically I'm an Austrian or Anarchocapitalist, hence AnCap. The lady is a fencewalker but we have great discussions daily./. comes up regularly, too.
I could probably live single forever and happily at that. I'm a great dater. Yet I also am more content in a monogamous relationship. As an AnCap, I am against government regulation and licensing of marriage, and definitely agree that marriage is not a good solution until both parties are stable (financially, emotionally, religiously, politically, sexually, etc).
Slashdot Mirror
The author must realize that having record low eruptions in 1998 and 2005 is the cause of the temperature hike.
See what happened in 1816.
Great post. Very informative. Why AC though? I can't add you as a Friend!
Hammerfall is top notch and I didn't realize it had solid Linux support, so I'll look into it. I know numerous people who had problems with alsa and HDSP even very recently.
M-Audio Delta I know has been supported for years (4Front? Can't look it up easily from my PDA) but I didn't think it was pro quality. Did they get ADAT support stable yet? I figured they lost the battle with PT at the highend and were going to chase the LT market. I've seen numerous studios dump Midiman over the years due to product constraints and limited end user support.
AudioScience seems very friendly for the not-for-profit studios (and churches) on a budget, but I think the higher end hardware is priced out of the picture. Radio stations and high budget companies seem to love it. I don't know anyone in my area using it in the studio, Win nor Lin.
I guess that's my problem with many of the companies I've seen supporting Linux: end user support problems. PT's end user support is fantastic even for small budget studios. The interface is known by every producer and engineer.
For me, initial cost means little. Low training costs, good support, and user friendliness are just as important as sound quality.
Ardour is a good product with, IMHO, the brightest future. We've screwed with it, and I believe are integrating it in a cheap portable studio.
I've read Day and it isn't a bad read, but I sense a lot of future poverty in that plan.
I advocate true deregulation due to what I see in markets and industries with little regulation: more choice, lower prices, better quality.
It is when regulations are incorporated that the consumers suffer. Regulations reduce businesses able to navigate the mandates, increase costs and sometimes enforce a monopoly.
IMO, Ardour is my least favorite but has the brightest future.
I know 2 Pro studios that made the switch from Pro Tools and both were financially unstable. Pro Tools still reigns supreme for me for the moment.
The 4 figures for software is worth it when the $150/hour mastering engineer spends 2 days at the studio and works with what he knows. The 2 studios I know running Ardour have released relatively mediocre sounding albums that had great content. I can tell they didn't have a good engineer handling the mastering.
Remember, $2500/album pays off Pro Tools in 8 weeks. Many bands and engineers are familiar with Pro Tools, which is a huge selling point.
My brother owns a recording studio, and Linux wouldn't compete in that arena. For a home studio, these apps + a SB Audigy are fine, but no talented band, producer, editor or mastering engineer will look twice. The midlevel sound cards don't approach the quality and power of the high end (even rotools HD) vehicles.
For me, I want to see Linux drivers adapted for the high end hardware. Windows isn't an issue as most high end studio apps offload the processing to the hardware. The software is just a window to what the hardware is doing in the recording.
If you're just mixing tracks for a garage demo, this software looks great. I paid a fortune 3 years ago for Win32 software that didn't approach this level. I see great things ahead as hardware gets better.
For now, though, the SB cards don't offer the best input quality. I can tell the difference in noise floor, transparency, and soundprint signature. When I've listened to demos, I can pinpoint quality gear versus prosumer gear.
In the end though, a 4track tape is enough if you have talent. Most bands don't.
So what do you support in terms of economic theory? Marx? Supply-side? Tax-and-spend?
I've looks at every theory. Most accepted ones are adjusted and shoehorned to fit unexpected results. the Austrian view predicts and explains inflation, bubbles, recessions and market growth.
There isn't easy empirical evidence or equations to be had.
The Austrians (Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Rockwell) point to the fact that money is a commodity affected by supply and demand and that prices are as well.
When you involve a million regulations, tariffs, taxes and fees, it is very difficult to scientifically attribute prices to reality. Fox example, gas. The price of gas is affected by too many government mandates to set an equation to. Mandated blends, refinery monopoly, distribution restrictions, price controls, etc. Did you know we sell our oil to Iraq for pennies a gallon? Government gas needs also raise prices by reducing supply.
In a free and unregulated market, the best quality and best price occur from billions of consumers making unique choices.
Economics to me is philosophical today. How else can you account for nearly every American putting faith in legal counterfeiting (inflation) and legal bubble-building (artificially low interest rates and artificially high loan acceptance due to FNMA)?
Don't read Mises for junk science, read Mises to better understand those you put in public office.
So basically we're going back to the days of IRC, albeit in a different front-end format.
It does sound good, in some ways, but I worry about rogue servers and rogue clients. IM has been virtually free of direct spam attacks (I have only received one in my entire life), and I fear that without having some corporation's control in their propietary medium, we'll see more spam and less usefulness.
Look what happened with the "open standard" of Usenet. It is SO informative and so readily useful, isn't it? I'm not a fan of most Yahoo Groups but the ones I read are generally spam free (moderators) instead of being spam magnets.
Yes, there is a place for open source, but I don't think this is it. I'm willing to hear reasons why Google's desire to have a open server-to-server federation will be good for a product that already offers me everything I need (at the moment). What new features are going to replace the current text-to-text feature that is probably used by 100% of IM's users. Is VoIP really an extension to IM or is it a different product? Aren't there enough programmers added on features to the propietary AIM program that is doesn't seem to warrant the need for a more open standard? Does the propietary standard offer manufacturers more reason to police their networks of abusers, and is it wrong for these companies to assume to make a profit in order to pay for the massive infrastructure needed to provide IM services?
I do understand the need to open the standard for client-server interaction. More clients means more features, more stability, and more control over your applications on your computer. It also means more clients for lesser-used operating systems, better integration into non-PC stations (media centers, phones, etc), and possibly more people using the IM system.
Though I would rather have tax break, if I have to pay the money anyway let the government spend it on improving our community (i.e. better schools, etc.) than on feeding corporate greed! Ahh, so you'd rather have the money go towards union greed from a monopoly (the public education system) rather than go to a company that puts billions of dollars into the economy through no coercion like taxation?
My hard earned money comes from supporting products by Microsoft and Oracle (and Linux and OOo and others). I'm far happier with my customers that run MS products and don't have to call with problems than I am with the few customers who have implemented Open Source programs and consistently need support. That's just my experience (and no, I didn't implement those Open Source programs).
I believe you're wrong. The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the documents that discuss the philosophies of the founding fathers make up a standard - the American government is in fact based on that standard, a 'Role Model'. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were not philosophical by any means, and did not create a standard 'Role Model' by any means. The Constitution and its Amendments were created to enforce a Federalist Republic of Independent States by requiring that the Federal government be restrained from trampling on the rights of the people.
If government were a reflection of the people governed, ID would be taught in science class and attending church would be mandatory, and the will of the majority would reign - otherwise known as 'mob rule' - because we'd have a Democracy. This is possibly true at the state level, but not the federal level. Education enforcement/standardization and Religious enforcement/standardization are not explicit powers of the federal government. Therefore, ninth and tenth Amendments assures that these rights are kept by the people, or by the individual state if the citizens of that state want it that way. The Constitution was not intended to control the state governments, just the federal government.
The US is a Republic - not a Democracy, and more and more people seem to misunderstand this basic fact. Yes, some officers are elected in a democratic process - but not a pure democratic process. We WERE a Republic, until the 16th and 17th Amendments were created. The 16th Amendment allowed the federal government to lay taxes deemed unconstitutional without the Amendment. The 17th Amendment destroyed the 9th and 10th amendment providing for states' rights by making the Senate a democratically elected federal body, rather than one elected by the state itself. I believe that the 17th Amendment should be repealed immediately.
I believe you are right in saying that more people seem to misunderstand that our federal government is a Federalist Republic, but it seems to me as though you misunderstand what it means to be Federalist and a Republic.
Massachusetts (Constitutionally) does have the right to incur these standards, but I don't understand why they are needed when my business isn't affected at all by the Microsoft "monopoly." I haven't had one single problem opening one single file in almost 8 years.
The MGIS program was not "online for free" by any means. In fact, its tragic that you applaud government for giving away something paid for by taxpayers when there are numerous companies out there providing a similar product (at a very reasonable price).
I tried to navigate Mass.gov's website to decipher the budget expended on the MGIS program, but that site is a mess of odd links.
As for the $0 per workstation, I'd like to see that happen. In reality, there will be a cost to implement the software (at taxpayer expense), handle the various compatibility problems that are sure to pop up, and enforce that the customers of the State can open the documents originated by the State.
I'm all for PDF being the standard by which we exchange documents, and I'm all for the free market implementing these changes as budgets and time constraints allow. I'm just against government telling making a mandate that doesn't reflect what the constituents of the State currently use.
The State should be a reflection of the people governed, not a role model. Choosing to support a standard virtually ignored by the constituents is callous and ignorant.
We, the State, acknowledge that our reign is supreme. We require you, the citizens, to modify your actions to comply with Our new standard. As this is law, those unwilling to accept Our freedom will be branded criminals.
No thanks. Every one of my customers is unwilling to change formats. Massachusetts will likely learn that even the most open format is considerably more proprietary if your customers don't use it.
FWIW, My company has subcontracted for numerous projects that attracted State interest. When the project required changes to our customers' standards, by State Decree, the costs ballooned.
I meant to try living alone while young and single, heh.
And if she's making it on her own fine before you start dating? How does that rule out her moving in before you actually get married?
My rule doesn't say it is doom to cohabitate, just that cohabitating before you can monitor another's codependent tendencies can be detrimental.
I've seen numerous friends' lives destroyed by cohabitating with a girlfriend who had never been alone, living without the support of others. Roommates are ok, but always needing to live with family or a significant other can be a codependency alarm.
My rule is probably flexible for others, but not for me. My life would be very different if I had noticed codependencies in some relationships that really affected me.
Also, you yourself might have codependent tendencies. Move out of the house for a year to see if you do.
Regulation has nothing to do with it either. There is a finite amount of bandwidth available at a price people are willing to pay.
But how much wired bandwidth could be added if more providers could run connections? Overregulation prevents that.
How much wireless bandwidth goes unused any given moment? Look at the entire spectrum and see the waste of separating it, regulating it into TV, radio, wifi, GSM, etc.
Analog wireless is dying. Combine the bandwidth into a large pool. Maximize the use of it all.
Regulations are restricting prices and bandwidth, thereby restricting information.
No troll noticed :)
:)
I was "lucky" to run a very successful BBS starting at age 12. By 14 I was earning enough to move it to a commercial space, basically moving out from home.
I don't know how old you are, but I can give you some advice...
First, if you have even the slightest desire to marry some day, NEVER live with a girlfriend . Ever. Even a fiance. Live together after the wedding.
Why? Cohabitating can create very bad codependencies. You need to test your girlfriend's ability to make it on her own. Don't seriously date girls who live at home. Casual dating is fine with them.
Don't date girls in massive debt. Don't date girls with all guy friends and 1 girlfriend, or girls who say "I hate girls." Don't date girls that your friends don't like or that don't like your friends. Don't date girls who can only have a good time drinking or smoking up.
With that out of the way, it shouldn't be hard to find a girl who can handle your PC "addiction," or in my case, gadget addiction. The "no" girls I listed above will have a propensity towards jealousy -- over friends, family and even toys.
My lady met me when I had 7 PCs at home. Now I only have 1 media PC and 1 PDA, but not because of her. I'm bored with technology. I know she'd love a new notebook at home
If you can use your PC skills to strike out on your own (consult), she'll see value. Even better, build a tech bench with a power strip on a timer -- have it force you off between 5pm and 8pm for spouse time!
A few years ago I listened to a PC app that was destined for hardware that was ahead of its time.
It upconverted/upsampled, analyzed the headroom and expanded/compressed as needed, analyzed the noise floor and reduced it, analyzed the spectrum and EQ'd it, analyzed the stereo separation and expanded it.
After 9x the WAV (or was it VOC?) length, it sounded "better" 99% of the time.
They never got funding and the project died.
With powerful hardware, you'll definitely get a more aurally pleasant and more dynamic sound.
But is it what the artist intended?
Exactly why a truly revolutionary IPTV medium would:
1. Let you choose what you watch and when (and where: home, PC, PDA, vPod)
2. Let you choose how to pay (ads, PPV, subscription, surveys)
3. Let you choose the quality levels
4. Let you choose value added options (surround sound, multiple views for sports, optional languages)
5. Let anyway buy into the distribution, and receive a revenue share.
The MS IPTV business model does not involve sending anything over the Internet; all the video stays within each ISP's network. Thus no changes to the Internet backbone are needed. /i> Which is why this is doomed to fail amongst the ever-growing geek and neogeek crowd.
This crowd wants both big media shows and RSS-fed indymedia shows. They want it when they need it, not when Nielson says it should be show. They want it funny/interesting/insightful 52 weeks a year, not just 4 weeks of sweeps and troll the other 48.
Information will combine better through Google rather than MS. I am so close to not separating my TV/radio/net/Phone data, but I'm just waiting for the Next Big Thing to combine it for me.
I doubt MS' IPTV will be it.
They'll keep a 30 minute show to 30 minutes, but real programming will be sped up 1.4x from 22 minutes to 16 minutes, offering them 6 additional minutes of ads. The extra ads will be performed on the TV shows' sets by the actors, to confound the commercial skippers.
"Buy Irish Spring Soap, it even makes me smell good!" Malcolm Reynolds
Verizon and SBC have been having some problems licensing TV channels, but they'll probably just spend their way through the problem. There are also local franchise problems that are being slowly solved in various legislatures. Both over-regulation consequences.
IP multicast cuts down on the backbone traffic a lot. Maybe, but true IPTV would be on-demand rather than scheduled, IMO. Of course, if the back-end is closed and licensed, its doomed to fail. iTunes picks RSS feeds for podcasting from anyone, but IPTV will likely give us "what we don't want, when we don't want it."
TiVo is an equipment/software provider, so they can survive in an IPTV world by making IPTV boxes instead of cable boxes. Fox is a content company, so IPTV will just be another distribution channel for their content. Only if its scheduled, not on-demand, and only if its a closed backend to only be used by big media corporations.
IPTV is the needed "invention" to roll faster connections for less money. IPTV can offer a variable payment method - subscription (show, channel or all channels), pay per view, or ads. IPTV can bring low budget vids to a wide audience, and it can tell advertisers, content creaters and others who is really watching their shows.
But will government, cable distributors and Hollywood allow it? I already foresee the "monopoly monopoly!" posts, but I think only a few big players could start the ball rolling.
I am very interested in seeing what MS can do to overcome bandwidth concerns at the backbone, ISP and user level (TFA only eludes to it).
IPTV could destroy Tivo, Comcast and Fox if the content is broadcast quality or better. I fear blog production quality, though.
Will this eventually be a separately managed "Internet" bridged at the DSLAM or ISP level? Will MS involve enough big players to keep regulators off their back? Will it run Linux? Err...
Then again, it could be a WebTV failure as well.
We need to stop separating media into cable, POTS, cell, radio, Internet, etc. Its all just packets and it needs massive cohesion in order to be truly at-will. Use all that bandwidth for AnyPacket services and bandwidth will skyrocket while prices will plummet. Why is MS forced to chase landlines? Overregulation.
Funny though that MS is digging their own grave. IPTV = more bandwidth = more client-server software implementation.
I can't wait for the future.
FYI, Timmoore's MyTray for Firewire channel changing and HD recording of digital cable is running extremely well for many MCE users.
10. Not that worried...use a condom, and common sense to avoid potential VD'ers
/. comes up regularly, too.
True, but nothing is 100%. In my years of dating I met a few psychopaths, too, so I'm glad to be out of that situation.
9. I can do my own laundry..usually easier and not expensive though, to take it all to the cleaners and them launder and iron it.
True, but its nice having it off my list of responsibilities.
6. Always good...better with different ones on occasion, unless you want to subscribe to the new Playboy for Married Men....every month.....SAME CHICK
Hasn't bothered me. There's so many ways to keep it fresh, and so many times when you just want to be selfish and not have to keep up appearances. I'm more satisfied now than ever.
5. Hot chicks are always great, but, they do start getting older...I like to trade them in periodically for a newer, hotter model, and not give up half my shit I own...(see #6 in italics for reading material)
My lady was financially self sufficient before me, so I don't fear the future. I think divorce comes from codependence and financial issues. As for aging, I age, too. Her mom stayed hot into her 50s (when she died in an accident).
2. Ok...please explain what "non-AnCap views" are...?
Politically I'm an Austrian or Anarchocapitalist, hence AnCap. The lady is a fencewalker but we have great discussions daily.
I could probably live single forever and happily at that. I'm a great dater. Yet I also am more content in a monogamous relationship. As an AnCap, I am against government regulation and licensing of marriage, and definitely agree that marriage is not a good solution until both parties are stable (financially, emotionally, religiously, politically, sexually, etc).