My eyes, the goggles do nothing!!
on
Case Tweaking
·
· Score: 1
Am i the only person who thinks that case looks like a pile of crap? And as to some of the earlier questions about why PC cases aren't easy to access like G4s are, the answer is some are, some aren't. I build about 10 computers a month (not alot compared to some of you i'm sure, but a good amount nonetheless), and therefore i see a lot of cases. Many i've seen lately have only a thumb screw required to get inside, with panels that all slide off easily.
Also, if you want the power of a desktop and the portability of a notebook, you get a rackmount case. You can have as much power as any desktop, with convenient handles and a protective shell.
If you want to see a WAY cooler case hack (with about 1/10th the work), check out this guys.
Just thought i'd add that radioactive decay is the standard random number generater used to make one-time pads for the government or other intensely high-security applications.
For those who aren't familar with the one-time pad, it is currently the only truly unbreakable encryption system (provided the encryption key is entirely random). It is a simple mathematical principle, take some plain-text T, take an random number generated pad P (the same length as T), and XOR them.
Plain-text: T
One-time pad: P
Ciphertext = T XOR P
Plaintext = Ciphertext XOR P
There is no way to break this simple process provided P is completely and entirely random, even tireless key searches merely yield every possible string of T's length, there is no way to know which is correct.
Let's just say for a minute that this protection scheme really works. Let's say it doesn't break compatibility with regular cd players. Let's say we somehow can't raw read it even with something hardcore like blindread. There is a simple way around these sort of protection schemes, and its name is VAC.
VAC (Virtual Audio Cable) is based off the idea (mentioned in a few other posts) of looping physical cables from your soundcard's output to it's input to record the audio. VAC creates a wave i/o device (or multiple i/o devices, but only one is needed for this sort of thing) that can be selected as your wave out device, and also as your wave in device in a recording program (soundforge, wavelab, hell even microsoft sound record would work). To the player you are simply listening to your cd, but in reality the signal is recorded without ever leaving the digital domain, and you now have a perfect copy.
The only downside to this is that you must do it all in real time. But of course once you've done it, then its a regular unprotected file, so do with it what you will. Also note that this works for recording real audio and other streams that are not supposed to be able to be recorded.
MD's are only popular as players, and only moderately so as that (i am aware of the international situation). The bottom line is you won't see many albums released that were recorded on MDs.
I am an audio engineer, and although this story is quite good, its use of mp3 recorders as an example of a withheld technology is a mistake.
High-quality mp3 recorder is an oxymoron. What good would a high-quality mp3 recorder be? If you are going to record "high quality", then you're going to need good mics, good preamps, quality synths, those sorts of things, and if you're going to spend the dough on those items why would you ever want to record directly to a lossy format like mp3? It is true that MD is also lossy, and recorders exist for it, but they have proven to be both undesirable and unpopular; so why would anyone make another generation of an unpopular idea? (besides microsoft and its crappy media player of course.)
If you're going to spend the money for high quality instruments and mics, then you're going to spend the money to record with lossless methods.
"A program is only as stable as its craziest programmer."
Slashdot Mirror
Am i the only person who thinks that case looks like a pile of crap? And as to some of the earlier questions about why PC cases aren't easy to access like G4s are, the answer is some are, some aren't. I build about 10 computers a month (not alot compared to some of you i'm sure, but a good amount nonetheless), and therefore i see a lot of cases. Many i've seen lately have only a thumb screw required to get inside, with panels that all slide off easily. Also, if you want the power of a desktop and the portability of a notebook, you get a rackmount case. You can have as much power as any desktop, with convenient handles and a protective shell. If you want to see a WAY cooler case hack (with about 1/10th the work), check out this guys.
For those who aren't familar with the one-time pad, it is currently the only truly unbreakable encryption system (provided the encryption key is entirely random). It is a simple mathematical principle, take some plain-text T, take an random number generated pad P (the same length as T), and XOR them.
Plain-text: T
One-time pad: P
Ciphertext = T XOR P
Plaintext = Ciphertext XOR P
There is no way to break this simple process provided P is completely and entirely random, even tireless key searches merely yield every possible string of T's length, there is no way to know which is correct.
Let's just say for a minute that this protection scheme really works. Let's say it doesn't break compatibility with regular cd players. Let's say we somehow can't raw read it even with something hardcore like blindread. There is a simple way around these sort of protection schemes, and its name is VAC.
VAC (Virtual Audio Cable) is based off the idea (mentioned in a few other posts) of looping physical cables from your soundcard's output to it's input to record the audio. VAC creates a wave i/o device (or multiple i/o devices, but only one is needed for this sort of thing) that can be selected as your wave out device, and also as your wave in device in a recording program (soundforge, wavelab, hell even microsoft sound record would work). To the player you are simply listening to your cd, but in reality the signal is recorded without ever leaving the digital domain, and you now have a perfect copy.
The only downside to this is that you must do it all in real time. But of course once you've done it, then its a regular unprotected file, so do with it what you will. Also note that this works for recording real audio and other streams that are not supposed to be able to be recorded.
MD's are only popular as players, and only moderately so as that (i am aware of the international situation). The bottom line is you won't see many albums released that were recorded on MDs.
I am an audio engineer, and although this story is quite good, its use of mp3 recorders as an example of a withheld technology is a mistake.
High-quality mp3 recorder is an oxymoron. What good would a high-quality mp3 recorder be? If you are going to record "high quality", then you're going to need good mics, good preamps, quality synths, those sorts of things, and if you're going to spend the dough on those items why would you ever want to record directly to a lossy format like mp3? It is true that MD is also lossy, and recorders exist for it, but they have proven to be both undesirable and unpopular; so why would anyone make another generation of an unpopular idea? (besides microsoft and its crappy media player of course.)
If you're going to spend the money for high quality instruments and mics, then you're going to spend the money to record with lossless methods.
"A program is only as stable as its craziest programmer."