I understand that, and that's why I said "best case". In a best case scenario (here defined as completely uncompressed), you have 1/4 the pixels per frame. Also, there's also the fact that, when dealing with interlaced material, to get a 240 line image you WILL be throwing away half of the content. With film material, you just encode at 24fps progressive (if you're dealing with telecined material in a video format, then do your best to IVTC before encoding). Also, you should remember that, in this particular instance, the source material is 720p, and not 480i, so you're reducing 1280x720 to 320x240, and since it's ludicrous to letterbox on such a small device, you're also cropping off nearly half the source image with a pan'n'scan technique. This is, of course, assuming that they're not taking a shortcut and just encoding the already P&S'd NTSC downconversion.
I do concede one point, however - I agree that, at the same bitrate, 320x240 will present more detail to the user, unless the bitrate is sufficient to show a substantial amount of detail at the larger resolution (in which case 320x240 won't look much different, except for the extremely fine details).
Yes, but there are valid reasons for wanting to burn on DVD - for example, if the computer is not in the same room as the good TV, then you'd want to burn it. Or, if you just plain want to watch it somewhere without a computer near a TV.
Or, you could go all out, build a file server and one media box for each TV you want connected, network then with at least 100mbps-capable NICs and stream the videos from the server. This is technically on the shady side of the law, but if you only use legally-purchased DVDs or PVR functionality as your source then you're "morally" okay, in that you're not stealing from anyone.
320x240 is 1/4 the detail of 720x480 (and was probably generated by cropping to 704 pixels width and then just resizing to 320x240). That's best case scenario, none of this "have you seen it" crap - by definition there can not be any more than 1/4 the detail of an SD signal.
Jesus said, "If any of you should cause one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better for you if a millstone were tied around your neck and that you be cast into the uttermost depths of the sea." Jack Thompson is trying to tie that millstone around the violent video game industry's neck, and he needs your help. These people intend to do evil, but evil can be turned away by persistence and prayer.
You're an idiot. It's not called IPv4 because it has "four digits", because it most certainly does not. An IP address has 8 hex digits, for a 32-bit value. Now, that happens to be four bytes, but that's not the same as four digits. IPv6 uses a 128-bit value, which comes out to 32 hex digits, or 16 bytes. They're called IPv4 and v6 because they're version 4 and version 6, respectively.
In fact, it will have no effect on it seeing as how all pirated works of digital media are captured using analog computer capture cards and the analog out ports on their digital tv's and receivers.
Um, that's actually not true. I've seen plenty of HD and SD digital rips (usually the SD rips are called "PDTV").
Re:Here in MN it's possible to block ads in yards.
on
Why Do You Block Ads?
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
It's illegal to post a non real estate, political or garage sale sign in your own front yard.
And you think that's a good thing in a supposedly free country? I should have the right to put whatever I want in my yard as long as it doesn't violate "community standards" for obscenity.
Most retail photo shops have a policy that if your photo looks too "professional", you will not be able to print it there. There is no definiton of "professional", which means that it's basically the judgment call of whoever's working the register. Instead, for the bit extra it costs to print my own 4x6's, I can print whatever I like. Any 4x6 image in Photoshop, regardless of the contents, can be printed. I don't have to worry about being second-guessed and told "you obviously didn't take this picture, it looks too 'good'".
It doesn't? You mean you can rip it normally without error, but yet it's not Red Book audio?
I forget which book details CDs with both a data track and audio tracks, but that's what this is. And that's certainly not outside the specs for that book.
Astute individuals can do the necessary translations between binary and hex themselves, so I would posit that hex is also an acceptable base to use, as it takes up 1/8 of the space that binary does, in this context.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand that, and that's why I said "best case". In a best case scenario (here defined as completely uncompressed), you have 1/4 the pixels per frame. Also, there's also the fact that, when dealing with interlaced material, to get a 240 line image you WILL be throwing away half of the content. With film material, you just encode at 24fps progressive (if you're dealing with telecined material in a video format, then do your best to IVTC before encoding). Also, you should remember that, in this particular instance, the source material is 720p, and not 480i, so you're reducing 1280x720 to 320x240, and since it's ludicrous to letterbox on such a small device, you're also cropping off nearly half the source image with a pan'n'scan technique. This is, of course, assuming that they're not taking a shortcut and just encoding the already P&S'd NTSC downconversion.
I do concede one point, however - I agree that, at the same bitrate, 320x240 will present more detail to the user, unless the bitrate is sufficient to show a substantial amount of detail at the larger resolution (in which case 320x240 won't look much different, except for the extremely fine details).
Yes, but there are valid reasons for wanting to burn on DVD - for example, if the computer is not in the same room as the good TV, then you'd want to burn it. Or, if you just plain want to watch it somewhere without a computer near a TV.
Or, you could go all out, build a file server and one media box for each TV you want connected, network then with at least 100mbps-capable NICs and stream the videos from the server. This is technically on the shady side of the law, but if you only use legally-purchased DVDs or PVR functionality as your source then you're "morally" okay, in that you're not stealing from anyone.
320x240 is 1/4 the detail of 720x480 (and was probably generated by cropping to 704 pixels width and then just resizing to 320x240). That's best case scenario, none of this "have you seen it" crap - by definition there can not be any more than 1/4 the detail of an SD signal.
The only thing worse than an Amiga zealot is an anti-Amiga zealot.
You're an idiot. It's not called IPv4 because it has "four digits", because it most certainly does not. An IP address has 8 hex digits, for a 32-bit value. Now, that happens to be four bytes, but that's not the same as four digits. IPv6 uses a 128-bit value, which comes out to 32 hex digits, or 16 bytes. They're called IPv4 and v6 because they're version 4 and version 6, respectively.
That's not a bug, it's a new restriction on ACs.
I've had it happen quite a bit while trying to post AC, but never when posting as myself.
Hahahah, looks like yet another gullible person who doesn't know that MAVAV is a hoax. Nice try though.
No, it will be televised, you just won't be able to record it.
Social contract my ass.
Most retail photo shops have a policy that if your photo looks too "professional", you will not be able to print it there. There is no definiton of "professional", which means that it's basically the judgment call of whoever's working the register. Instead, for the bit extra it costs to print my own 4x6's, I can print whatever I like. Any 4x6 image in Photoshop, regardless of the contents, can be printed. I don't have to worry about being second-guessed and told "you obviously didn't take this picture, it looks too 'good'".
Then I'd go up to their parents and say "This little prat punched me in the bollocks, so deal with it" and leave it at that as far as I'm concerned.
Why do video games need such a law when movies don't?
Directory traversal is now "cracking"?
At least you had the common sense not to call it "hacking". But you're still wrong.
It doesn't? You mean you can rip it normally without error, but yet it's not Red Book audio?
I forget which book details CDs with both a data track and audio tracks, but that's what this is. And that's certainly not outside the specs for that book.
What? You're way off on your math. A real CD is not "320Kbs", it's about 1411kbps. That's about a 10-to-1 difference.
Astute individuals can do the necessary translations between binary and hex themselves, so I would posit that hex is also an acceptable base to use, as it takes up 1/8 of the space that binary does, in this context.
A real IP is only 8 digits.
For example, slashdot.org is 4223FA96.
That would actually be "less", since negative numbers run in the opposite direction. But you keep telling yourself that it's more.
$SYNTAX ERROR IN 20
READY.
You forgot the hot grits.
HD isn't mandatory, you dumbass.