Yeah, I don't get it. Why wouldn't he make headlines and a taster of the content publicly accessible and indexed by the search engines? He needs to hook people in, not disappear from the internet.
I so hope they go to a process per tab. The benefits out-weigh the memory demands, and with computers with more than 4GB becoming more and more commonplace, why put constraints on the majority of users that only benefits a few people on old hardware? Legacy software for legacy systems. I hope a multiprocess implementation comes with decent memory and CPU profiling tools so I can make decisions about killing off individual tabs that are stealing too much memory or CPU. Chrome already does this at a basic level. FF is always going to be leaky, even it's through the flexibility it gives to add-ons. On top of that, it's got to be more secure having tab isolation via multiple processes.
Don't browsers like IE and Chrome render each tab in their own process (and thus own thread), yet there is only one process that displays all the tabs? Presumably that single display thread has a lot less work to do as it's not doing any layout.
Of course, Chrome is doing process separation too. I would love it if Firefox implemented this. Forget the possible security improvements, a separate process per tab empowers me in reigning in the browser's demands on CPU and memory. Firefox leaks memory like a sieve (be it directly, or be allowing extensions the freedom to do so), but I have no way to find the problematic tabs and kill them off individually - I have to do a complete FF restart, which is just annoying. Why should activity on other tabs kill the performance of the tab I'm using? FF has inherited Netscape's moronic attitudes towards monolithic architecture, so change will be slow.
Wrong: it's nothing to do with the file system type. If you're on Windows and you want volumes larger than 2TB, your need NT 5.1 or newer (i.e. XP x86 or older will not cut it).
More succinctly: the Lib-Dems got 23% of the vote, but only 9% of the seats in parliament. They increased their share of the vote by 1%, but lost nearly 10% of the seats they previously held. System broken?
How ironic that you would make an accusation of tribalism.
Good for you for speaking eight languages, but that doesn't add any authority to your ridiculous statement. Just why would you expect everybody to use English? Move on, you're irrelevant.
The Flash implementation on OS X is terrible. When I'm watching streamed catch-up TV from say BBC iPlayer or Channel 4, I have to fire up Windows in a virtual machine on my MacBook Pro. The native performance under OS X is unwatchable.
Don't Google also need to improve their reliability and guarantee data integrity? People have lost their email in the past due to Gmail disasters, with no backups to recover it from.
What bitrate were these download MP3 encoded at? Optimised for a small portable device?
No, MP3 is generally a poor choice these days, as is OGG. AAC achieves the same quality as MP3 at a lower bitrate. Why would you want to bloat your files more than you have to?
That wouldn't go on for four years. PR is a fundamental requirement for the Lib-Dems. A coalition only works whilst both parties have each other's support.
Canada is actually in an interesting position right now. They've had a minority Tory government (a.k.a. hung parliament) for some time, with no coalition. The opposition don't bring them down for two reasons: 1) voters don't want another election yet; 2) none of the opposition parties thinks their support has grown enough to make it worthwhile. Every key vote becomes tense as it could come down to a motion of confidence in the government. The Tories have still managed some distasteful policies, and even prorogued parliament a couple of times to their benefit.
Your best bet is to vote Lib-Dem this election, and suck it up until the following election. Then vote Pirate. Assumes though that the Lib-Dems will actually implement a decent form of proportional representation.
Do you have the tools to create your own pressed discs? I can't imagine any replicator out there would accept such a disc from you. In fact, the Type A (or V) CMF that you send to them makes no provision for this, and they would probably raise their eyebrows if you tried to send them Type B, or C or later in the process. If in fact you're just duplicating (BD-R/-RE or DVD-R) then your point is moot.
Duplicated discs (BD-R/RE) do not require any AACS. Replicated discs do require AACS processing, but do not have to be encrypted (see my first reply to the OP).
You do not need to encrypt content on a BDROM - go and read the AACS spec, which is publicly available on the AACS LA's website. CPS Units on a BD Prercorded can be either encrypted on unencrypted for Basic Titles, per the CCI.
You are correct though that to replicate a BD that you need to pay an AACS fee, but that's now down to $500, IIRC.
I haven't see any issues with players playing back Type A CMF burnt to BDRE (i.e. partial AACS, as sent to replicators before AACS processing). This is how most authoring houses test their content. In fact, I don't even remember having to specify unencrypted + no disable Copy Permission Indicator when testing on the PS3 recently - at one time we had to burn to BD-REv3 format (which is annoying because that format doesn't support everything in BDROM).
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't the photo part only valid with the separate paper part too?
Crazy.
Hang on, try reading TFA. It says:
That's considerably more than 800 million quid.
Yeah, I don't get it. Why wouldn't he make headlines and a taster of the content publicly accessible and indexed by the search engines? He needs to hook people in, not disappear from the internet.
I so hope they go to a process per tab. The benefits out-weigh the memory demands, and with computers with more than 4GB becoming more and more commonplace, why put constraints on the majority of users that only benefits a few people on old hardware? Legacy software for legacy systems. I hope a multiprocess implementation comes with decent memory and CPU profiling tools so I can make decisions about killing off individual tabs that are stealing too much memory or CPU. Chrome already does this at a basic level. FF is always going to be leaky, even it's through the flexibility it gives to add-ons. On top of that, it's got to be more secure having tab isolation via multiple processes.
Don't browsers like IE and Chrome render each tab in their own process (and thus own thread), yet there is only one process that displays all the tabs? Presumably that single display thread has a lot less work to do as it's not doing any layout.
Of course, Chrome is doing process separation too. I would love it if Firefox implemented this. Forget the possible security improvements, a separate process per tab empowers me in reigning in the browser's demands on CPU and memory. Firefox leaks memory like a sieve (be it directly, or be allowing extensions the freedom to do so), but I have no way to find the problematic tabs and kill them off individually - I have to do a complete FF restart, which is just annoying. Why should activity on other tabs kill the performance of the tab I'm using? FF has inherited Netscape's moronic attitudes towards monolithic architecture, so change will be slow.
Yes you're right. Typo - thanks for catching that. NT5.2 onwards is required for larger volumes.
Wrong: it's nothing to do with the file system type. If you're on Windows and you want volumes larger than 2TB, your need NT 5.1 or newer (i.e. XP x86 or older will not cut it).
XP doesn't support volumes larger than 2TB, so it'll also have to be partitioned. XP x64 resolved that issue.
What happens to the oxygen in this process? Could it be easily recombined with the hydrogen and thus another desalination method?
Well then you'll be impressed: I work in Soho. I get here everyday via bicycle too! Who needs rockets?
More succinctly: the Lib-Dems got 23% of the vote, but only 9% of the seats in parliament. They increased their share of the vote by 1%, but lost nearly 10% of the seats they previously held. System broken?
What year is it for us? We're travelling away from Voyager at 17 km/s.
How ironic that you would make an accusation of tribalism.
Good for you for speaking eight languages, but that doesn't add any authority to your ridiculous statement. Just why would you expect everybody to use English? Move on, you're irrelevant.
You mean that it can't be URLEncoded?
The Flash implementation on OS X is terrible. When I'm watching streamed catch-up TV from say BBC iPlayer or Channel 4, I have to fire up Windows in a virtual machine on my MacBook Pro. The native performance under OS X is unwatchable.
Don't Google also need to improve their reliability and guarantee data integrity? People have lost their email in the past due to Gmail disasters, with no backups to recover it from.
What bitrate were these download MP3 encoded at? Optimised for a small portable device?
No, MP3 is generally a poor choice these days, as is OGG. AAC achieves the same quality as MP3 at a lower bitrate. Why would you want to bloat your files more than you have to?
That wouldn't go on for four years. PR is a fundamental requirement for the Lib-Dems. A coalition only works whilst both parties have each other's support.
Canada is actually in an interesting position right now. They've had a minority Tory government (a.k.a. hung parliament) for some time, with no coalition. The opposition don't bring them down for two reasons: 1) voters don't want another election yet; 2) none of the opposition parties thinks their support has grown enough to make it worthwhile. Every key vote becomes tense as it could come down to a motion of confidence in the government. The Tories have still managed some distasteful policies, and even prorogued parliament a couple of times to their benefit.
Your best bet is to vote Lib-Dem this election, and suck it up until the following election. Then vote Pirate. Assumes though that the Lib-Dems will actually implement a decent form of proportional representation.
Do you have the tools to create your own pressed discs? I can't imagine any replicator out there would accept such a disc from you. In fact, the Type A (or V) CMF that you send to them makes no provision for this, and they would probably raise their eyebrows if you tried to send them Type B, or C or later in the process. If in fact you're just duplicating (BD-R/-RE or DVD-R) then your point is moot.
Just to clarify: duplicated isn't just BD-R/RE, but also DVD-R (BD-5/9). Replicated are BD-ROM.
Duplicated discs (BD-R/RE) do not require any AACS. Replicated discs do require AACS processing, but do not have to be encrypted (see my first reply to the OP).
Which also comes with lower bitrate support than BD25/50.
Is there a free BD multiplexer available too? What about any word of development of an AVC MVC encoder for the profile 5 BD players?
You do not need to encrypt content on a BDROM - go and read the AACS spec, which is publicly available on the AACS LA's website. CPS Units on a BD Prercorded can be either encrypted on unencrypted for Basic Titles, per the CCI.
You are correct though that to replicate a BD that you need to pay an AACS fee, but that's now down to $500, IIRC.
I haven't see any issues with players playing back Type A CMF burnt to BDRE (i.e. partial AACS, as sent to replicators before AACS processing). This is how most authoring houses test their content. In fact, I don't even remember having to specify unencrypted + no disable Copy Permission Indicator when testing on the PS3 recently - at one time we had to burn to BD-REv3 format (which is annoying because that format doesn't support everything in BDROM).