I'm trying to find a good home stereo amp, but I can't stand the modern stuff (usually identified by being all black with a giant volume knob). I like the vintage hardware, with actual transistors rather than integrated circuits. So the way I shop is (mostly) by weight. If it was manufactured prior to 1980 or thereabouts, I simply go for the heaviest thing I can find. All else being equal (which it never is, of course), the amp with the biggest, baddest set of heat sinks will be the highest quality.
So that form of benchmarking suits my needs just fine.
WTB: Vintage home stereo amp. Must score 3/16" or better on a 3' benchmark test.
A surefire 5 words to get a +5 post: You're new here aren't you?
I use that all the time in meatspace to great effect (usually) but have used it a half dozen times here (too lazy to check) and gotten no Funny mods at all.
My personal favorite is when the RoadRunner tech support drone refuses to believe that some computers don't need to be rebooted to change network settings. But no matter what you tell them, they refuse to put down their precious script and accept that maybe, just maybe, I'm not running windows.
If they can't be used in the way we fear, then why are retailers so hot to put them in the *product* rather than the packaging?
RFIDs in packaging would provide all the inventory benefits of which they speak, and RFIDs in the products themselves would provide the privacy fears of which we speak. So the harder they push to get the tags in the products themselves, the less credence your can't-be-scanned-from-a-distance argument has.
Hmmm... I think you might be onto something there... take two legal atrocities, pit against each other, let the courts strike one down. Repeat as needed.
Don't go assuming that individuals will be on equal footing with megacorps when it comes to applying DRM protection. I mean sure, in an idea world, but...
I don't know, I'd really love to get my hands on one. I've got two geiger counters, one of which is dead and would make a good chasis donor, but my Solder Fu just isn't quite up to that task.
If they think I'm a pain in the ass when the cashier asks if I have one of their "discount cards" just wait till I can run up and down the aisles with one of those squaking away!
Jeez people, I wasn't suggesting we confiscate their tip jars, just that rock and roll should *not* be a multi-billion dollar cash cow for the suits. I'd rather see a music "industry" where 1,000 bands make 50,000 each, rather than 10 bands make 5 million each and the other 995 have to pack it in.
Guys, turns out the equipment really does matter after all. I've had some '68 KLH speakers for two years, they sounded pretty sweet driven by a big-black-knob style surround sound Sony receiver/amp. I'd gotten an old, *heavy* Kenwood KA-6000 amp at a yard sale a few years ago, that I finally got around to having rebuilt recently.
I promptly gave the Sony to my girlfriend. I can finally *hear* my music. With a clear enough system, the difference between MP3 and AAC is obvious. Not that I can't still hear a certain certain extra sizzle in the AAC, but it's nothing at all like the "zhing" sound of MP3 at 128k. Some of you know the one I mean, it's like a small china ride cymbal run through an overdriven flanger, and it always seemed so fitting that the Xing encoder was the worst about it (that I'd come across, anyway).
So yeah, as I've just demonstrated, trying to describe characteristics of sound with common english gets kinda silly, but it's the best I can do other than inviting you over.
Oh, and my vote for reference album goes to Paul Simon's Graceland.
It's a new service. If they get enough requests, they may (doubtful) spend the time (money) necessary to support other browsers too.
I'm just here to de-Fnord the idea that a developer needs to 'support' a given browser when developing a web site.
We're not talking platforms and APIs here, folks. They're spewing horseshit about everything other than the use of ActiveX (which is boneheaded in this context) and instead doing clumsy browser sniffing to keep it IE/Win exclusive.
I've always been dissapointed that they didn't do any basic browser sniffing to serve up the appropriate misleading dialog boxes. I mean, c'mon, at least *try* to trick me.
Brings up the point of who gets the bulk of the money spent by political campaigns... I imagine most of it's going to buy television air time, and a lesser amount for radio and newspaper ads. So why aren't the media companies working behind the scenes to get the dollar amounts increased? Or are they, and just not having much luck?
One of the things that's always disturbed me the most about our legislation-for-the-highest-bidder system is how utterly cheap it is. I mean, think about it: A law that can increase your global corp's profits by $500 million annually can be purchased for a one-time fee of less than a tenth of that. The ROI on bribery is insane! Wouldn't you expect legislation to be priced more concurrently with other costs of doing business, such that said hypothetical law would cost you enough that it took two or three years to really pay off? Seriously, our politicians are just too damn cheap.
There are several systems currently available for addressing such language barriers. In one system, a user of an instant messaging tool types a message in their source language, preferred language, or into a text field, then "cuts and pastes" the text into a separate translation program. The user must then activate the translation tool to translate the message into the destination language, and cut and paste the translated text back into the text field of the instant messaging tool. Once this is complete, the user can transmit the message. While this method can be effective, it is obvious that the process of continually cutting, pasting and switching between applications significantly impedes the communication process.
Translates to:
Okay, we finally admit that the point-n-click interface isn't the single most effective means of accomplishing every last task mankind could ever come up with.
So we hereby patent the 'pipe' command.
Even in systems where entries typed into the messaging tool are converted "on-the-fly", such as by activating a "Translate" button that links the instant messaging program to a translation tool; the extra steps required by the user compromise the real-time communication experience.
I think the people behind this idea know it can't work. They're not trying to address the terrorist->airplane->tragedy issue, they're trying to address the popular idea that if you just redesign the technology so that it 'knows' not to let bad people do the 'wrong' things, then we'll all stay safe and rich. And they've realized that the best way to bring this fallacy to light is to establish the reduction ad absurdum of that belief as a strong meme that will resonate well with the masses.
So thank you Dr. Edward Lee (and colleagues), we salute you, Mr. Just-Rebuild-All-Planes-So-They-Won't-Hurt-People.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a bag of tacos here quicly seeking thermal equilibrium. Talk amongst yourselves.
But I don't know where you got the idea you were pushing earlier, that today's untrammeled multinationals are somehow like foreign powers working against US interests.
I assume that he meant it in the context of corporations being not agents of some foreign nation, but effectiveley nations unto themselves, regardless of where they're headquarters are located or where they're chartered.
Would you want your wife and kids walking through one of these things knowing that a complete stranger will be looking at them naked?
What if some pedophile gets a job working these things just to get his jollies from watching children go through?
What about people that are so self-concious about their weight that they will hold up the line indefinitely rather than go through security?
Are these scanned images akin to public pornography?
Yep, these are all valid questions, as long as you buy into the belief that seeing a human being in its natural state is somehow bad, or ruinous to a healthy psyche, or even to the person being viewed without their all-powerful protective fabrics.
Hmm, come to think of it, isn't that same mythical power attributed to God in his natural form? Odd that the people who chafe at having mankind considered to be on par with their deity in any way would propagate both these legends. Hmm.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, that's not far from the truth.
I'm trying to find a good home stereo amp, but I can't stand the modern stuff (usually identified by being all black with a giant volume knob). I like the vintage hardware, with actual transistors rather than integrated circuits. So the way I shop is (mostly) by weight. If it was manufactured prior to 1980 or thereabouts, I simply go for the heaviest thing I can find. All else being equal (which it never is, of course), the amp with the biggest, baddest set of heat sinks will be the highest quality.
So that form of benchmarking suits my needs just fine.
WTB: Vintage home stereo amp. Must score 3/16" or better on a 3' benchmark test.
I use that all the time in meatspace to great effect (usually) but have used it a half dozen times here (too lazy to check) and gotten no Funny mods at all.
I want my money back!!!
My personal favorite is when the RoadRunner tech support drone refuses to believe that some computers don't need to be rebooted to change network settings. But no matter what you tell them, they refuse to put down their precious script and accept that maybe, just maybe, I'm not running windows.
If they can't be used in the way we fear, then why are retailers so hot to put them in the *product* rather than the packaging?
RFIDs in packaging would provide all the inventory benefits of which they speak, and RFIDs in the products themselves would provide the privacy fears of which we speak. So the harder they push to get the tags in the products themselves, the less credence your can't-be-scanned-from-a-distance argument has.
Metallica?
</irony>
Hmmm... I think you might be onto something there... take two legal atrocities, pit against each other, let the courts strike one down. Repeat as needed.
Don't go assuming that individuals will be on equal footing with megacorps when it comes to applying DRM protection. I mean sure, in an idea world, but...
I don't know, I'd really love to get my hands on one. I've got two geiger counters, one of which is dead and would make a good chasis donor, but my Solder Fu just isn't quite up to that task.
If they think I'm a pain in the ass when the cashier asks if I have one of their "discount cards" just wait till I can run up and down the aisles with one of those squaking away!
Simply make donor status mandatory for a motorcycle license and eliminate the helmet laws.
Jeez people, I wasn't suggesting we confiscate their tip jars, just that rock and roll should *not* be a multi-billion dollar cash cow for the suits. I'd rather see a music "industry" where 1,000 bands make 50,000 each, rather than 10 bands make 5 million each and the other 995 have to pack it in.
Yeah, 'cause nobody writes or records music for any reason other than profit.
Maybe if music weren't a multi-billion dollar business, true musicians would again gain prominence.
Guys, turns out the equipment really does matter after all. I've had some '68 KLH speakers for two years, they sounded pretty sweet driven by a big-black-knob style surround sound Sony receiver/amp. I'd gotten an old, *heavy* Kenwood KA-6000 amp at a yard sale a few years ago, that I finally got around to having rebuilt recently.
I promptly gave the Sony to my girlfriend. I can finally *hear* my music. With a clear enough system, the difference between MP3 and AAC is obvious. Not that I can't still hear a certain certain extra sizzle in the AAC, but it's nothing at all like the "zhing" sound of MP3 at 128k. Some of you know the one I mean, it's like a small china ride cymbal run through an overdriven flanger, and it always seemed so fitting that the Xing encoder was the worst about it (that I'd come across, anyway).
So yeah, as I've just demonstrated, trying to describe characteristics of sound with common english gets kinda silly, but it's the best I can do other than inviting you over.
Oh, and my vote for reference album goes to Paul Simon's Graceland.
I think he was referring to the TV ads they have on their home page...
a ls/superfreak300k.wmv
http://ak.buy.com/buy_assets/v6/buymusic/commerci
I'm just here to de-Fnord the idea that a developer needs to 'support' a given browser when developing a web site.
We're not talking platforms and APIs here, folks. They're spewing horseshit about everything other than the use of ActiveX (which is boneheaded in this context) and instead doing clumsy browser sniffing to keep it IE/Win exclusive.
/me bows down in awe and reverence
I've always been dissapointed that they didn't do any basic browser sniffing to serve up the appropriate misleading dialog boxes. I mean, c'mon, at least *try* to trick me.
Slackers.
And then get prosecuted for some sort of inverse circumvention violaion... my god, think of the precendent that could set!
Brings up the point of who gets the bulk of the money spent by political campaigns... I imagine most of it's going to buy television air time, and a lesser amount for radio and newspaper ads. So why aren't the media companies working behind the scenes to get the dollar amounts increased? Or are they, and just not having much luck?
One of the things that's always disturbed me the most about our legislation-for-the-highest-bidder system is how utterly cheap it is. I mean, think about it: A law that can increase your global corp's profits by $500 million annually can be purchased for a one-time fee of less than a tenth of that. The ROI on bribery is insane! Wouldn't you expect legislation to be priced more concurrently with other costs of doing business, such that said hypothetical law would cost you enough that it took two or three years to really pay off? Seriously, our politicians are just too damn cheap.
Hmm. Ironic.
Translates to:
Okay, we finally admit that the point-n-click interface isn't the single most effective means of accomplishing every last task mankind could ever come up with.
So we hereby patent the 'pipe' command.
Translates to:
Screw you Jeff, I just patented the zero-click!
I think the people behind this idea know it can't work. They're not trying to address the terrorist->airplane->tragedy issue, they're trying to address the popular idea that if you just redesign the technology so that it 'knows' not to let bad people do the 'wrong' things, then we'll all stay safe and rich. And they've realized that the best way to bring this fallacy to light is to establish the reduction ad absurdum of that belief as a strong meme that will resonate well with the masses.
.
So thank you Dr. Edward Lee (and colleagues), we salute you, Mr. Just-Rebuild-All-Planes-So-They-Won't-Hurt-People
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a bag of tacos here quicly seeking thermal equilibrium. Talk amongst yourselves.
I assume that he meant it in the context of corporations being not agents of some foreign nation, but effectiveley nations unto themselves, regardless of where they're headquarters are located or where they're chartered.
Yep, these are all valid questions, as long as you buy into the belief that seeing a human being in its natural state is somehow bad, or ruinous to a healthy psyche, or even to the person being viewed without their all-powerful protective fabrics.
Hmm, come to think of it, isn't that same mythical power attributed to God in his natural form? Odd that the people who chafe at having mankind considered to be on par with their deity in any way would propagate both these legends. Hmm.
Uhh, no, that's "msHTML." Have you ever tried to read that stuff?