It does. It probably doesn't occur to non-techies that normal stereo sound is just 1D and dolby surrond is 2D. Yes, that means mono sound is 0D.
Seems like this should be fairly obvious. But you're right, a lot of people think of stereo as "all around you" when it's really just occuring on a line between the speakers.
On the other hand (and getting off topic) it seems like you should be able to simulates everything human's can hear just with two speakers, one for each ear. After all, sound comes in two sources, seems like it should only need to be generated from two sources. Of course, clever phase shifting (like you mentioned earlier) would need to be used, I would think.
Cool. Maybe some real 3d sound is coming up. Characters talk on the screen, and the sound comes from that point on the screen.
That sounds awful 2d to me...
The problem with these existing speakers, critics say, is that while they do a good job of reproducing high-frequency sounds, they often are not substantial enough to produce deep bass sounds, or play at high volume.
They say this like the new speakers will solve the problem, but then don't explain anything more about it.
And if you think about it, it makes sense that flat speakers would lack in the bass department. How could they not? If you've ever wathcerd a big subwoofer at work, you'll see they move quite alot. A good centimenter worth of motion, at least. Now, if you pin a flat speaker to a wall, how do you expect to achieve that sort of range of motion? Sure, it'll be able to vibrate very quickly against the wall, but it has no room for the deep slow bass virations.
Perhaps they'll eventually work out a system in which the speaker sits in a deep picture frame, but until then, seems like flat tweeters and conventional woofers is the way to go.
For those of you rushing out to get Jabber as an AIM replacement (like I did) better settle down. AOL has started blocking all jabber.com IP adresses from using their servers. So no more interoperability with AIM.
Jabber still works with ICQ, Yahoo, and MSN messangers, just not AIM. Maybe someday AOL and Jabber can come up with an agreement. But as it is, things are at a stalemate.
Hold your horses, buddy. It's not like Slahdot wrote the article, they just pointed it out.
Either way, surely Slashdot is allowed to report on things related to VA Linux?
Ok, the Russians failed a couple of launches, and then covered up the results. Is anyone surprised? Does anyone care? I guess this is news for nerd, but I'm having a hard time classifying it as "stuff that matters."
What next? Someone attaches jumper cables from their car to your shirt? I think I'll stick with batteries.
Really, you're not going to get much power off of solar panels. Event the huge ones used for solar powered cars can barely power a blow drier. I doubt you're in any danger of being electrocuted.
Looks like the same entity controlls all of the state.us domain. Take a look at www.nic.us
Looking at the page closer... "The US Domain Registry is administered by VeriSign, Inc." Hmm...
some charge outrageous fees (>$400/yr) to register
Actually, I believe you can reigster a.us domain for free. I'm not sure exactly, but I know a friend of mine owns chinatown.ny.us or some such, and registered it for free (no dirty hacking involved).
Just because a large bit of info on our culture may be lost doesn't mean it will all be lost. Sure, a lot of relevant stuff is stored digitally, but a ton of information of every kind is available on paper. If future historians want to know about our culture, let them dig up our old books and newpapers and magazines, they'll learn incredible ammounts about us. And if they want to know about our digital culture, they can still hit the books. It's all on paper, somewhere.
So no one can use "Open" or "GL" preceded or followed by someting else without it being confusing?
No, that's not at all what I'm saying. If you name your software something like, for example, "Open Yadda Yadda," more power to you. But with "Open?L" you're just asking for it.
Only "computer savy" users are going to know what OpenGL is, and they can typically read a web page.
I think you're forgetting a huge chunk of computer users: the `l33t gamers. Half of these guys are dumb as boards, but I'll bet that they all know what OpenGL is. And tell them about OpenIL, and you'll probably hear "w0w! That's 2 letters after OpenIL! `l33t!"
This seems to me like another case of Slashdotters running crying everytime a copmany steps on what they mistakenly consider their rights.
Let's look at this logically. Is a name like "OpenIL" confusable with "OpenGL?" Sure is. If I heard about something named OpenIL, I'd instantly assume it had something to do with OpenGL, and I might even go as far, as I bet a lot of "end users" would, as to assume that it was from the same people. This is futerh complicated by the fact that the logos are similar enough to perhaps cause some confusion for those not too familiar with OpenGL.
Trademark law was created, and in my mind rightly so, to stop this kind of confusion between products.
My advice? Change the name. It doesn't sound like SGI sent out the big nasties, just a polite letter. They were even cosiderate enough to have a conversation with the guy via email rather than just more threatening letters.
Oh, and Slashdotters? Calm down. Just because a corporation is invoking IP law doesn't make them evil.
This seems to me like another case of Slashdotters running crying everytime a copmany steps on what they mistakenly consider their rights.
Let's look at this logically. Is a name like "OpenIL" confusable with "OpenGL?" Sure is. If I heard about something named OpenIL, I'd instantly assume it had something to do with OpenGL, and I might even go as far, as I bet a lot of "end users" would, as to assume that it was from the same people. This is futerh complicated by the fact that the logos are similar enough to perhaps cause some confusion for those not too familiar with OpenGL.
Trademark law was created, and in my mind rightly so, to stop this kind of confusion between products.
My advice? Change the name. It doesn't sound like SGI sent out the big nasties, just a polite letter. They were even cosiderate enough to have a conversation with the guy via email rather than just more threatening letters.
Oh, and Slashdotters? Calm down. Just because a corporation is invoking IP law doesn't make them evil.
The argument that "you know when you post that..." is bogus. Music publishers also "know when they publish CDs" that their music will get copied, but that doesn't invalidate their copyright
It's not just that usenet authors know that their work will be sent publicly, they command it to happen by hitting that submit button. If music publishers are releasing CDs, usenet authors are uploading their songs to napster users themselves.
There is no "work" involved in archiving USENET postings. DejaNews didn't manually classify or edit articles. What you need for USENET archiving is storage and a simple script
I think you are greatly, greatly underesimating the work involved in maintaining a large usenet server and archiver 5 years worth of material. At bare, rediculously underestimated minumum, this is going to require a huge amount of storage, a couple of servers, and at least one full time IT professional, working for five years. That's just a bit of an investment
Hm. Does Google own the database of Usenet postings?
Google does indeed own a copy of the database of usenet postings. More on this later
You see, since every person ever write to the Usenet still retains copyright to their postings, isn't it in the slightest bit illegal to actually *sell* the database? Or at least immoral?
This is a funny bit of Usenet culture/law. While it is generally accepted that usenet users are giving others permission to copy there works they *do* retain copyright. So why can deja go around selling this work? IANAL, but here is how I see it, I think I'm (mostly) right.
1) When you post to usenet, you're sending your work to whatever every archives are in place, and you know it. By posting, you are giving any other user permission to view and archive the material. In fact, you yourself are commanding that the message be forwarded to all other connected computers, and therein lies the implied permission.
2) This strikes me as an important point. What deja.com is selling is not the rights to the posts, or the posts themselves, but the work that they put into archiving the posts, which is considerable. It is the same way that free software sell CDs with open source programs on them. They are selling the data itself and the work that went into collecting the data, not the rights to the data. So, while you may have put a lot of effort into writing that post for alt.silly.rantings, deja.com didn't sell that work, deja.com merely sold the work that went into collecting your work.
Do you see what I'm saying? Or am I just rambling?
Read the f*cking article, everyone! With a range that is currently 1 cm and isn't gonna get much gger, no one is gonna be tracking anyone and ripping away rights. Read the article and chill out.
Knowing slashdotters, the first thing that's gonna happen is everyone is gonna have a fit about consumer rights. Now they can track us wherever we go. Now they can tack away are basic privancy. Etc.
One thing that the article makes clear and the everyone should keep in mind is the range of these things is extremely limited. We're talking 1 cm, right now, maybe a couple of feet when the tech is perfected, and even then the devices don't continually broadcast, they only respond to speciall readers. So no, companies can't follow their produts to your home.
This said, the radio tags seem like a good idea to me. With devices like retail bcomes a lot cooler. The checkpoint devices will actually work correctly, for one. When you walk out of the store, a reader on the entrance will only sound an alert if you have a tag that is in inventory. No more false alarms. And checkout will be very easy. Instead of scanning every item by hand, a reader can quickly tally every item in your cart. Not to mentioneEvery cart could have a reader that keeps a running tally for you. No more overspending.
Things get better on the other side of the equation, too. Taking inventroy is very easy. Walk down the isles with a reciever, and it tallies everything. Put recievers in trucks and make sure your stock isn't dissappearing. The list of cool things that these can do go on and on.
This isn't a technology to be afraid of. Read the article. Be happy. These things are already working wonders is things like ski lift tickets and livestock managment. Don't let paranoia get in the way of some cool technology.
Yep. Copyright law (in America, at least) applies to everything equally. So copyrights on movies do expire. But they don't expire until 70 years after the last surviving author's death. The good thing about Project Gutenburg is that so much "great liturature" was written such a very long time ago that the copyrights have long expired. Not so with movies, which are a relatively new medium. Have fun waiting around.
Slashdot Mirror
It does. It probably doesn't occur to non-techies that normal stereo sound is just 1D and dolby surrond is 2D. Yes, that means mono sound is 0D.
Seems like this should be fairly obvious. But you're right, a lot of people think of stereo as "all around you" when it's really just occuring on a line between the speakers.
On the other hand (and getting off topic) it seems like you should be able to simulates everything human's can hear just with two speakers, one for each ear. After all, sound comes in two sources, seems like it should only need to be generated from two sources. Of course, clever phase shifting (like you mentioned earlier) would need to be used, I would think.
I doubt it's real
Flat speakers have been aroud a while. What makes you doubt these? *cough*troll*cough*
Cool. Maybe some real 3d sound is coming up. Characters talk on the screen, and the sound comes from that point on the screen.
That sounds awful 2d to me...
The problem with these existing speakers, critics say, is that while they do a good job of reproducing high-frequency sounds, they often are not substantial enough to produce deep bass sounds, or play at high volume.
They say this like the new speakers will solve the problem, but then don't explain anything more about it.
And if you think about it, it makes sense that flat speakers would lack in the bass department. How could they not? If you've ever wathcerd a big subwoofer at work, you'll see they move quite alot. A good centimenter worth of motion, at least. Now, if you pin a flat speaker to a wall, how do you expect to achieve that sort of range of motion? Sure, it'll be able to vibrate very quickly against the wall, but it has no room for the deep slow bass virations.
Perhaps they'll eventually work out a system in which the speaker sits in a deep picture frame, but until then, seems like flat tweeters and conventional woofers is the way to go.
sounds alot like (i think its called) pizeo-electic metals.
If you'd taken the time to read the article, you'd konw for a fact that pizeo-electric metals (specifically platinum electrodes) are being used.
No, it's till there, last I checked. You just need to go to the main page and clikc to to the comment box.
This link won't work properly. Try going to the main page, and clicking on "Contast MISD".
For those of you rushing out to get Jabber as an AIM replacement (like I did) better settle down. AOL has started blocking all jabber.com IP adresses from using their servers. So no more interoperability with AIM.
Jabber still works with ICQ, Yahoo, and MSN messangers, just not AIM. Maybe someday AOL and Jabber can come up with an agreement. But as it is, things are at a stalemate.
Hold your horses, buddy. It's not like Slahdot wrote the article, they just pointed it out. Either way, surely Slashdot is allowed to report on things related to VA Linux?
Ok, the Russians failed a couple of launches, and then covered up the results. Is anyone surprised? Does anyone care? I guess this is news for nerd, but I'm having a hard time classifying it as "stuff that matters."
Now how about diamond coated solar clothes?
"Look over there, it's a pimp."
"No, no, that's just a geek, see the cable running to his PDA?"
What next? Someone attaches jumper cables from their car to your shirt? I think I'll stick with batteries.
Really, you're not going to get much power off of solar panels. Event the huge ones used for solar powered cars can barely power a blow drier. I doubt you're in any danger of being electrocuted.
Furthermore, the 1.5GHz P4's thermal diode throttles the part to effectively 750Mhz as soon as power consumption exceeds 54.7W.
All your power consumption are belong to Pentium, it seems.
Looks like the same entity controlls all of the state.us domain. Take a look at www.nic.us Looking at the page closer... "The US Domain Registry is administered by VeriSign, Inc." Hmm...
some charge outrageous fees (>$400/yr) to register
.us domain for free. I'm not sure exactly, but I know a friend of mine owns chinatown.ny.us or some such, and registered it for free (no dirty hacking involved).
Actually, I believe you can reigster a
Just because a large bit of info on our culture may be lost doesn't mean it will all be lost. Sure, a lot of relevant stuff is stored digitally, but a ton of information of every kind is available on paper. If future historians want to know about our culture, let them dig up our old books and newpapers and magazines, they'll learn incredible ammounts about us. And if they want to know about our digital culture, they can still hit the books. It's all on paper, somewhere.
So no one can use "Open" or "GL" preceded or followed by someting else without it being confusing?
No, that's not at all what I'm saying. If you name your software something like, for example, "Open Yadda Yadda," more power to you. But with "Open?L" you're just asking for it.
Only "computer savy" users are going to know what OpenGL is, and they can typically read a web page.
I think you're forgetting a huge chunk of computer users: the `l33t gamers. Half of these guys are dumb as boards, but I'll bet that they all know what OpenGL is. And tell them about OpenIL, and you'll probably hear "w0w! That's 2 letters after OpenIL! `l33t!"
This seems to me like another case of Slashdotters running crying everytime a copmany steps on what they mistakenly consider their rights.
Let's look at this logically. Is a name like "OpenIL" confusable with "OpenGL?" Sure is. If I heard about something named OpenIL, I'd instantly assume it had something to do with OpenGL, and I might even go as far, as I bet a lot of "end users" would, as to assume that it was from the same people. This is futerh complicated by the fact that the logos are similar enough to perhaps cause some confusion for those not too familiar with OpenGL.
Trademark law was created, and in my mind rightly so, to stop this kind of confusion between products.
My advice? Change the name. It doesn't sound like SGI sent out the big nasties, just a polite letter. They were even cosiderate enough to have a conversation with the guy via email rather than just more threatening letters.
Oh, and Slashdotters? Calm down. Just because a corporation is invoking IP law doesn't make them evil.
This seems to me like another case of Slashdotters running crying everytime a copmany steps on what they mistakenly consider their rights. Let's look at this logically. Is a name like "OpenIL" confusable with "OpenGL?" Sure is. If I heard about something named OpenIL, I'd instantly assume it had something to do with OpenGL, and I might even go as far, as I bet a lot of "end users" would, as to assume that it was from the same people. This is futerh complicated by the fact that the logos are similar enough to perhaps cause some confusion for those not too familiar with OpenGL. Trademark law was created, and in my mind rightly so, to stop this kind of confusion between products. My advice? Change the name. It doesn't sound like SGI sent out the big nasties, just a polite letter. They were even cosiderate enough to have a conversation with the guy via email rather than just more threatening letters. Oh, and Slashdotters? Calm down. Just because a corporation is invoking IP law doesn't make them evil.
The argument that "you know when you post that..." is bogus. Music publishers also "know when they publish CDs" that their music will get copied, but that doesn't invalidate their copyright
It's not just that usenet authors know that their work will be sent publicly, they command it to happen by hitting that submit button. If music publishers are releasing CDs, usenet authors are uploading their songs to napster users themselves.
There is no "work" involved in archiving USENET postings. DejaNews didn't manually classify or edit articles. What you need for USENET archiving is storage and a simple script
I think you are greatly, greatly underesimating the work involved in maintaining a large usenet server and archiver 5 years worth of material. At bare, rediculously underestimated minumum, this is going to require a huge amount of storage, a couple of servers, and at least one full time IT professional, working for five years. That's just a bit of an investment
Hm. Does Google own the database of Usenet postings?
Google does indeed own a copy of the database of usenet postings. More on this later
You see, since every person ever write to the Usenet still retains copyright to their postings, isn't it in the slightest bit illegal to actually *sell* the database? Or at least immoral?
This is a funny bit of Usenet culture/law. While it is generally accepted that usenet users are giving others permission to copy there works they *do* retain copyright. So why can deja go around selling this work? IANAL, but here is how I see it, I think I'm (mostly) right.
1) When you post to usenet, you're sending your work to whatever every archives are in place, and you know it. By posting, you are giving any other user permission to view and archive the material. In fact, you yourself are commanding that the message be forwarded to all other connected computers, and therein lies the implied permission.
2) This strikes me as an important point. What deja.com is selling is not the rights to the posts, or the posts themselves, but the work that they put into archiving the posts, which is considerable. It is the same way that free software sell CDs with open source programs on them. They are selling the data itself and the work that went into collecting the data, not the rights to the data. So, while you may have put a lot of effort into writing that post for alt.silly.rantings, deja.com didn't sell that work, deja.com merely sold the work that went into collecting your work.
Do you see what I'm saying? Or am I just rambling?
What? You mean what I was taught in school was wrong?
Yes. We all thought you'd figured it out already. We didn't mean to break it to you like that.
You've just undermined my trust in everything I've ever known.
Someone had to do it.
Read the f*cking article, everyone! With a range that is currently 1 cm and isn't gonna get much gger, no one is gonna be tracking anyone and ripping away rights. Read the article and chill out.
Knowing slashdotters, the first thing that's gonna happen is everyone is gonna have a fit about consumer rights. Now they can track us wherever we go. Now they can tack away are basic privancy. Etc.
One thing that the article makes clear and the everyone should keep in mind is the range of these things is extremely limited. We're talking 1 cm, right now, maybe a couple of feet when the tech is perfected, and even then the devices don't continually broadcast, they only respond to speciall readers. So no, companies can't follow their produts to your home.
This said, the radio tags seem like a good idea to me. With devices like retail bcomes a lot cooler. The checkpoint devices will actually work correctly, for one. When you walk out of the store, a reader on the entrance will only sound an alert if you have a tag that is in inventory. No more false alarms. And checkout will be very easy. Instead of scanning every item by hand, a reader can quickly tally every item in your cart. Not to mentioneEvery cart could have a reader that keeps a running tally for you. No more overspending.
Things get better on the other side of the equation, too. Taking inventroy is very easy. Walk down the isles with a reciever, and it tallies everything. Put recievers in trucks and make sure your stock isn't dissappearing. The list of cool things that these can do go on and on.
This isn't a technology to be afraid of. Read the article. Be happy. These things are already working wonders is things like ski lift tickets and livestock managment. Don't let paranoia get in the way of some cool technology.
Do they [copyrights on movies] expire like books?
Yep. Copyright law (in America, at least) applies to everything equally. So copyrights on movies do expire. But they don't expire until 70 years after the last surviving author's death. The good thing about Project Gutenburg is that so much "great liturature" was written such a very long time ago that the copyrights have long expired. Not so with movies, which are a relatively new medium. Have fun waiting around.