DRM and plugging the analogue hole doesn't make any sense in the context of audio. The argument is always that the final signal is analogue so you can always record it.In the video world this process is imperfect and takes a considerable quality hit as the final analogue signal is made up of millions of individual analogue signals.
In the audio world this process is absolutely perfect. The signal levels required to drive the analogue transducers to make sound to go in the ear are perfect for recording at top quality. Digitizing high quality audio is cheap and easy, and I would argue far more foolproof than the process of ripping a CD was only 10 years ago (remember those skipping MP3s?)
Then there's the context of the company involved: Google. The same Google who has no problem with you firing up your downloader of choice and ripping audio streams straight out of it's online video service (a point of contention with the RIAA at the moment). Also the first company to make this decision were well known for being one of the few to provide DRM free music.
Really this is all about shiny and wireless. It's about looking sleek with no buttons or holes. It's about being so futuristic that there is no cable. The analogue hole and DRM have zero to do with it.
People who quote the horseless carriages in this case only show their own ignorance of history.
It took a good 30 years for the horseless carriage to catch on. By that time the costs plummeted and it started showing real advantages including actually being faster and more comfortable than the horse drawn counterpart. There was a long history before mass adoption where the horseless carriage was a piece of shit that was slow, useless, and in some cases even required a person walking in front of it to be used legally.
That is where wireless headphones are right now. There's not a single wireless headphone on the market that can out perform its wired counterpart in any metric other than not having a wire.
They have their use cases, but they are not in the general all encompassing case superior.
Sucks to get stuck with Bluetooth if you want to travel, though... Many overseas airlines will not allow use of Bluetooth headphones,
Like which ones? I mean really. I travel for work. I spend about 40% of my time in other countries and 10% of those on other continents. I have *never* been asked to stop using my bluetooth headset for anything other than paying attention to the flight attendant during the inflight safety demonstration.
Many international airlines not only don't give a crap about your bluetooth, many of them now run in flight entertainment systems over WiFi, offer in flight internet access, and some even have microcells to allow you to talk on your phone. Hell the last flight I took replaced the no smoking light with a no phone light to tell you when you were allowed to turn off flightmode.
As for the FAA, what they say or don't say is irrelevant compared to what airlines enforce. My above experience includes trips to the USA several times per year and the Bose QC headphones that you will typically see multiple people wearing and using on pretty much every flight and advertised in every in flight magazine, and even comes with airline adapters, and has bluetooth always on when noise cancelling is activated goes with me on every USA flight too.
I think you fundamentally miss what it is that motivates people. It's not that people aren't interested in photography and only want to take snapshots, it's that people don't want to carry something.
I'm into photography (FE, F5, D40, D70, D200, D800 owner here) but the majority of my photos are done on my cellphone as it is the camera I have with me.
The thing is quality wise in a standard well lit scenario it is very difficult to tell a cellphone from a DSLR. It's only when you want to get fancy, depth of field, low light, non standard zoom ranges (the GP calling out the ability to zoom as a killer feature makes a mockery of those of us with 50mm f/1.2 lenses), or issues which demand extreme dynamic range, THEN the DSLR stands out.
It's why Apple's marketing department showed some hipster douchebag doing a studio model shoot on his iPhone with fantastic results. There's an element of just because you can doesn't mean you should, but for the vast majority of the population who's cells are in their pocket and who's SLRs are at home, the option doesn't exist.
Also nitpick, cellphones weren't the only thing that killed the point and shoot. I know a great many people who now have jumped on the mirrorless bandwagon which offers them a lot of the advantages of an SLR without the heft. Around here you'd be hard pressed finding a household which doesn't have a mirrorless or SLR around.
Or you can always open search result clicks in a new tab or window
You're making assumptions about which search engine is in use and where the pop-under sits. There are plenty of sites of questionable rapport which offer search and will happily then create a pop-under off a middle click.
You just reminded me of what's even worse. By trapping the middle click it also breaks the open in new tab functionality.
Why not adopt a burden of proof system like many other countries have. If you want to identify yourself you need to accumulate a certain number of points. Certain points are required for certain things (e.g. 100 points to open a bank account, 200 to apply for citizen ship etc).
Different items provide different points e.g. drivers license or government ID document with photo 50 points, bank issued document or card 25 points, internationally identifying document like passport 75 points, letter posted to your address 10 points etc.
Then the burden of proof also needs to link the systems together, i.e. you should always have a document with your name, your face, your date of birth and your home address. Mix and match documents until you have the required number of points and all the core parts covered, and bam. ID.
Why? Simply eliminate the TID. The government doesn't need more than one key to use in a database. The issue here isn't the fact that these numbers are used, it's the fact that any single identifier is used for identification and authentication.
Any system built on this basis is too easy to abuse.
They fundamentally break the browser behaviour. The problem is as soon as you close the advert to get back to your page you have now low the history. If you ended up there as a result of a search, screw you, no back key for you, start from the beginning.
This isn't just an advert. This isn't just a quirky way of getting attention. This is fundamentally screwing with the web browser and to me is as offensive as a HTML5 pop-over that can't be cleared.
Much of the fake news was carried on Cat5 ethernet cable and over Wi-Fi.
Thus, Cat5 and Wi-Fi have failed us again! When will we learn???
To be fair to the poor cat5 cable, according to the network layer the cat5 cable has never done anything to moderate any content I wanted it to deliver. The same can't be said for Google or Facebook.
The problem there is that Internet users in general are subset of people.
There's a lot of frigging dumb people in the world. There really can't be much of an argument that providing a completely open outlet for information has let the crazies spread their crazy at a far larger pace than ever before.
We're not training anyone. We're feeding idiots to trolls.
Also, how pedantic would it be of me to point out that it should be "fewer" lights, not "less"?
If you want to be super pedantic then point out that counting working lights from space on a small heatmap isn't really representative. The issue isn't with less or fewer lights, it's that they used the word "lights" instead of the word "light".:-)
There are many technical, geological, electrical, and external reasons that cables fail. Unfortunately underground it is often a case of not being able to identify problems early through PD monitoring or similar maintenance systems.
The water table isn't bad for cables, and by countering with the Netherlands you've actually pointed to one of the key points the GP was making: the high water table and soft sub-ocean level dirt / sand mixture that much of the country is made of is actually really really easy to trench and dig, which is why you won't typically find overhead powerlines here.
Trenching is hell expensive. But it is always a risk vs cost thing, and both of those are highly dependent on the local geography. It isn't foregone conclusion that many on/. make it out to be.
Your cherry picking skills are masterful and very non-representative of the actual state of this nation.
Neither is your comment that you need guns to maintain rights. Quite frankly, guns or no guns, much of the western world are just sitting here eating our popcorn watching the incredible race to fucking up the nation. UK, USA? Who will win? I'm betting it's going to be a photo finish.
By the way since your 4th-amendment free zone extends 100miles from any border (which technically includes any international servicing airport), I'm not just cherry picking, I'm cherry farming, and going to own a world wide monopoly the cherry industry.
Sure you can. In fact the chances are that when you get into your fancy EV to escape your last minute doom it will have a full charge, whereas your car could be mostly empty and if you didn't plan ahead you'll find yourself either at an empty station or in a queue for a nearly empty station.
The odds are if you're better off with the ICE then you're also a disaster prepper (because if you're talking about buying gas a month before, they you could just out-walk your disaster scenario), in which case why are you running instead of retreating into the underground city you built just for this case?
What rights? You have no rights. You have a piece of paper that the government chooses to follow haphazardly and with all your might and all your guns you roll over and ignore your 4th amendment free zones, your places where guns are banned, and your general military police state you find yourself in where police are a protected entity even when they shoot and kill unarmed women in the pyjamas who were the ones who called them in the first place.
Sure you have the right to a fair trial, apparently... if you make it that far. And given the recent track record you're far more likely to do that without a gun than with.
It's bad enough that it's the reason why Cobalt tipped tools have completely gone away over the last 5 years.
If by completely gone away you mean searching for cobalt in the tools section of Amazon giving just shy of 200,000 products, and every local hardware store across the world stocking basic cobalt tipped cutting tools, then sure, they've "completely gone away".
I guess the internet, televsision, and the petrol engine have also "completely gone away" by your criteria. It must be a very empty world.
And Musk is a con man, Tesla only survives because of federal grants and will go under once those grants are revoked, Tesla sells cars at a loss, chewing through investor money...
This is called executing government policy. The whole purpose of subsidies is to startup companies and get them to a point in their production where they are self sufficient in order to achieve the governmental goals (in this case related to reduction of pollution and cleaner air).
That doesn't make Musk a con man, it makes *you* ignorant.
Speaking of the subsidies. You're talking about subsidies specifically designed by the incumbent non electric cars that give them a relative advantage (hence the exact figures and limits on the subsidies so they can profit off them while ensuring competitors don't grow). You're also talking about subsidies that Musk has specifically asked to be repealed by the government in Q1 this year because it gives the incumbent companies a financial advantage
But speaking of con men, you're talking about the car company that was first to pay back the entirety of its federal loan with interest, at a time where you were too busy bailing out the too-big-to-failers. Yeah there are con men in the auto industry.
Ever consider learning about a topic before you comment on it?
Slashdot Mirror
You can buy a dongle but are incapable of following the logical flow of a conversation. You're in no position to call others a moron.
DRM and plugging the analogue hole doesn't make any sense in the context of audio. The argument is always that the final signal is analogue so you can always record it.In the video world this process is imperfect and takes a considerable quality hit as the final analogue signal is made up of millions of individual analogue signals.
In the audio world this process is absolutely perfect. The signal levels required to drive the analogue transducers to make sound to go in the ear are perfect for recording at top quality. Digitizing high quality audio is cheap and easy, and I would argue far more foolproof than the process of ripping a CD was only 10 years ago (remember those skipping MP3s?)
Then there's the context of the company involved: Google. The same Google who has no problem with you firing up your downloader of choice and ripping audio streams straight out of it's online video service (a point of contention with the RIAA at the moment). Also the first company to make this decision were well known for being one of the few to provide DRM free music.
Really this is all about shiny and wireless. It's about looking sleek with no buttons or holes. It's about being so futuristic that there is no cable. The analogue hole and DRM have zero to do with it.
People who quote the horseless carriages in this case only show their own ignorance of history.
It took a good 30 years for the horseless carriage to catch on. By that time the costs plummeted and it started showing real advantages including actually being faster and more comfortable than the horse drawn counterpart. There was a long history before mass adoption where the horseless carriage was a piece of shit that was slow, useless, and in some cases even required a person walking in front of it to be used legally.
That is where wireless headphones are right now. There's not a single wireless headphone on the market that can out perform its wired counterpart in any metric other than not having a wire.
They have their use cases, but they are not in the general all encompassing case superior.
Sucks to get stuck with Bluetooth if you want to travel, though... Many overseas airlines will not allow use of Bluetooth headphones,
Like which ones? I mean really. I travel for work. I spend about 40% of my time in other countries and 10% of those on other continents. I have *never* been asked to stop using my bluetooth headset for anything other than paying attention to the flight attendant during the inflight safety demonstration.
Many international airlines not only don't give a crap about your bluetooth, many of them now run in flight entertainment systems over WiFi, offer in flight internet access, and some even have microcells to allow you to talk on your phone. Hell the last flight I took replaced the no smoking light with a no phone light to tell you when you were allowed to turn off flightmode.
As for the FAA, what they say or don't say is irrelevant compared to what airlines enforce. My above experience includes trips to the USA several times per year and the Bose QC headphones that you will typically see multiple people wearing and using on pretty much every flight and advertised in every in flight magazine, and even comes with airline adapters, and has bluetooth always on when noise cancelling is activated goes with me on every USA flight too.
I look to see if there are any USB-C headphones I can grab --- because I assume the audio quality will be better.
That is not a good assumption to make. In fact I would wager the opposite. You're no longer paying for analogue audio design.
I think you fundamentally miss what it is that motivates people. It's not that people aren't interested in photography and only want to take snapshots, it's that people don't want to carry something.
I'm into photography (FE, F5, D40, D70, D200, D800 owner here) but the majority of my photos are done on my cellphone as it is the camera I have with me.
The thing is quality wise in a standard well lit scenario it is very difficult to tell a cellphone from a DSLR. It's only when you want to get fancy, depth of field, low light, non standard zoom ranges (the GP calling out the ability to zoom as a killer feature makes a mockery of those of us with 50mm f/1.2 lenses), or issues which demand extreme dynamic range, THEN the DSLR stands out.
It's why Apple's marketing department showed some hipster douchebag doing a studio model shoot on his iPhone with fantastic results. There's an element of just because you can doesn't mean you should, but for the vast majority of the population who's cells are in their pocket and who's SLRs are at home, the option doesn't exist.
Also nitpick, cellphones weren't the only thing that killed the point and shoot. I know a great many people who now have jumped on the mirrorless bandwagon which offers them a lot of the advantages of an SLR without the heft. Around here you'd be hard pressed finding a household which doesn't have a mirrorless or SLR around.
Or you can always open search result clicks in a new tab or window
You're making assumptions about which search engine is in use and where the pop-under sits. There are plenty of sites of questionable rapport which offer search and will happily then create a pop-under off a middle click.
You just reminded me of what's even worse. By trapping the middle click it also breaks the open in new tab functionality.
Why not adopt a burden of proof system like many other countries have. If you want to identify yourself you need to accumulate a certain number of points. Certain points are required for certain things (e.g. 100 points to open a bank account, 200 to apply for citizen ship etc).
Different items provide different points e.g. drivers license or government ID document with photo 50 points, bank issued document or card 25 points, internationally identifying document like passport 75 points, letter posted to your address 10 points etc.
Then the burden of proof also needs to link the systems together, i.e. you should always have a document with your name, your face, your date of birth and your home address. Mix and match documents until you have the required number of points and all the core parts covered, and bam. ID.
Why? Simply eliminate the TID. The government doesn't need more than one key to use in a database. The issue here isn't the fact that these numbers are used, it's the fact that any single identifier is used for identification and authentication.
Any system built on this basis is too easy to abuse.
They fundamentally break the browser behaviour. The problem is as soon as you close the advert to get back to your page you have now low the history. If you ended up there as a result of a search, screw you, no back key for you, start from the beginning.
This isn't just an advert.
This isn't just a quirky way of getting attention.
This is fundamentally screwing with the web browser and to me is as offensive as a HTML5 pop-over that can't be cleared.
Halting and catching fire in your sleep is such a horrible way to go.
Much of the fake news was carried on Cat5 ethernet cable and over Wi-Fi.
Thus, Cat5 and Wi-Fi have failed us again! When will we learn???
To be fair to the poor cat5 cable, according to the network layer the cat5 cable has never done anything to moderate any content I wanted it to deliver. The same can't be said for Google or Facebook.
Cat5 lives matter.
We're not their customers. We're their PRODUCT.
-jcr
Not even a good product. Because as your post has shown many of us can't use their brains.
The problem there is that Internet users in general are subset of people.
There's a lot of frigging dumb people in the world. There really can't be much of an argument that providing a completely open outlet for information has let the crazies spread their crazy at a far larger pace than ever before.
We're not training anyone. We're feeding idiots to trolls.
Also, how pedantic would it be of me to point out that it should be "fewer" lights, not "less"?
If you want to be super pedantic then point out that counting working lights from space on a small heatmap isn't really representative. The issue isn't with less or fewer lights, it's that they used the word "lights" instead of the word "light". :-)
Not only did he say household income he also italicised household to make it stand out.
It is technically impossible to fail.
Well, found the non-electrical engineer.
There are many technical, geological, electrical, and external reasons that cables fail. Unfortunately underground it is often a case of not being able to identify problems early through PD monitoring or similar maintenance systems.
It is a silly comment both of you just made.
The water table isn't bad for cables, and by countering with the Netherlands you've actually pointed to one of the key points the GP was making: the high water table and soft sub-ocean level dirt / sand mixture that much of the country is made of is actually really really easy to trench and dig, which is why you won't typically find overhead powerlines here.
Trenching is hell expensive. But it is always a risk vs cost thing, and both of those are highly dependent on the local geography. It isn't foregone conclusion that many on /. make it out to be.
Your cherry picking skills are masterful and very non-representative of the actual state of this nation.
Neither is your comment that you need guns to maintain rights. Quite frankly, guns or no guns, much of the western world are just sitting here eating our popcorn watching the incredible race to fucking up the nation. UK, USA? Who will win? I'm betting it's going to be a photo finish.
By the way since your 4th-amendment free zone extends 100miles from any border (which technically includes any international servicing airport), I'm not just cherry picking, I'm cherry farming, and going to own a world wide monopoly the cherry industry.
But sure dismiss away. *mmmm popcorn*
Sure you can. In fact the chances are that when you get into your fancy EV to escape your last minute doom it will have a full charge, whereas your car could be mostly empty and if you didn't plan ahead you'll find yourself either at an empty station or in a queue for a nearly empty station.
The odds are if you're better off with the ICE then you're also a disaster prepper (because if you're talking about buying gas a month before, they you could just out-walk your disaster scenario), in which case why are you running instead of retreating into the underground city you built just for this case?
I think a certain amount of political sanity will be restored to the EU once those twats from Westminster isolate themselves.
What rights? You have no rights. You have a piece of paper that the government chooses to follow haphazardly and with all your might and all your guns you roll over and ignore your 4th amendment free zones, your places where guns are banned, and your general military police state you find yourself in where police are a protected entity even when they shoot and kill unarmed women in the pyjamas who were the ones who called them in the first place.
Sure you have the right to a fair trial, apparently ... if you make it that far. And given the recent track record you're far more likely to do that without a gun than with.
It's bad enough that it's the reason why Cobalt tipped tools have completely gone away over the last 5 years.
If by completely gone away you mean searching for cobalt in the tools section of Amazon giving just shy of 200,000 products, and every local hardware store across the world stocking basic cobalt tipped cutting tools, then sure, they've "completely gone away".
I guess the internet, televsision, and the petrol engine have also "completely gone away" by your criteria. It must be a very empty world.
Sure, are you going to pay for it?
Power isn't run above ground because it makes the skyline look pretty.
And Musk is a con man, Tesla only survives because of federal grants and will go under once those grants are revoked, Tesla sells cars at a loss, chewing through investor money...
This is called executing government policy. The whole purpose of subsidies is to startup companies and get them to a point in their production where they are self sufficient in order to achieve the governmental goals (in this case related to reduction of pollution and cleaner air).
That doesn't make Musk a con man, it makes *you* ignorant.
Speaking of the subsidies. You're talking about subsidies specifically designed by the incumbent non electric cars that give them a relative advantage (hence the exact figures and limits on the subsidies so they can profit off them while ensuring competitors don't grow). You're also talking about subsidies that Musk has specifically asked to be repealed by the government in Q1 this year because it gives the incumbent companies a financial advantage
But speaking of con men, you're talking about the car company that was first to pay back the entirety of its federal loan with interest, at a time where you were too busy bailing out the too-big-to-failers. Yeah there are con men in the auto industry.
Ever consider learning about a topic before you comment on it?