Surely there MUST be developers out there who can make better products than Adobe.
Yes there are. But until we ditch our monopoly-centric competition-busting big-business-oriented lawyer-profiting patent system (and all the patents issued under it), and adopt one that does not award patents to anything even remotely obvious, or anything that someone educated and experienced in the field could come up with if asked to, it will be very hard to produce such competitive software products.
FYI, the kind of patent system I would envision is not one that specifically needs to address patents in software. Instead, it would be one that requires a strong test of clear innovation through unique intellectual insight. Do that, and we'll see lots of the more obvious innovations springing up everywhere faster and faster, creating a more competitive economy. Stuff that is obvious does not need a patent system to make it happen; what it needs is a patent system that doesn't stand in the way.
They can change the IP address since they are using a hostname. You need to also add the domain name "2o7.net" (you know, number two, letter oh, number seven, dot net) as a zone in your resolving/caching DNS server, with a wildcard labeled "A" record pointing to somewhere that will be a dead end under your control, like 127.0.0.1.
I absolutely agree that the software vendor thinking that they have some right to do this spying is very arrogant and serious. But think about this. The fact that the connection is structured to LOOK like something connecting internally only goes to show that not only are they doing this, but they are doing this with the intent to try to obscure it. It would be one thing if they were on the up and up about it. But they would not need to do this 2o7.net stuff if they were. They could connect to "reg7.adobe.com" or some such name. But no... they tried to add a layer of obfuscation to it.
They know they are spying on you because they are doing it. But they also know you won't like it. And that is obvious from the effort to hide and obscure it. Doesn't that make it at least twice as bad, if not triple or worse?
The absorption lines are very narrow and do not affect the ability to focus. But the gap in fluorescent lighting is huge by comparison. That causes an edge between black and white to show up as 2 or 3 separate edges.
I don't know anything about why incandescent lights make you lethargic. If they are a problem for you, it should be your choice to not use them.
I'm not interested in where the peak frequency is. That's just color balance and is easy to deal with. What I want to know is if there are any spectral gaps.
Building an MD5 table of existing domain names is easy. Building one for all the potential names that do not yet exist, for other than the very short ones, would be very hard.
They have the list of the domain names. They only need to calculate a forward MD5 checksum on each domain, and build an index with the MD5 checksum as the key. As new domains are added, checksum them and add them.
Your reaction to having your country blacklisted is to... all of you together... complain to the leaders of your country to do all it takes... whatever it takes... to totally crack down on all the crimes that make your country stand out in a bad way. Do that, and solve the problem, then your country won't be listed. It's that simple. And that is what the blacklisting is for.
If the block on disk has ever been written the flash device has to keep it. It has no idea that no file inodes point to it anymore. Wehn a write is done, it picks a block from the pool and writes it there, and juggles its own mapping. But I am curious about a flash device that will, on its own, just juggle things around. That could avoid the data stagnation problem, where any data that doesn't get written on is just keeping the zones of writing all that much smaller. But it can also increase the number of writes being done. It would have to know that certain blocks don't get frequently written for that to be effective.
I could give a damned about the losses the corporations face when the music gets shared without them having to expend anything for that sharing to be achieved. We don't need their CD factories. We don't need their printing of the album liners. We don't need their marketing departments. We don't need them.
It is the musicians that suffer. This might include the artists for the album cover, too. I wish there was a way for them to be paid for the music we enjoy (in proper proportion to how much their particular music gets enjoyed).
However, the ones that sign with the big corporations that take 92% off the top have apparently already accepted that they are going to get shafted by the man. Then when together they get shafted by the public, it's the corporations that lose the most, as it should be since we don't need what they contribute to the process.
But we do have a start to this in places like CD Baby and Magnatune. People who listen to music should shift to these business models as much as they can.
As for movies, that's a bit harder, since there is a larger production model involved, with lots of people whose only connection is being employed by one or more businesses involved in the production. Still, we should look carefully at how much the real artists and workers make compared to the investors (who deserve a fair share for investing, but absolutely never the right to gouge).
They are still the only product that produces a continuous unbroken spectrum of light. It would be great if they would make some other light source that had that character. But, so far, they have not done so. I don't think they are even trying. They are focusing more on things like the color balance.
And that doesn't even consider the issue of light bulbs as a cheap way to produce heat in a genuine heating application.
CFLs are just as inefficient as incandescent when used to produce heat, such as the infra-red bulbs some people have in bathrooms, bulbs used to produce heat in some heating systems, and the ubiquitous "EZ bake" oven toy. Of course these are not lighting applications. But the cheap bulbs have a place in heating applications. For example, leaving one bulb on in a boat tied up at dock for a while to keep moisture out is a common practice. It's not the light doing the job, it's the heat. And the total heat (including the light that doesn't escape the application space) is a function of the power going in.
They can make CFLs that don't flicker, but they are not as cheap. They can make CFLs that have a color balance closer to incandescent. But they have yet to achieve a CFL that has a true continuous spectrum (the ones marketed as "full spectrum" are not).
I once believed it was the flicker that caused my headaches from fluorescent lighting. But after some study on this, including having the same headaches from DC power fluorescent and LED lights, I have found the real cause is the oscillating focus that comes about from non-continuous (broken) spectrum lighting.
I've tried many CFLs and use some of them in many places already. But there are a few places where an incandescent light is still king and no CFL comes even close to matching. Table lamps used for reading a book (something that seems to be a lost practice these dates) and various task lighting purposes such as a kitchen when I am preparing meals that take some time.
Do let me know when they come up with a more efficient heating element for my electric water heater. I'd very much be interested in that.
But is it truly full spectrum, as opposed to the junk I have seen that is labeled "full spectrum" by the marketing droids? I've found most people can't even tell the difference. Those of us that can need the real thing. I'm one of those who can tell the difference, and I have not see a single one, yet, that is labeled "full spectrum", that really is full spectrum.
So what is the exact manufacturer and model you found? Maybe I could find that one and test it.
I would have no problem with a format system that allowed for a variety of progressive-only formats. Once things are strictly limited to progressive, a lot of different display geometries and frame rates can be handled quite easily, such as 576p100, 720p64, 864p48, 1008p32 (no, I didn't mean 1080p30 here), and 1152p24 (all within the ATSC 6 MHz channel), as well as slower or lower formats.
FYI, the geometries I chose in that list are ones that fit using 16x16 pixel blocks for compression without waste. That's why 1008 instead of 1080. They are all multiples of 144.
Now I just need an LCD monitor that will actually work with true 24 fps video coming in.
So they say the old analog OnStar units cannot be upgraded to digital in certain cars. GM/OnStar should just replace the thing at their own expense for being so dumb. Corporations being dumb? Not a new concept.
The switch won't affect sets with cable or satellite service.
The cable part is right. The satellite part is not. While most people can get their local stations over the satellite, a great many choose not to pay the extra 5 dollars a month. Some don't even have the option since the satellite providers still don't have 100% local coverage (and have apparently stopped building it to focus on high-definition expansion).
Why is it these people are always putting up videos in Flash format that requires people to Borg their browsers that make them vulnerable on so many web sites around the net? Please include a normal link to a normal video file.
If you illuminate any of the reflective street signs with the laser, it is amazingly impressive. The entire sign, regardless of size, illuminates so blindingly bright that you cannot look at it. Do this at a street sign over a freeway and you could easily cause an accident.
The signs are highly reflective because they use tiny retroreflectors. If you shine the laser at the sign, most of it will reflect back at YOU. Yeah, it could cause an accident... yours.
But doing that over the entire windshield would be very expensive.
So do it in glasses the pilot wears.
Further, what about all the other laser wavelengths?
The 532nm ones are the predominant ones that look cool pointed into the sky that most of the public would ever get. All the rest are are likely to pose less than 1% of the threat.
Your lab safety requirements for lasers of such power, vs. the need to protect a pilot from extreme exposure from a laser that would be wimp in your lab, are quite different. Your filters are intended to block 99.9...% with possibly many 9's. Blocking merely 98% at 532nm for the pilot might be enough. Most lasers that most people might point into the sky are the 532nm "UV doubled" green ones. Trying to achieve absolute total 100% protection is not practical in many respects. The power levels you deal with need more protection and you can readily give up a huge chunk of the spectrum to get it. Narrow band filters are possible, such as 542nm to 522nm, which would have a slight pink to it which could be compensated by a few percent of wide spectrum attenuation in red and blue. This could still be fairly expensive, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes there are. But until we ditch our monopoly-centric competition-busting big-business-oriented lawyer-profiting patent system (and all the patents issued under it), and adopt one that does not award patents to anything even remotely obvious, or anything that someone educated and experienced in the field could come up with if asked to, it will be very hard to produce such competitive software products.
FYI, the kind of patent system I would envision is not one that specifically needs to address patents in software. Instead, it would be one that requires a strong test of clear innovation through unique intellectual insight. Do that, and we'll see lots of the more obvious innovations springing up everywhere faster and faster, creating a more competitive economy. Stuff that is obvious does not need a patent system to make it happen; what it needs is a patent system that doesn't stand in the way.
They can change the IP address since they are using a hostname. You need to also add the domain name "2o7.net" (you know, number two, letter oh, number seven, dot net) as a zone in your resolving/caching DNS server, with a wildcard labeled "A" record pointing to somewhere that will be a dead end under your control, like 127.0.0.1.
Who will be the first to register ad0b3.com? Or maybe 4dobe.com or 4d0be3.com?
I absolutely agree that the software vendor thinking that they have some right to do this spying is very arrogant and serious. But think about this. The fact that the connection is structured to LOOK like something connecting internally only goes to show that not only are they doing this, but they are doing this with the intent to try to obscure it. It would be one thing if they were on the up and up about it. But they would not need to do this 2o7.net stuff if they were. They could connect to "reg7.adobe.com" or some such name. But no ... they tried to add a layer of obfuscation to it.
They know they are spying on you because they are doing it. But they also know you won't like it. And that is obvious from the effort to hide and obscure it. Doesn't that make it at least twice as bad, if not triple or worse?
The absorption lines are very narrow and do not affect the ability to focus. But the gap in fluorescent lighting is huge by comparison. That causes an edge between black and white to show up as 2 or 3 separate edges.
I don't know anything about why incandescent lights make you lethargic. If they are a problem for you, it should be your choice to not use them.
I'm not interested in where the peak frequency is. That's just color balance and is easy to deal with. What I want to know is if there are any spectral gaps.
Building an MD5 table of existing domain names is easy. Building one for all the potential names that do not yet exist, for other than the very short ones, would be very hard.
They have the list of the domain names. They only need to calculate a forward MD5 checksum on each domain, and build an index with the MD5 checksum as the key. As new domains are added, checksum them and add them.
Your reaction to having your country blacklisted is to ... all of you together ... complain to the leaders of your country to do all it takes ... whatever it takes ... to totally crack down on all the crimes that make your country stand out in a bad way. Do that, and solve the problem, then your country won't be listed. It's that simple. And that is what the blacklisting is for.
They should be able to parallel several flash chips to increase the speed. Or maybe the old drives already did this?
If the block on disk has ever been written the flash device has to keep it. It has no idea that no file inodes point to it anymore. Wehn a write is done, it picks a block from the pool and writes it there, and juggles its own mapping. But I am curious about a flash device that will, on its own, just juggle things around. That could avoid the data stagnation problem, where any data that doesn't get written on is just keeping the zones of writing all that much smaller. But it can also increase the number of writes being done. It would have to know that certain blocks don't get frequently written for that to be effective.
I could give a damned about the losses the corporations face when the music gets shared without them having to expend anything for that sharing to be achieved. We don't need their CD factories. We don't need their printing of the album liners. We don't need their marketing departments. We don't need them.
It is the musicians that suffer. This might include the artists for the album cover, too. I wish there was a way for them to be paid for the music we enjoy (in proper proportion to how much their particular music gets enjoyed).
However, the ones that sign with the big corporations that take 92% off the top have apparently already accepted that they are going to get shafted by the man. Then when together they get shafted by the public, it's the corporations that lose the most, as it should be since we don't need what they contribute to the process.
But we do have a start to this in places like CD Baby and Magnatune. People who listen to music should shift to these business models as much as they can.
As for movies, that's a bit harder, since there is a larger production model involved, with lots of people whose only connection is being employed by one or more businesses involved in the production. Still, we should look carefully at how much the real artists and workers make compared to the investors (who deserve a fair share for investing, but absolutely never the right to gouge).
They are still the only product that produces a continuous unbroken spectrum of light. It would be great if they would make some other light source that had that character. But, so far, they have not done so. I don't think they are even trying. They are focusing more on things like the color balance.
And that doesn't even consider the issue of light bulbs as a cheap way to produce heat in a genuine heating application.
CFLs are just as inefficient as incandescent when used to produce heat, such as the infra-red bulbs some people have in bathrooms, bulbs used to produce heat in some heating systems, and the ubiquitous "EZ bake" oven toy. Of course these are not lighting applications. But the cheap bulbs have a place in heating applications. For example, leaving one bulb on in a boat tied up at dock for a while to keep moisture out is a common practice. It's not the light doing the job, it's the heat. And the total heat (including the light that doesn't escape the application space) is a function of the power going in.
They can make CFLs that don't flicker, but they are not as cheap. They can make CFLs that have a color balance closer to incandescent. But they have yet to achieve a CFL that has a true continuous spectrum (the ones marketed as "full spectrum" are not).
I once believed it was the flicker that caused my headaches from fluorescent lighting. But after some study on this, including having the same headaches from DC power fluorescent and LED lights, I have found the real cause is the oscillating focus that comes about from non-continuous (broken) spectrum lighting.
I've tried many CFLs and use some of them in many places already. But there are a few places where an incandescent light is still king and no CFL comes even close to matching. Table lamps used for reading a book (something that seems to be a lost practice these dates) and various task lighting purposes such as a kitchen when I am preparing meals that take some time.
Do let me know when they come up with a more efficient heating element for my electric water heater. I'd very much be interested in that.
But is it truly full spectrum, as opposed to the junk I have seen that is labeled "full spectrum" by the marketing droids? I've found most people can't even tell the difference. Those of us that can need the real thing. I'm one of those who can tell the difference, and I have not see a single one, yet, that is labeled "full spectrum", that really is full spectrum.
So what is the exact manufacturer and model you found? Maybe I could find that one and test it.
I guess they would need to have a Sydney Tea Party.
What file format do you use for videos?
I would have no problem with a format system that allowed for a variety of progressive-only formats. Once things are strictly limited to progressive, a lot of different display geometries and frame rates can be handled quite easily, such as 576p100, 720p64, 864p48, 1008p32 (no, I didn't mean 1080p30 here), and 1152p24 (all within the ATSC 6 MHz channel), as well as slower or lower formats.
FYI, the geometries I chose in that list are ones that fit using 16x16 pixel blocks for compression without waste. That's why 1008 instead of 1080. They are all multiples of 144.
Now I just need an LCD monitor that will actually work with true 24 fps video coming in.
Even if you are downloading something that is legal, like Linux?
So they say the old analog OnStar units cannot be upgraded to digital in certain cars. GM/OnStar should just replace the thing at their own expense for being so dumb. Corporations being dumb? Not a new concept.
From TnsFA:
The cable part is right. The satellite part is not. While most people can get their local stations over the satellite, a great many choose not to pay the extra 5 dollars a month. Some don't even have the option since the satellite providers still don't have 100% local coverage (and have apparently stopped building it to focus on high-definition expansion).
Why is it these people are always putting up videos in Flash format that requires people to Borg their browsers that make them vulnerable on so many web sites around the net? Please include a normal link to a normal video file.
The signs are highly reflective because they use tiny retroreflectors. If you shine the laser at the sign, most of it will reflect back at YOU. Yeah, it could cause an accident ... yours.
So do it in glasses the pilot wears.
The 532nm ones are the predominant ones that look cool pointed into the sky that most of the public would ever get. All the rest are are likely to pose less than 1% of the threat.
Your lab safety requirements for lasers of such power, vs. the need to protect a pilot from extreme exposure from a laser that would be wimp in your lab, are quite different. Your filters are intended to block 99.9...% with possibly many 9's. Blocking merely 98% at 532nm for the pilot might be enough. Most lasers that most people might point into the sky are the 532nm "UV doubled" green ones. Trying to achieve absolute total 100% protection is not practical in many respects. The power levels you deal with need more protection and you can readily give up a huge chunk of the spectrum to get it. Narrow band filters are possible, such as 542nm to 522nm, which would have a slight pink to it which could be compensated by a few percent of wide spectrum attenuation in red and blue. This could still be fairly expensive, though.