I attempted this at my last (unnamed) company. We were doing music fingerprinting, which worked perfectly on compressed media (mp3, vorbis, real, windows media, etc etc).
So we attempted to fingerprint radio broadcasts. It seemed simple in concept, a radio tivo like device wouldn't be too difficult: buffer some audio, fingerprint the stream, mark & cut beginning and ending of song (easy if you know track length), store to database.
Unfortunately it failed miserably. The reason was the fingerprint didn't work on radio signals. Do you know what sort of signal chain radio puts most music through? It's ugly dynamic compression. This isn't compression like mp3, it's *dynamic* compression. The average radio station could probably get by playing 4 or 8 bit audio, the dynamic range is crap. They do this to keep their V/U meters peaked as much as they can, similar to how TV commercials are louder than the TV programs.
anyway, it was a decent idea. I was hoping to make something that recorded all 20 songs most stations play, store them in a database, then when I'm driving I just pick the songs I want to hear. Sure, you might get some DJ talking over a bit of the intro/ending, but it beats listening to commercials.
what if, instead, each encrypted message contained the next one time pad? would that be any more secure? Of course, once cracked all future messages are cracked...
I sometimes wonder if the eds intentionally post crap, just to get companies shot down. And what exactly will Prescient's venture capitolists say when they learn that the geek public thinks Prescient's product is worth crap?
I mean really, I doubt Timothy is trying to sell this to us. He's just preaching to the choir. And if Prescient was public he probably would of shorted a couple hundred shares before posting the story...
I'm a relative newbie to using mozilla. When using netscape, I often start more than one netscape process since if one process crashes it won't take down the unrelated netscape processes. Is this possible with mozilla? When I tried doing that it didn't seem to start a seperate process. Is their a way to force >1 mozilla process?
So it behooves (love that word..) us to be careful. Better too caution, than not cautios enough. The same applies for any samples returned. What if it turns out that some Europan life form loves vinyl?
My gawd, hip hop DJs around the world would have to switch to CDs!
yeah, you'd think they would of used the Devo Corporate Anthem!
how about using tcpdump or ethereal
on
Spy v. Spy
·
· Score: 2
I've never used anti-spy software, but what exactly does it do? Is it like an eye candy version of tcpdump or ethereal (http://www.ethereal.com/)?
btw- an easy solution would be to run an eavesdropper on your router/masquerade machine (if you're using one). It would be extremely difficult for spyware to find that you're running tcpdump or ethereal on a remote machine.
I was hunting around on my Solaris machine at the office yesterday. For amusement, I looked at the shell script it's got for/usr/bin/clear. In addition to containing the standard AT&T copyright, it also contains a Microsoft Copyright:
#!/usr/bin/sh # Copyright (c) 1984, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989 AT&T # All Rights Reserved
# THIS IS UNPUBLISHED PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODE OF AT&T # The copyright notice above does not evidence any # actual or intended publication of such source code.
#ident "@(#)clear.sh 1.8 96/10/14 SMI"/* SVr4.0 1.3 */ # Copyright (c) 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corporation # All Rights Reserved
# This Module contains Proprietary Information of Microsoft # Corporation and should be treated as Confidential.
# clear the screen with terminfo. #
It thought it rather amusing to see a Microsoft copyright there of all places. And the source is only two lines of code, one of them being exit. It's left as an exercise to the reader which line (first or second) is exit.
The other line is/usr/bin/tput ${1:+-T$1} clear 2>/dev/null, but you didn't hear that from me.
I'm sure you're correct. I'm (obviously) not too familiar with rsync, but I can say that unison is a godsend for maintaining consistency between two seperate filesystems.
Unison knows which way to update my files, it can merge conflicts in text files, you can override the direction of the update easily, and the UI (text or graphical) is excellent...perhaps some of these things are common with rsync, I dunno. If you've got a tool that works for you, more power to ya, that's all that matters.
The problem is, even if you're doing everything remotely, you're pretty much stuck using one computer as a central repository for everything--programs and data.
That isn't painful with unison. I use this to sync my laptop and desktop. Unlike rsync, unison can propogate changes in *both* directions. This allows me to keep my home directory consistent. And for the paranoid, it can even be used over ssh.
Re:Serial ATA could REALLY cut into SCSI sales
on
Serial ATA Coming
·
· Score: 2
I mean, let's face it--SCSI is still pretty expensive due to the cost of host adapters, cabling and SCSI peripherals.
The only reason SCSI is really expensive is because Joe Consumer hasn't adopted it. If the industry went with SCSI then SCSI vendors could lower their prices. Of course, that won't happen until vendors lower their prices, a catch 22 really.
Also, I really doubt serial ATA would bite into the server market. SCSI has such a robust history (once you get it terminated correctly!), admins like to go with what they know works. Plus scsi supports tagged command queueing, which has yet to be implemented to any reasonable degree on the ATA side.
I definitely recommend this article - especially when trying to explain to your boss why you can't flick your magic wand, and *poof* the data moves from his text file into a database.
Assuming the software appears for Intel architecture. I know Cadence does have a bit of Windows software, and we're working on Linux ports too. But mainly it's Sun, HP, and IBM.
those are good points, and would definetely give a user leverage in finding their data. I purport that it's windows own doing, window's file browser window is pathetic, and the find utility plain sucks.
So would this be useful in unix? Sure it would. But is it necessary? Watching any seasoned unix d00d walk a filesystem is a treat. Using find, grep, awk, perl, etc gives a tremendous advantage over the windows side. I'm just not sure that this type of filesystem is necessary.
While I agree that Linux needs to kick things up a notch in the desktop/extreme innovation category, a concern I'd have with that is fragmentation of the community. What I mean is extreme innovation is a risk since you're putting developers on unproven tasks, when they could excel at tasks that are known to be needed.
That said, since the community is a tight knit anarchy, nothing is stopping developers from trying something extreme (and they do).
Why do programmers have to implement dozens of different abstract filesystems in order to achieve their design goals?
Why? well, to quote my OS prof, "a file is the most abstract data type, it can contain anything".
As for your second point, MS should realize by now that if they make something incompatible with everybody else it won't get adopted. On second thought, who am I kidding, this is Microsoft we're talking about -- backwards compatibility isn't a concern.
at a previous job, a file server crashed due to a power outage. We later found out that a squirrel climbed in a transformer box and was fried to squirrel hell along with our file server. We named the new file server "rocky" in rememberance of the squirrel.
So there you have it, a naming convention based on acts of god (and squirrels).
For my home lan, I prefer to name based on styles of beer. I've got dunkles, pilsner, porter, doppelbock (appropriate since it's a SMP machine).
Slashdot Mirror
I attempted this at my last (unnamed) company. We were doing music fingerprinting, which worked perfectly on compressed media (mp3, vorbis, real, windows media, etc etc).
So we attempted to fingerprint radio broadcasts. It seemed simple in concept, a radio tivo like device wouldn't be too difficult: buffer some audio, fingerprint the stream, mark & cut beginning and ending of song (easy if you know track length), store to database.
Unfortunately it failed miserably. The reason was the fingerprint didn't work on radio signals. Do you know what sort of signal chain radio puts most music through? It's ugly dynamic compression. This isn't compression like mp3, it's *dynamic* compression. The average radio station could probably get by playing 4 or 8 bit audio, the dynamic range is crap. They do this to keep their V/U meters peaked as much as they can, similar to how TV commercials are louder than the TV programs.
anyway, it was a decent idea. I was hoping to make something that recorded all 20 songs most stations play, store them in a database, then when I'm driving I just pick the songs I want to hear. Sure, you might get some DJ talking over a bit of the intro/ending, but it beats listening to commercials.
IBM, UBM, we all BM.
what if, instead, each encrypted message contained the next one time pad? would that be any more secure? Of course, once cracked all future messages are cracked...
I sometimes wonder if the eds intentionally post crap, just to get companies shot down. And what exactly will Prescient's venture capitolists say when they learn that the geek public thinks Prescient's product is worth crap?
I mean really, I doubt Timothy is trying to sell this to us. He's just preaching to the choir. And if Prescient was public he probably would of shorted a couple hundred shares before posting the story...
I'm a relative newbie to using mozilla. When using netscape, I often start more than one netscape process since if one process crashes it won't take down the unrelated netscape processes. Is this possible with mozilla? When I tried doing that it didn't seem to start a seperate process. Is their a way to force >1 mozilla process?
My gawd, hip hop DJs around the world would have to switch to CDs!
yeah, you'd think they would of used the Devo Corporate Anthem!
I've never used anti-spy software, but what exactly does it do? Is it like an eye candy version of tcpdump or ethereal (http://www.ethereal.com/)?
btw- an easy solution would be to run an eavesdropper on your router/masquerade machine (if you're using one). It would be extremely difficult for spyware to find that you're running tcpdump or ethereal on a remote machine.
Don't waste your money. I'll sell my company's secrets for a fraction of that.
I was hunting around on my Solaris machine at the office yesterday. For amusement, I looked at the shell script it's got for /usr/bin/clear. In addition to containing the standard AT&T copyright, it also contains a Microsoft Copyright:
/* SVr4.0 1.3 */
/usr/bin/tput ${1:+-T$1} clear 2> /dev/null, but you didn't hear that from me.
#!/usr/bin/sh
# Copyright (c) 1984, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989 AT&T
# All Rights Reserved
# THIS IS UNPUBLISHED PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODE OF AT&T
# The copyright notice above does not evidence any
# actual or intended publication of such source code.
#ident "@(#)clear.sh 1.8 96/10/14 SMI"
# Copyright (c) 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corporation
# All Rights Reserved
# This Module contains Proprietary Information of Microsoft
# Corporation and should be treated as Confidential.
# clear the screen with terminfo.
#
It thought it rather amusing to see a Microsoft copyright there of all places. And the source is only two lines of code, one of them being exit. It's left as an exercise to the reader which line (first or second) is exit.
The other line is
I'm sure you're correct. I'm (obviously) not too familiar with rsync, but I can say that unison is a godsend for maintaining consistency between two seperate filesystems.
Unison knows which way to update my files, it can merge conflicts in text files, you can override the direction of the update easily, and the UI (text or graphical) is excellent...perhaps some of these things are common with rsync, I dunno. If you've got a tool that works for you, more power to ya, that's all that matters.
That isn't painful with unison. I use this to sync my laptop and desktop. Unlike rsync, unison can propogate changes in *both* directions. This allows me to keep my home directory consistent. And for the paranoid, it can even be used over ssh.
The only reason SCSI is really expensive is because Joe Consumer hasn't adopted it. If the industry went with SCSI then SCSI vendors could lower their prices. Of course, that won't happen until vendors lower their prices, a catch 22 really.
Also, I really doubt serial ATA would bite into the server market. SCSI has such a robust history (once you get it terminated correctly!), admins like to go with what they know works. Plus scsi supports tagged command queueing, which has yet to be implemented to any reasonable degree on the ATA side.
I'm sure people in Tennessee would love waterfront property.
I was wondering if anyone had applied Moore's law to 3D graphics. A quick google search and...
d /F 00_Whi tted_slides.pdf
http://www.3dlabs.com/product/technology/moo resla.htm
Unfortunately it's a company paper and very biased towards the 3Dlabs Wildcat. That, and it's a bit dated. Then I found a Microsoft Research pdf:
http://amp.ece.cmu.edu/ECESeminar/slides/Whitte
it's an interesting read, but not 100% relevant. Anyone else have relevant info?
Greetings Starfighter. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the frontier from Xur and the Ko-Dan Armada.
I always wondered why they didn't come out with an actual Last Starfigher video game.
And pray your boss hasn't heard of Perl :)
Assuming the software appears for Intel architecture. I know Cadence does have a bit of Windows software, and we're working on Linux ports too. But mainly it's Sun, HP, and IBM.
Another Anderson, Pamela Anderson, is also noted for their work relating to bone induction...
what's the worse that could happen?
% ping hidden.airforce.mil
PING hidden.airforce.mil from 192.168.1.4 : 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=0 ttl=57 time=20.871 msec fbi_agents_in=10
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=19.560 msec fbi_agents_in=9
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=20.497 msec fbi_agents_in=8
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=20.820 msec fbi_agents_in=7
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=19.732 msec fbi_agents_in=6
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=20.805 msec fbi_agents_in=5
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=19.830 msec fbi_agents_in=4
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=20.770 msec fbi_agents_in=3
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=8 ttl=57 time=19.781 msec fbi_agents_in=2
64 bytes from hidden.airforce.mil: icmp_seq=9 ttl=57 time=20.790 msec fbi_agents_in=1
--- hidden.airforce.mil ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss, 100% user loss
round-trip min/avg/max/mdev = 19.560/20.345/20.871/0.541 ms
those are good points, and would definetely give a user leverage in finding their data. I purport that it's windows own doing, window's file browser window is pathetic, and the find utility plain sucks.
So would this be useful in unix? Sure it would. But is it necessary? Watching any seasoned unix d00d walk a filesystem is a treat. Using find, grep, awk, perl, etc gives a tremendous advantage over the windows side. I'm just not sure that this type of filesystem is necessary.
While I agree that Linux needs to kick things up a notch in the desktop/extreme innovation category, a concern I'd have with that is fragmentation of the community. What I mean is extreme innovation is a risk since you're putting developers on unproven tasks, when they could excel at tasks that are known to be needed.
That said, since the community is a tight knit anarchy, nothing is stopping developers from trying something extreme (and they do).
Why? well, to quote my OS prof, "a file is the most abstract data type, it can contain anything".
As for your second point, MS should realize by now that if they make something incompatible with everybody else it won't get adopted. On second thought, who am I kidding, this is Microsoft we're talking about -- backwards compatibility isn't a concern.
at a previous job, a file server crashed due to a power outage. We later found out that a squirrel climbed in a transformer box and was fried to squirrel hell along with our file server. We named the new file server "rocky" in rememberance of the squirrel.
So there you have it, a naming convention based on acts of god (and squirrels).
For my home lan, I prefer to name based on styles of beer. I've got dunkles, pilsner, porter, doppelbock (appropriate since it's a SMP machine).
open source doesn't mean non profit. Some lucky OSS programmers get paid for their work.