I agree with you, I bought a miniDV (Canon ZR65) and have to say that importing the video onto a PC (Mac & PC in this case) is a breeze. It takes time (realtime, damn), but I video taped a get-together of a local Tai Chi club on Friday. Had it on the computer on Sunday when I had the time, and, after buying some blank DVD's I had a rough burn Monday night.
Actually it is possible on Cable, or even antenna. To extract a radio signal the circuit is tuned, a tuned circuit gives off interference as well and the frequency of that can be used to determine what station a tv is tuned to. Theoretically the cable company could monitor any feedback on the cable line to the closest amplifier.
Of course, you really have to be paranoid to think they were/are doing it.
Much easier to track digital cable/satellite. (As for not plugging it in, people with legitimate satellite that wtach any pay-per-view will sooner or later plug in the phoneline..)
Crap like this is often passed by countries in the U.N. which do not care about human rights; but wish instead to reduce western influences.
They known that in western society a company which violates some U.N. stipulation will be harrased and condemed, while they, in there semi-fascist/dictatorship can continue running the country, and their corrupt companies however they see fit without any U.N. resolution effecting them in the least.
The U.N. continues to pass BS resolutions related to human rights when half the countries in the U.N. commit crimes against humanity against their own citizens daily.
If you can take a picture of an image and have it look otherwise identical to the original image I would be amazed.
(For the sake of testing the image photopgraphed would be un-modified for purposes of validating the process as not causing further distortions).
I have photos which were taken of other photos, used to create replacement negatives for archival purposes of pictures taken 50+ years ago where the original negatives were either lost, or destroyed. If you look very close in all the images you can tell they are not the originals. A pieces of dust on the original photo, a slight crack in the paper, etc. Something will give it away, never mind any optical distortions introduced. It would be very hard to cancel most of that out within the camera to get a signed image which didn't have something 'odd' about it that an expert couldn't critique.
I think the most likely chain of events, to start with anyway, would simply be to trick the camera into signing an image that was already on the memory card. (perhaps it would need to be copied to the memory on the camera first, but a tweaked firmware might be able to do that....).
SCO is -slow-. Undeniably slow. It's KNOWN for being slow.
And lets not discuss the 5hrs of my life it sucked up because some idiot plugged in a tape drive and re-linked the kernel. ugh. (Syntax error in the configuration scripts caused no end of headaches).
You don't mention which version of the OS. I'll assume Jaguar or Panther.
As I understand it Jaguar has the printer sharing hidden. Try hold the Option button down while in the printer setup window. (Can't test it as I've moved up to Panther).
Here's where it gets ugly: OS X is using CUPS and CUPS doesn't seem to support my Canon, while I can hook it up directly to the Mac and print without difficulties. (anybody knows how to redirect the USB stuff over the network and print to a regular share let me know!)
It's not popular because you can't get a good library for free.
Most other formats are 'good enough', so why work with something new?
jpeg2000 is SLOW too. Even on high-end machines, it feels like jpg on a 386. It is impressive though. I have a highres picture I took which I took with a friends EOS Digital Rebel, I compressed with with jpeg2000 to under 200K and then visually compared them zoomed in. Was amazing, there were few noticable differences even when zoomed way in. (obviously wasn't using lossless option).
It's called interpolation, and for each and every camera you will have to read the specifications in detail to be certain they are not using interpolation.
$500 is a good deal. Particularly since you should be able to take a project developed in gcc and re-compile it with XLC if the need arises. I'm considering starting work on a particular project, if it works out and I take it far enough it could be in my financial interest to spend the $500, on the other hand it could end up like other projects of mine, destined to be filed away and long forgotten... so I'll keep the $500 for now, and spend it later if it warrants.
Canadian Customs use to be pretty bad too. I've heard numerous horror stories from people I trust. (Their stories, not 3rd party).
Never had the 'pleasure' myself. They didn't even insist on checking the box my Tivo came in to confirm where it was made. (Thankfully Mexico as there are no duties for them.. could have been worse, was told it could have been about a 30% duty. (didn't ask where, probably Tiwan or china).
When passing through Custom you have virtually no rights, and occasional customs like to prove the fact.
(To Canadians the American customs aren't a big deal, you answer a couple of inane questions and carry on..., to americans it tends to be the other way around...)
Most programs doing audio over the internet ARE based on UDP.
TCP is inappropriate for voice in most circumstances. TCP's extra overhead and reliability of transfer are counter productive to sending audio. Missing a single packet or two is not a big deal, but re-trying transmission repeatedly untill success would cause significant stutter and or delay in an audio application.
Generally the stores take the hit. They would have to prove they had a signed receipt for a swiped card to stand up.
As for tickets in Winnipeg, they were probably ordered online and then picked up. It's quite easy to do that here. (not sure about elsewhere).
Around here we have the problem of freudulent debit card use. They hide a camera or otherwise watch as the customer keys in their pin number when making a purchase. The card gets double swiped (so they get a copy of the data) (or, if they are really good, the patch into the transelect machine itself.)
One method which works on some NAT routers is pretty simple:
Output a packet via UDP to a particular IP address and port number. The NAT setups I've used will log that, and subsequently allow incoming UDP packets from that IP address and port number. If both machines negotiate via a third party and then trade such packets blind they can then start communicating. Note: some of the UDP packets will be lost at the start of the process... doesn't matter, not a problem.
As somebody who lost a motherboard to over-clocking: bull.
The typical result may be errors occurring before a significant component failure, but that is not 100%.
I over-clocked a motherboard years ago and the result was one of the support components failed without warning. The failure showed itself as errors when transferring data using particular DMA channels. Floppy disk, and digital audio for a soundblaster. The failure did not reverse itself when clockspeed was returned to normal. Friends of mine have, over the years, experienced similar results. Sooner or later the envelope is pushed too far for a particular component and something will break.
Without going into too many details (because I don't know them), it comes down to Google giving employees some form of stock options. Once they hit a certain dollar amount, or something they are required, within a specific period of time either either have an IPO or ask the FTC for an exception.
As bad as the mouse argument is the problem is it is a fundamental design defect.
(Note: I just bought a G5 in November, I used a Microsoft mouse on the G5 within a day.).
I don't think the argument holds any real sway over whether or not someone will spend the money required to buy a Mac, but it does seem odd, coming from the PC world to be limited to no real choice on the matter as Apple configures their systems with a single button mouse.
Oh well, I went out last week and bought a wireless keyboard and mouse set (Logitech). It solved a keyboard problem I had, the keys are labeled for both Mac and Windows and the extra level of Function keys is proving quite usefull. (I'm suprised actually). The keyboard/mouse receiver is hooked to a USB switch so it can be used with both my Computers, Windows XP 2.4Ghz and my G5 1.6Ghz. (wish I had the cash for the Dual... ah well..).
But yes, Apple should be configuring systems with 2 button optical wheel mice. They work well with OS X too.
Slashdot Mirror
Depending on where you live a 30 second sample could be considered fair use. But, it cannot be used for commercial gain.
Which, obviously when used in a commercial, is not this scenario.
Well, based on the Judges decision, if he were in the U.S. he would have the legal right to do it; just not the right to buy the software to do it.
No problem. Just download from somewhere outside the U.S.
Your wrong. They didn't deport him, they sent him back to his riding...
And for those of you who failed to get the joke, check out the Federal government in Canada and the word Scandal.
I agree with you, I bought a miniDV (Canon ZR65) and have to say that importing the video onto a PC (Mac & PC in this case) is a breeze. It takes time (realtime, damn), but I video taped a get-together of a local Tai Chi club on Friday. Had it on the computer on Sunday when I had the time, and, after buying some blank DVD's I had a rough burn Monday night.
Don't complaint to Google, use robot.txt to restrict the traffic.
Bitch and moan about the influence of the Russians, but if it weren't for them the space station would have been abandoned by now.
Actually it is possible on Cable, or even antenna. To extract a radio signal the circuit is tuned, a tuned circuit gives off interference as well and the frequency of that can be used to determine what station a tv is tuned to. Theoretically the cable company could monitor any feedback on the cable line to the closest amplifier.
Of course, you really have to be paranoid to think they were/are doing it.
Much easier to track digital cable/satellite.
(As for not plugging it in, people with legitimate satellite that wtach any pay-per-view will sooner or later plug in the phoneline..)
Crap like this is often passed by countries in the U.N. which do not care about human rights; but wish instead to reduce western influences.
They known that in western society a company which violates some U.N. stipulation will be harrased and condemed, while they, in there semi-fascist/dictatorship can continue running the country, and their corrupt companies however they see fit without any U.N. resolution effecting them in the least.
The U.N. continues to pass BS resolutions related to human rights when half the countries in the U.N. commit crimes against humanity against their own citizens daily.
If you can take a picture of an image and have it look otherwise identical to the original image I would be amazed.
(For the sake of testing the image photopgraphed would be un-modified for purposes of validating the process as not causing further distortions).
I have photos which were taken of other photos, used to create replacement negatives for archival purposes of pictures taken 50+ years ago where the original negatives were either lost, or destroyed. If you look very close in all the images you can tell they are not the originals. A pieces of dust on the original photo, a slight crack in the paper, etc. Something will give it away, never mind any optical distortions introduced. It would be very hard to cancel most of that out within the camera to get a signed image which didn't have something 'odd' about it that an expert couldn't critique.
I think the most likely chain of events, to start with anyway, would simply be to trick the camera into signing an image that was already on the memory card. (perhaps it would need to be copied to the memory on the camera first, but a tweaked firmware might be able to do that....).
No cryptography expertise would be required.
No office, but the original poster was right.
It sucked then, it sucks now.
SCO is -slow-. Undeniably slow. It's KNOWN for being slow.
And lets not discuss the 5hrs of my life it sucked up because some idiot plugged in a tape drive and re-linked the kernel. ugh. (Syntax error in the configuration scripts caused no end of headaches).
CSIS hasn't gone rogue.
CSIS exists to do what the RCMP isn't allowed to do.
They were designed to be 'rogue' from day one.
By the way, CSIS doesn't like it if you talk about war-driving.
You don't mention which version of the OS. I'll assume Jaguar or Panther.
As I understand it Jaguar has the printer sharing hidden. Try hold the Option button down while in the printer setup window. (Can't test it as I've moved up to Panther).
Here's where it gets ugly: OS X is using CUPS and CUPS doesn't seem to support my Canon, while I can hook it up directly to the Mac and print without difficulties. (anybody knows how to redirect the USB stuff over the network and print to a regular share let me know!)
It's not popular because you can't get a good library for free.
Most other formats are 'good enough', so why work with something new?
jpeg2000 is SLOW too. Even on high-end machines, it feels like jpg on a 386. It is impressive though. I have a highres picture I took which I took with a friends EOS Digital Rebel, I compressed with with jpeg2000 to under 200K and then visually compared them zoomed in. Was amazing, there were few noticable differences even when zoomed way in. (obviously wasn't using lossless option).
It's called interpolation, and for each and every camera you will have to read the specifications in detail to be certain they are not using interpolation.
$500 is a good deal. Particularly since you should be able to take a project developed in gcc and re-compile it with XLC if the need arises. I'm considering starting work on a particular project, if it works out and I take it far enough it could be in my financial interest to spend the $500, on the other hand it could end up like other projects of mine, destined to be filed away and long forgotten... so I'll keep the $500 for now, and spend it later if it warrants.
Canadian Customs use to be pretty bad too. I've heard numerous horror stories from people I trust. (Their stories, not 3rd party).
Never had the 'pleasure' myself. They didn't even insist on checking the box my Tivo came in to confirm where it was made. (Thankfully Mexico as there are no duties for them.. could have been worse, was told it could have been about a 30% duty. (didn't ask where, probably Tiwan or china).
When passing through Custom you have virtually no rights, and occasional customs like to prove the fact.
(To Canadians the American customs aren't a big deal, you answer a couple of inane questions and carry on..., to americans it tends to be the other way around...)
Most programs doing audio over the internet ARE based on UDP.
TCP is inappropriate for voice in most circumstances. TCP's extra overhead and reliability of transfer are counter productive to sending audio. Missing a single packet or two is not a big deal, but re-trying transmission repeatedly untill success would cause significant stutter and or delay in an audio application.
Generally the stores take the hit. They would have to prove they had a signed receipt for a swiped card to stand up.
As for tickets in Winnipeg, they were probably ordered online and then picked up. It's quite easy to do that here. (not sure about elsewhere).
Around here we have the problem of freudulent debit card use. They hide a camera or otherwise watch as the customer keys in their pin number when making a purchase. The card gets double swiped (so they get a copy of the data) (or, if they are really good, the patch into the transelect machine itself.)
Na, if it had a V6, performed like a V8 they would call it a V8+
Thankfully the auto industry doesn't take marketing tricks from the tech industry.... yet.
One method which works on some NAT routers is pretty simple:
Output a packet via UDP to a particular IP address and port number. The NAT setups I've used will log that, and subsequently allow incoming UDP packets from that IP address and port number. If both machines negotiate via a third party and then trade such packets blind they can then start communicating. Note: some of the UDP packets will be lost at the start of the process... doesn't matter, not a problem.
As somebody who lost a motherboard to over-clocking: bull.
The typical result may be errors occurring before a significant component failure, but that is not 100%.
I over-clocked a motherboard years ago and the result was one of the support components failed without warning. The failure showed itself as errors when transferring data using particular DMA channels. Floppy disk, and digital audio for a soundblaster. The failure did not reverse itself when clockspeed was returned to normal. Friends of mine have, over the years, experienced similar results. Sooner or later the envelope is pushed too far for a particular component and something will break.
Without going into too many details (because I don't know them), it comes down to Google giving employees some form of stock options. Once they hit a certain dollar amount, or something they are required, within a specific period of time either either have an IPO or ask the FTC for an exception.
While trollish, I'll take my G5 with 9 fans over my PC with 3, it's a fraction as loud under normal usage.
Actually, I can barely hear it at all.
As bad as the mouse argument is the problem is it is a fundamental design defect.
(Note: I just bought a G5 in November, I used a Microsoft mouse on the G5 within a day.).
I don't think the argument holds any real sway over whether or not someone will spend the money required to buy a Mac, but it does seem odd, coming from the PC world to be limited to no real choice on the matter as Apple configures their systems with a single button mouse.
Oh well, I went out last week and bought a wireless keyboard and mouse set (Logitech). It solved a keyboard problem I had, the keys are labeled for both Mac and Windows and the extra level of Function keys is proving quite usefull. (I'm suprised actually). The keyboard/mouse receiver is hooked to a USB switch so it can be used with both my Computers, Windows XP 2.4Ghz and my G5 1.6Ghz. (wish I had the cash for the Dual... ah well..).
But yes, Apple should be configuring systems with 2 button optical wheel mice. They work well with OS X too.