I had someone try to tell me they can hear the difference between a 256 kbps mp3 and CD quality. So we did a "trick" on my friend, by playing a track of his choice, encoded w/ 192kbps VBR as an mp3 and a supposedly "lossless" copy from a CD.
Immediately he exclaims "oh yeah, I can easily tell the difference. The CD is sooooo much better..."
Too bad the CD we used was the same mp3 converted to CD-audio.
We then proceeded to conduct the same experiment on a 1kW sound system at a psychedelic trance party. My friend DJ's using a laptop and mp3s normally, but after getting sick of the critics giving him shit for using "lossy" mp3s (320 kbps CBR), we decided to burn a bunch of audio CD versions and played it on CDJ's... of course the critics immediately approached him after finishing his set, saying "oh that sounded so much better this time"......
I fucking hate audio quality snobs... especially ones that are full of shit.
What's your problem with dual booting? I have a reasonably good computer, and I want to have the maximum performance possible in either operating system.
Plus I have no problems with having a dual boot setup and it's quite functional.
As for VMWare, VMWare is not free unless you warez it, and really VMWare has several limitations. Eg. Multisim 7 runs very slow, 3d applications just don't work, etc (it's a good product otherwise, I love VMWare for what it can do)
I need these applications and I have no choice in my need of them unless I seek another profession. If I had all the software I needed under Linux, I probably wouldn't bother with dual booting. But reality dictates otherwise...
A second PC is something I have used for a long time, but then that second PC got outdated, and I don't want to spend the money on another PC. Keeping one computer upgraded is enough of a financial burden on me, two is just not realistic.
Yeah - FAT32 has some 48GB limit, I found this out when I installed a 200GB harddrive, and wanted it in FAT32 so I could have write access under Linux.
Instead I just ran into numerous problems and formatted the drive w/ NTFS leaving a smaller FAT32 partition.
What does ActiveX do that XPCOM and Java are incapable of performing?
I'll play devil's advocate here, and say the first thing that comes to mind: It can't run all those ActiveX applications that already exist. Companies invest money into programmers who will maintain or program existing software and infrastructure.
Maybe what's needed is an ActiveX type clone just to end this problem. Let's keep in mind that there are large numbers of IT workers who do not frequent this website regularly, and don't really care if XPCOM and Java are better - it still won't run the ActiveX applications they currently have.
There are large numbers of people who like having LESS work to do when they are at work. If they need to hunt down and replace all their internal ActiveX applications, that will simply make more work for them. Plus, their PHBs will always see this as just costing more money.
But, if this means swallowing some open source pride, and writing a GPL ActiveX clone just to edge out Microsoft elsewhere, then it's worth it. Of course it would never be installed by default, and of course there would be multiple pop-up windows telling you why this is a bad idea, but it should be available.
If the strategy is played correctly, we could start slowly moving companies over to more OSS solutions and away from ActiveX.
But, in the end, Compatibility is King, since your PHB sees this as a means of saving money in the short, and long-term. Anything that is seen as a non-drastic change to the infrastructure will always be regarded as a good thing as they view it as a means to save money. Think of all those computer "n00bs" who will still refuse to buy a Mac even though all their computer nerd friends tell them to buy one. (I have a PC - but I want my friends to start using Macs since I'm sick of fixing their PCs) But, I always hear the concern over compatibility, since they know not everything will work on a Mac. Yes, there are equivalent products, but they don't care since it won't run the "majority" of computer products already existing.
Am I completely wrong? Please tell me, I know someone here will anyway.:-)
Well, the press release from the DayStar Technologies website notes their electrical production to be 1440 W/kg, which seems like a very deceiving value since I would want to know W/cm^2 or any form of Watts per Area...
I think they're cooking the numbers since they keep saying over and over again how light their solar cells are compared to silicon, but of course only provide us with power per kilogram.
If you need 10x the area to provide the same amount of power, that means you'll increase the overall amount of mass as well. If it's still lighter, and provides the same amount of electron juice, then this maybe considered useful.
Again, I could be completely wrong about the product, but I find it quite odd they left out power per area.
Senator Hatch has a website that hosts his music, which was pointed on another thread for this article.
So I decided to take a hexeditor to his mp3 files, just to see LAME 3.93 all over the files at the end. LAME is licensed under the LGPL, and is in violation of certain patents to my understanding.
Well, the mp3 sample files were encoded with LAME, at least the Everyday.mp3 track.
Just go with a hexeditor to the bottom of the file and you'll see LAME 3.93 everywhere in the file.
Doesn't LAME use the LGPL license? Someone should point out to him how important free open source software is to the continued development of the internet.
And clearly those Office performance benchmarks benefit greatly due to the ATI GPU... or those Digital media applications. Since everyone knows that Word uses Direct3d to render text onto the screen....
But again, this whole article involves interviewing a Gartner analyst, and as far as I'm concerned Gartner lacks credibility.
Plus, no one should ever trust the benchmarks from the manufacturer. Anyone with half a brain has realized this years ago.
No UV-B (or UV-A) rays would make it that far down the tube - most glass attenuates UV quite well.
You'd need to get some stupidly expensive glass (like the kind used in photolithography) to transmit the UV down the light pipe.
I did a quick search on google, and came across this about glass absorbing UV:
"From: James Richmond (Avatar) 15/02/99 12:39:42 Subject: re: sunburn and car windows post id: 1216 As others have said, glass absorbs UV reasonably effectively. I am reminded of a story told by the late Richard Feynman, who was present at the first nuclear bomb detonation. The bomb was mounted on a tower in the desert. Everyone was issued with dark goggles to protect their eyes from the flash as the bomb went off. The goggles were almost opaque, making it difficult to see anything. Feynman figured that the only dangerous thing would be the UV light, and he wanted to get a good look at the explosion, so he sat in a car and watched through the windscreen (without goggles), assuming that the screen would absorb much of the harmful UV. As a result, he probably got the best naked-eye view of anyone present."
I thought Kashmir was a heavily disputed part of India and Pakistan, and this has basically been an issue since Pakistan has become an independent state from India?
Actually, according to the Wiki, China even occupies a large portion of Kashmir... so to say Kashmir is part of India would be largely misleading and incorrect.
He still excluded the portion of the article IMMEDIATELY after the part he's questioning.
The point Lai was making that there is a large discrepency between industry funded and non-industry funded research. The reason we have non-industry funded research is to see past the possible biases the industry funded research studies produces.
Clearly there's enough of an issue here where we should be conducting more research. I've long been a skeptic about this cell-phone/microwave damage topic, since both devices use relatively low power, non-ionizing radiation.
The following is what caught my attention, and was the type of information I've been waiting to hear for this side of the debate.
Microwave News Editor Slesin says he has pondered why government funding isn't available. His hypothesis is that it's a matter of attitude.
"There is a view out there among many scientists that this is just impossible--the radiation is too weak and there cannot be any effects," Slesin says. "We all know that ionizing radiation is bad. Ions are more reactive, there's no doubt it can lead to cancer, it's nasty stuff."
The people who work with ionizing radiation see EMF radiation--that from electromagnetic fields--as a 97-pound weakling, he continues. They believe it's not capable of doing anything.
"Yet, when you see effects like Henry reported, especially at the low power intensities, you have to ask what is going on to cause this?" he says. "As long as that attitude remains unchanged, you won't get more funding and you don't get anywhere."
Lai says there have been about 200 studies on the biological effects of cell-phone-related radiation. If you put all the ones that say there is a biological effect on one side and those that say there is no effect on the other, you'd have two piles roughly equal in size. The research splits about 50-50.
"That, in and of itself, is alarming," Lai says. But it's not the whole story. If you divide up the same 200 studies by who sponsored the research, the numbers change.
"When you look at the non-industry sponsored research, it's about three to one--three out of every four papers shows an effect," Lai says. "Then, if you look at the industry-funded research, it's almost opposite--only one out of every four papers shows an effect."
Umm - why did you decide to exclude the rest of the information?
From TFA:
Lai says there have been about 200 studies on the biological effects of cell-phone-related radiation. If you put all the ones that say there is a biological effect on one side and those that say there is no effect on the other, you'd have two piles roughly equal in size. The research splits about 50-50.
"That, in and of itself, is alarming," Lai says. But it's not the whole story. If you divide up the same 200 studies by who sponsored the research, the numbers change.
"When you look at the non-industry sponsored research, it's about three to one--three out of every four papers shows an effect," Lai says. "Then, if you look at the industry-funded research, it's almost opposite--only one out of every four papers shows an effect."
Exactly - think of all the ritalin, prozac, and other, newer more expensive medication they can drug kids with.
Additionally - CBS and any television media have a direct motivation to get games banned/restricted, as young males tend to turn off CBS to turn on their XBox/PS2/Gamecube.......
Please, We already know from previous articles that Google has more money then they can handle at this point. Also they no longer need to make their own OS. All they need to do is take one that already exists, one that their familiar with, and already has lots of industry backing.
If customizing heavily a preexisting Linux will do the trick, then why not? They've already done their own in-house customization of Red Hat, why not take this a step further?
Apple has basically done the same thing, but they took it a step further with some preexisting experience from NeXT.
Google is -the- top brand right now. I feel they may ride the investment capital as far as they can and make sure they provide value to their share holders. If they can leverage the OS market, that gives them access to every PC running GoogleOS.
Or maybe I've become delusional thinking that Linux will eventually take over everything. (make that Google) Hey, maybe this is Google's way of silencing all those nerds who are worried about Google going "evil".
Or you could just start a book store and have items arriving from Amazon.com in two days instead of keeping a large inventory. Just sell to everyone who doesn't like ordering online and you're set. This allows a small business to keep a low overhead and increase margins.
Hey - why bother working with another established console maker when you can just attempt to pilfer the competition's titles?
The new XBox will be using a PowerPC cpu instead of another x86 type cpu. In this field, Apple has plenty of experience.
They could release a slick looking console, and have games easily ported by the game companies themselves - or make it even capable of playing the XBox 2 games as well.
Another side benefit of the overall increase of PowerPC cpu sales would hopefully include decreased per unit costs and an increase in compatible software.
I had never even considered Apple making a console until mentioned in these comments. I think Apple making a video console would be awesome - hell - there's many things I don't like what Apple does, but I can see myself buying a console made by them. Especially if they make it very hackable - that always adds bonus points.
Hell - they could even include iTunes with the box and a docking station or connection for an iPod. Have it display an interface on the TV that would control the iPod, even while you play a game - this would allow custom control over game soundtracks....:-) Actually, Apple making a video game console would be similiar in strategy to the iPod/iTunes being available on Windows...
Slashdot Mirror
It's good to know that I'm not the only person who has thought about this idea ... aside from the making money from the conflict afterwards.
Aside from that, what kind of finishing moves do you think Jesus would have?
I think it would be great for Xenu to throw all the Scientologists into ...
an opening that looks like everyone's favourite internet celebrity
THIS IS REALLY ONE OF THE PICS
I had someone try to tell me they can hear the difference between a 256 kbps mp3 and CD quality. So we did a "trick" on my friend, by playing a track of his choice, encoded w/ 192kbps VBR as an mp3 and a supposedly "lossless" copy from a CD.
... of course the critics immediately approached him after finishing his set, saying "oh that sounded so much better this time" ......
... especially ones that are full of shit.
Immediately he exclaims "oh yeah, I can easily tell the difference. The CD is sooooo much better..."
Too bad the CD we used was the same mp3 converted to CD-audio.
We then proceeded to conduct the same experiment on a 1kW sound system at a psychedelic trance party. My friend DJ's using a laptop and mp3s normally, but after getting sick of the critics giving him shit for using "lossy" mp3s (320 kbps CBR), we decided to burn a bunch of audio CD versions and played it on CDJ's
I fucking hate audio quality snobs
What's your problem with dual booting? I have a reasonably good computer, and I want to have the maximum performance possible in either operating system.
Plus I have no problems with having a dual boot setup and it's quite functional.
As for VMWare, VMWare is not free unless you warez it, and really VMWare has several limitations. Eg. Multisim 7 runs very slow, 3d applications just don't work, etc (it's a good product otherwise, I love VMWare for what it can do)
I need these applications and I have no choice in my need of them unless I seek another profession. If I had all the software I needed under Linux, I probably wouldn't bother with dual booting. But reality dictates otherwise...
A second PC is something I have used for a long time, but then that second PC got outdated, and I don't want to spend the money on another PC. Keeping one computer upgraded is enough of a financial burden on me, two is just not realistic.
Yeah - FAT32 has some 48GB limit, I found this out when I installed a 200GB harddrive, and wanted it in FAT32 so I could have write access under Linux.
Instead I just ran into numerous problems and formatted the drive w/ NTFS leaving a smaller FAT32 partition.
What does ActiveX do that XPCOM and Java are incapable of performing?
:-)
I'll play devil's advocate here, and say the first thing that comes to mind: It can't run all those ActiveX applications that already exist. Companies invest money into programmers who will maintain or program existing software and infrastructure.
Maybe what's needed is an ActiveX type clone just to end this problem. Let's keep in mind that there are large numbers of IT workers who do not frequent this website regularly, and don't really care if XPCOM and Java are better - it still won't run the ActiveX applications they currently have.
There are large numbers of people who like having LESS work to do when they are at work. If they need to hunt down and replace all their internal ActiveX applications, that will simply make more work for them. Plus, their PHBs will always see this as just costing more money.
But, if this means swallowing some open source pride, and writing a GPL ActiveX clone just to edge out Microsoft elsewhere, then it's worth it. Of course it would never be installed by default, and of course there would be multiple pop-up windows telling you why this is a bad idea, but it should be available.
If the strategy is played correctly, we could start slowly moving companies over to more OSS solutions and away from ActiveX.
But, in the end, Compatibility is King, since your PHB sees this as a means of saving money in the short, and long-term. Anything that is seen as a non-drastic change to the infrastructure will always be regarded as a good thing as they view it as a means to save money. Think of all those computer "n00bs" who will still refuse to buy a Mac even though all their computer nerd friends tell them to buy one. (I have a PC - but I want my friends to start using Macs since I'm sick of fixing their PCs) But, I always hear the concern over compatibility, since they know not everything will work on a Mac. Yes, there are equivalent products, but they don't care since it won't run the "majority" of computer products already existing.
Am I completely wrong? Please tell me, I know someone here will anyway.
I have to be really really baked to act like that. :-)
Well, the press release from the DayStar Technologies website notes their electrical production to be 1440 W/kg, which seems like a very deceiving value since I would want to know W/cm^2 or any form of Watts per Area ...
I think they're cooking the numbers since they keep saying over and over again how light their solar cells are compared to silicon, but of course only provide us with power per kilogram.
If you need 10x the area to provide the same amount of power, that means you'll increase the overall amount of mass as well. If it's still lighter, and provides the same amount of electron juice, then this maybe considered useful.
Again, I could be completely wrong about the product, but I find it quite odd they left out power per area.
Senator Hatch has a website that hosts his music, which was pointed on another thread for this article.
So I decided to take a hexeditor to his mp3 files, just to see LAME 3.93 all over the files at the end. LAME is licensed under the LGPL, and is in violation of certain patents to my understanding.
His mp3s on his music website are encoded using LAME, which uses the LGPL license.
Well, the mp3 sample files were encoded with LAME, at least the Everyday.mp3 track.
Just go with a hexeditor to the bottom of the file and you'll see LAME 3.93 everywhere in the file.
Doesn't LAME use the LGPL license? Someone should point out to him how important free open source software is to the continued development of the internet.
And clearly those Office performance benchmarks benefit greatly due to the ATI GPU ... or those Digital media applications. Since everyone knows that Word uses Direct3d to render text onto the screen....
But again, this whole article involves interviewing a Gartner analyst, and as far as I'm concerned Gartner lacks credibility.
Plus, no one should ever trust the benchmarks from the manufacturer. Anyone with half a brain has realized this years ago.
No UV-B (or UV-A) rays would make it that far down the tube - most glass attenuates UV quite well.
You'd need to get some stupidly expensive glass (like the kind used in photolithography) to transmit the UV down the light pipe.
I did a quick search on google, and came across this about glass absorbing UV:
"From: James Richmond (Avatar) 15/02/99 12:39:42
Subject: re: sunburn and car windows post id: 1216
As others have said, glass absorbs UV reasonably effectively. I am reminded of a story told by the late Richard Feynman, who was present at the first nuclear bomb detonation. The bomb was mounted on a tower in the desert. Everyone was issued with dark goggles to protect their eyes from the flash as the bomb went off. The goggles were almost opaque, making it difficult to see anything. Feynman figured that the only dangerous thing would be the UV light, and he wanted to get a good look at the explosion, so he sat in a car and watched through the windscreen (without goggles), assuming that the screen would absorb much of the harmful UV. As a result, he probably got the best naked-eye view of anyone present."
Source
I thought Kashmir was a heavily disputed part of India and Pakistan, and this has basically been an issue since Pakistan has become an independent state from India?
... so to say Kashmir is part of India would be largely misleading and incorrect.
Actually, according to the Wiki, China even occupies a large portion of Kashmir
He still excluded the portion of the article IMMEDIATELY after the part he's questioning.
The point Lai was making that there is a large discrepency between industry funded and non-industry funded research. The reason we have non-industry funded research is to see past the possible biases the industry funded research studies produces.
Clearly there's enough of an issue here where we should be conducting more research. I've long been a skeptic about this cell-phone/microwave damage topic, since both devices use relatively low power, non-ionizing radiation.
The following is what caught my attention, and was the type of information I've been waiting to hear for this side of the debate.
Microwave News Editor Slesin says he has pondered why government funding isn't available. His hypothesis is that it's a matter of attitude.
"There is a view out there among many scientists that this is just impossible--the radiation is too weak and there cannot be any effects," Slesin says. "We all know that ionizing radiation is bad. Ions are more reactive, there's no doubt it can lead to cancer, it's nasty stuff."
The people who work with ionizing radiation see EMF radiation--that from electromagnetic fields--as a 97-pound weakling, he continues. They believe it's not capable of doing anything.
"Yet, when you see effects like Henry reported, especially at the low power intensities, you have to ask what is going on to cause this?" he says. "As long as that attitude remains unchanged, you won't get more funding and you don't get anywhere."
If you read TFA you would know:
Lai says there have been about 200 studies on the biological effects of cell-phone-related radiation. If you put all the ones that say there is a biological effect on one side and those that say there is no effect on the other, you'd have two piles roughly equal in size. The research splits about 50-50.
"That, in and of itself, is alarming," Lai says. But it's not the whole story. If you divide up the same 200 studies by who sponsored the research, the numbers change.
"When you look at the non-industry sponsored research, it's about three to one--three out of every four papers shows an effect," Lai says. "Then, if you look at the industry-funded research, it's almost opposite--only one out of every four papers shows an effect."
That's of course, according to Lai.
Umm - why did you decide to exclude the rest of the information?
From TFA:
Lai says there have been about 200 studies on the biological effects of cell-phone-related radiation. If you put all the ones that say there is a biological effect on one side and those that say there is no effect on the other, you'd have two piles roughly equal in size. The research splits about 50-50.
"That, in and of itself, is alarming," Lai says. But it's not the whole story. If you divide up the same 200 studies by who sponsored the research, the numbers change.
"When you look at the non-industry sponsored research, it's about three to one--three out of every four papers shows an effect," Lai says. "Then, if you look at the industry-funded research, it's almost opposite--only one out of every four papers shows an effect."
Exactly - think of all the ritalin, prozac, and other, newer more expensive medication they can drug kids with.
Additionally - CBS and any television media have a direct motivation to get games banned/restricted, as young males tend to turn off CBS to turn on their XBox/PS2/Gamecube.......
Please, We already know from previous articles that Google has more money then they can handle at this point. Also they no longer need to make their own OS. All they need to do is take one that already exists, one that their familiar with, and already has lots of industry backing.
If customizing heavily a preexisting Linux will do the trick, then why not? They've already done their own in-house customization of Red Hat, why not take this a step further?
Apple has basically done the same thing, but they took it a step further with some preexisting experience from NeXT.
Google is -the- top brand right now. I feel they may ride the investment capital as far as they can and make sure they provide value to their share holders. If they can leverage the OS market, that gives them access to every PC running GoogleOS.
Or maybe I've become delusional thinking that Linux will eventually take over everything. (make that Google) Hey, maybe this is Google's way of silencing all those nerds who are worried about Google going "evil".
I think in BC the legal age to enter a casino is 19.
Ontario is also 19 - so if those 5 canucks looked quite younger, that could be the reason.
I know when we turned 19 it was almost tradition to go to the casino.
The person who hacked the mail server was also the one who notified Slashdot about the mail server getting shut down.
Or you could just start a book store and have items arriving from Amazon.com in two days instead of keeping a large inventory. Just sell to everyone who doesn't like ordering online and you're set. This allows a small business to keep a low overhead and increase margins.
Hey - why bother working with another established console maker when you can just attempt to pilfer the competition's titles?
.... :-) Actually, Apple making a video game console would be similiar in strategy to the iPod/iTunes being available on Windows...
The new XBox will be using a PowerPC cpu instead of another x86 type cpu. In this field, Apple has plenty of experience.
They could release a slick looking console, and have games easily ported by the game companies themselves - or make it even capable of playing the XBox 2 games as well.
Another side benefit of the overall increase of PowerPC cpu sales would hopefully include decreased per unit costs and an increase in compatible software.
I had never even considered Apple making a console until mentioned in these comments. I think Apple making a video console would be awesome - hell - there's many things I don't like what Apple does, but I can see myself buying a console made by them. Especially if they make it very hackable - that always adds bonus points.
Hell - they could even include iTunes with the box and a docking station or connection for an iPod. Have it display an interface on the TV that would control the iPod, even while you play a game - this would allow custom control over game soundtracks
Yep - It's currently up on Torrentspy.com.
I don't know who posted it, but it's there - not too many seeds though.
If you looked at the OSHA link you'd have noticed that nothing was supporting the biological effects.