You know, I wonder something - the ruling is stating that the RIO doesn't fall under the guidelines of the Audio Home Recording Act, because the RIO "downloads" a copy of a digital encoded image (MP3) from another hard drive, and that it doesn't make recordings from an analog source. However, if you wanted to remain legal with everything, in order to get a song you don't have in another format (CD, tape), you would have to purchase the MP3 from someplace, then download it to the RIO - and checks would have to be in place to keep your freind from downloading it to his RIO as well (from your computer), right? Plus, the RIO couldn't have any kind of audio in plugs for recording...
What is so confusing about this is that the Audio Home Recording Act seems to apply mainly to the conversion process - from digital (CD) to analog (speakers, audio out), then using that output to make an illegal tape or something (or CD - back to digital). In other words, going from digital to analog then back to digital (with MP3 or CD, or staying analog, in the case of a tape) is wrong, but what about straight digital? In other words, direct CD -> CD or CD -> MP3 encoding? How does this fit in?
I know this is rambling - I hope someone can make since of what it is I am getting at. I guess I am wondering if the act would cover RIOs that could download from each other? Not record from an analog source - but direct digital copies? Then download to your computer? No analog process involved? It almost seems like the fact that music CDs are data (and not analog recordings) is getting lost somewhere...
I am not using bad english - I am using American english (which to some, equates to the same thing)!
I suppose I could've said: This person wants to remain anonymous because he works for Xircom.
or I could've said: This person wants to remain anonymous because s/he works for Xircom.
I didn't - I used "they" - and you still understood what I was saying. The reason I used "they" is because, while the second example is correct ("he"), it is not considered "PC" - the third example looks plain wrong to me ("s/he") - so I avoided the "PC" issue and chose "they".
If the person doesn't work for Xircom - this becomes even a larger free speech issue - I mean, if someone has a problem with a company's product, shouldn't he have a right to say that? Of course, if he was making libelous statements about the company with no proof...
One would think that - however, I would prefer the seperate measurements, rather than calculate (which might turn out to be a guess, since we are relying on the 4/3 ratio assumption)...
If they would make the software Open Source (not necessarily GPL'd, though that would be nice), I am sure they could say "for Linux", and not "for RedHat Linux" - and people could get the source and tweek/compile it for themselves to get it running on the distro they choose.
Perhaps after getting it working, they could even send back the code to WP so that others could use it as well (this would have to be with some kind of agreement with the submitter to document any and all changes to get the source to work with distro X). After getting working source submissions, and verifying they work, they could then release just the binary installs for those individual platforms, so that users who didn't have a clue about compilation (or didn't want to go through the hassle), could still use the distro.
Open Source can solve this and other problems - if only companies would let it.
This is the reason that open source should be promoted by companies - hopefully White Pine will do this (if they build a client)? I guess what I am trying to say is that it seems imbedded in people's heads that the only hardware out there is Intel-based - that there is nothing else. Most of this problem has to do with the masses being brainwashed into thinking Windoze is king (or something) - but they are going to need to get their heads out and learn that Linux isn't just for Intel hardware!
This is also what the RedHat thing feels like - I mean, for some reason, when I think RedHat, I think Intel (it is crazy, I know!)... I wish companies, when annoucing Linux support - would just say "Now supporting Linux" or some such thing - heck, maybe even throw in a kernel rev number or something (just so someone with an old 1.0 kernel doesn't try to run "Widget X" on it and watch it fail, cause it was written for 2.2 and beyond or something).
This person wants to remain anonymous because they work for Xircom - and wish to keep their job (though I wonder why, if the conditions are bad like they say they are - anyone got a link or something to that discussion?).
Now, I imagine Xircom might have a case if the employee used company equipment to post the message or they did it on company time - I think this sort of thing has precedent. But I can understand wanting to remain anonymous if they did it on their own time/equipment (and if they were smart, they did).
I can't think of a "real world" example for comparison here - though I am sure one could find one...
They give something like a 39.5 diag FOV - what kind of crap is this? Give the individual vertical and horizontal FOV - so it can be known what kind of immersion we can expect.
I have never understood why so many HMD manufacturers are going the route of high quality display/low FOV - W Industries (now Virtuality) had the Visette - it was OK on the res, and great on the FOV! Focus was crap, but as long as you took the thing off every no and then, you were OK.
Now, as then, it is still cheaper to build your own HMD than it is to buy it (with the exception of a used Victormaxx Stuntmaster off of EBAY)...
This is what I have been saying for a long time - I am a long time BASIC programmer who current does a lot of work in VB (when not reading/.). I have found that VB can do quite a lot alone - when combined with VC++ DLLs, performance really goes through the roof. Now, don't say I am an idiot VB coder who doesn't know jack - I like C/C++ - I hate MFC, and it is near impossible to code under Windoze without MFC (thanks to the crappy OS), unless you like huge case statements/event loops. The syntax of the language doesn't bother me much (though pointers are a drag - but I do like 'em!), it is just the interface to create "pretty" apps for Windoze.
I would like to see something like VB (IDE wise), to allow one to create forms and graphically "point-click-draw" the interface, then click on a control to enter code for that object's events/methods. VC doesn't cut it.
I have been working in Java lately, and loving every minute of it (right now under Windoze using Notepad and command line compilation - the command line is _not_ something I fear. Hopefully soon I will do my coding under Linux), but it is a pain to make a GUI interface using a text editor (though not impossible, just slow). I like the GC of Java, but it would be nice if it could be turned off in some manner to allow you to do it yourself (same with pointers - give the coders options - although it could break the security model - same with GC, now that I think about it).
The way the language looks doesn't matter - whether it is styled on BASIC or C or Pascal - but for some reason, we think that if it is styled on BASIC, then it must be a toy language. It is like saying Chinese is inferior to English because the ideograms look funny, and so must not be good...?
One last point - in VB (5 & 6), when compiling to EXE (with compile to native code turned on), the VB code is first converted to C/C++ (internally - the converted file is not written anywhere AFAIK), then ran through the VC++ compiler to create the EXE. Sometimes, the OBJ file(s) are left behind (they are supposed to be deleted - if you look at the directory you are compiling to, sometimes you can see them created then deleted by VB, sometimes they get left behind).
Ok, so if we know that this thing can pack.003 Gbytes into a square inch, and that 36 Gbytes fit on a double sided platter, we can determine the size of the platter by...
[furious scribbling ensues...]
36 Gbytes / 2 sides = 18 Gbytes/side (duh)
PI x r^2 = surface area of a circle
So let's try a 5 inch platter (for a 5 1/4 inch drive):
WOW! This would definitely screw things up. I had an idea of such a thing - not a virus (ok, it would be a virus) - but one that is propagated as a virus alert - it would be a macro virus that would clean up/alert the user of other macro viruses. Think of it as a virus that kills other viruses (and ONLY other viruses)...
(Most) doctors hate patients who study up on this stuff, because they hate to get second-guessed.
I agree with you there - when I go to the doctor and tell him "Yeah, I get an infection, so I take erythromyicin (sp) for it... Who prescribed it? I bought it down in Mexico!" - I get a very strange, mean look...
Motherboard w/o slots???!
on
Cool PC Cases
·
· Score: 1
What kinda shit is this? I want a backplane system that is cheap - I want to be able to expand my system, so that next time I have the money for a new MB, I would get one, and plug it into the backplane - and increase my total power. Why hasn't such a system been made for home/business use? Many older machines used this kind of design - why don't we see such a thing today?
On another note - the one about trucks - I like a good truck dammit - and I don't care what it looks like, or what kind of options it has - just as long as it has the power to do what I need, and a large bed - I want to be able to put a stack of 4x8 plywood back there if needed - or a half cord of wood for my fireplace. And fuck leather seating - what is it with these yuppie mo'fos anyhow?
I love my putty colored tower! I wouldn't have it any other way! The top is flat, so I can sit my Jolt on it, or another tower! Then bolt them together!
I kinda wish all of my other "appliances" were like my computer - so when the tuner goes out in my TV, I wouldn't have to buy a new TV, just a new tuner. But then again, that is the potential of the computer - since most have sound cards, video card, sometimes a TV tuner - you can add a remote, etc.
This is the way I want my entertainment/house computer to be - an all in one solution, but one in which if one part fails, I can pop it out and get another - and I can still use the rest of the system in the meantime.
Most people can't change the oil on their cars, something which is these days about as complex as connecting to the internet.
Do you really believe this?
Changing the oil in most cars is stupid simple stuff - I mean, pop the oil fill cap, stick a pan under the car, and open the crankcase plug - let 'er drain, replace the plug, change the filter (probably the hardest step - seems like the engineers purposefully make it difficult to change), and fill with new oil - then take the old oil and recycle it.
There was a reason boneheads in HS took auto shop...
That isn't to say cars are getting easier to work on - just that changing oil is far easier than one might think (ok, it is messy - and I can understand someone not wanting to do it because of this - plus, with the cost of oil changes being so low, it isn't cheaper to do it yourself anymore)...
I would love to get one of these things for my truck (or even build one) - if I could only afford it. I live in Phoenix, AZ - where interior temperatures during the summer can actually cook food. I also like to drive "rough" in my truck (mountain trails are fun - I also tend to think of curbs as a minor annoyance) - so I have to wonder about this. Plus, in the winter, I can drive a couple of hours north and be in a snowy wonderland (with freezing temperatures).
This has always been the sticking point with me on getting a computer in my truck (I don't want just MP3s - I want engine monitoring, GPS, etc) - how to protect it and the drive. Mounting the drive on springs (like MP3CAR) would be OK, but the heat/cold? Especially the heat (the cold would be easy) when parked at the mall or something...
I have to agree with this - although I would put 3D Studio Max up there as well.
What is kinda funny is that not too long ago (about 6 months) I saw a copy of QB4.5 at Fry's of all places - all nice and shrink wrapped! Guess how much it was selling for?
Would you believe $150.00?
I nearly fell over - I wouldn't give a pile of monkey brains for it! What was really funny was it was sitting next to an LE version of VB5 - which was selling for $99.00...
I can't understand why M$ has to charge such over inflated prices for any of their compilers (ever seen the price for VB)? Too me, it seems like they do this out of elitism, to try and keep "shadetree" programmers from creating what they perceive as lower quality (read: less features) software for the masses...
There should be a contest to build your own computer - from scratch. Put limits on the contest - maybe three classes: Mechanical, Electrical, and Electronic (electrical and electronic could use some mechanical components, and mechanical could only use electrical components for power, like a motor to drive gears or something). Electronic would be restricted to transistor level at best. I would love to see what people come up with...
Actually, most of the pictures I have seen of the ENIAC show that it would fit into a good size living room. The ENIAC was big - but it wasn't that big.
Thanks for refs - I am going to put in for a search for the first one - I already have the second.
I actually have an old "lights and wire" calculator type kit from Radio Shack, as well as the "real" computer kit they sold (has a small processor, a hex keyboard, binary lights, speaker, etc.). While these aren't really computers (well, the latter one, maybe - you can code it in hex opcode assembler), they are still fun to play with.
I will definitely let people know if I get the book - I actually have a couple of old computer history books from the 50's - these are a hoot to read!
Slashdot Mirror
You know, I wonder something - the ruling is stating that the RIO doesn't fall under the guidelines of the Audio Home Recording Act, because the RIO "downloads" a copy of a digital encoded image (MP3) from another hard drive, and that it doesn't make recordings from an analog source. However, if you wanted to remain legal with everything, in order to get a song you don't have in another format (CD, tape), you would have to purchase the MP3 from someplace, then download it to the RIO - and checks would have to be in place to keep your freind from downloading it to his RIO as well (from your computer), right? Plus, the RIO couldn't have any kind of audio in plugs for recording...
What is so confusing about this is that the Audio Home Recording Act seems to apply mainly to the conversion process - from digital (CD) to analog (speakers, audio out), then using that output to make an illegal tape or something (or CD - back to digital). In other words, going from digital to analog then back to digital (with MP3 or CD, or staying analog, in the case of a tape) is wrong, but what about straight digital? In other words, direct CD -> CD or CD -> MP3 encoding? How does this fit in?
I know this is rambling - I hope someone can make since of what it is I am getting at. I guess I am wondering if the act would cover RIOs that could download from each other? Not record from an analog source - but direct digital copies? Then download to your computer? No analog process involved? It almost seems like the fact that music CDs are data (and not analog recordings) is getting lost somewhere...
Aggg!
I am not using bad english - I am using American english (which to some, equates to the same thing)!
I suppose I could've said: This person wants to remain anonymous because he works for Xircom.
or I could've said: This person wants to remain anonymous because s/he works for Xircom.
I didn't - I used "they" - and you still understood what I was saying. The reason I used "they" is because, while the second example is correct ("he"), it is not considered "PC" - the third example looks plain wrong to me ("s/he") - so I avoided the "PC" issue and chose "they".
If the person doesn't work for Xircom - this becomes even a larger free speech issue - I mean, if someone has a problem with a company's product, shouldn't he have a right to say that? Of course, if he was making libelous statements about the company with no proof...
One would think that - however, I would prefer the seperate measurements, rather than calculate (which might turn out to be a guess, since we are relying on the 4/3 ratio assumption)...
Thank you for your corrections - my response:
Mistake #1: Yes, this could have been done, but I wanted to try to avoid using any of the "published" numbers and work toward them...
Mistake #2: Yep! That could be a problem - thank you for this correction...
Mistake #3: Very true, very true...
Once again, thank you...
I had my head up my butt or something - I meant 2.0.2 - not 2.2 (last line)...
If they would make the software Open Source (not necessarily GPL'd, though that would be nice), I am sure they could say "for Linux", and not "for RedHat Linux" - and people could get the source and tweek/compile it for themselves to get it running on the distro they choose.
Perhaps after getting it working, they could even send back the code to WP so that others could use it as well (this would have to be with some kind of agreement with the submitter to document any and all changes to get the source to work with distro X). After getting working source submissions, and verifying they work, they could then release just the binary installs for those individual platforms, so that users who didn't have a clue about compilation (or didn't want to go through the hassle), could still use the distro.
Open Source can solve this and other problems - if only companies would let it.
I know I am preaching to the choir here, but...
This is the reason that open source should be promoted by companies - hopefully White Pine will do this (if they build a client)? I guess what I am trying to say is that it seems imbedded in people's heads that the only hardware out there is Intel-based - that there is nothing else. Most of this problem has to do with the masses being brainwashed into thinking Windoze is king (or something) - but they are going to need to get their heads out and learn that Linux isn't just for Intel hardware!
This is also what the RedHat thing feels like - I mean, for some reason, when I think RedHat, I think Intel (it is crazy, I know!)... I wish companies, when annoucing Linux support - would just say "Now supporting Linux" or some such thing - heck, maybe even throw in a kernel rev number or something (just so someone with an old 1.0 kernel doesn't try to run "Widget X" on it and watch it fail, cause it was written for 2.2 and beyond or something).
This person wants to remain anonymous because they work for Xircom - and wish to keep their job (though I wonder why, if the conditions are bad like they say they are - anyone got a link or something to that discussion?).
Now, I imagine Xircom might have a case if the employee used company equipment to post the message or they did it on company time - I think this sort of thing has precedent. But I can understand wanting to remain anonymous if they did it on their own time/equipment (and if they were smart, they did).
I can't think of a "real world" example for comparison here - though I am sure one could find one...
They give something like a 39.5 diag FOV - what kind of crap is this? Give the individual vertical and horizontal FOV - so it can be known what kind of immersion we can expect.
I have never understood why so many HMD manufacturers are going the route of high quality display/low FOV - W Industries (now Virtuality) had the Visette - it was OK on the res, and great on the FOV! Focus was crap, but as long as you took the thing off every no and then, you were OK.
Now, as then, it is still cheaper to build your own HMD than it is to buy it (with the exception of a used Victormaxx Stuntmaster off of EBAY)...
Moderate this up!
/.). I have found that VB can do quite a lot alone - when combined with VC++ DLLs, performance really goes through the roof. Now, don't say I am an idiot VB coder who doesn't know jack - I like C/C++ - I hate MFC, and it is near impossible to code under Windoze without MFC (thanks to the crappy OS), unless you like huge case statements/event loops. The syntax of the language doesn't bother me much (though pointers are a drag - but I do like 'em!), it is just the interface to create "pretty" apps for Windoze.
This is what I have been saying for a long time - I am a long time BASIC programmer who current does a lot of work in VB (when not reading
I would like to see something like VB (IDE wise), to allow one to create forms and graphically "point-click-draw" the interface, then click on a control to enter code for that object's events/methods. VC doesn't cut it.
I have been working in Java lately, and loving every minute of it (right now under Windoze using Notepad and command line compilation - the command line is _not_ something I fear. Hopefully soon I will do my coding under Linux), but it is a pain to make a GUI interface using a text editor (though not impossible, just slow). I like the GC of Java, but it would be nice if it could be turned off in some manner to allow you to do it yourself (same with pointers - give the coders options - although it could break the security model - same with GC, now that I think about it).
The way the language looks doesn't matter - whether it is styled on BASIC or C or Pascal - but for some reason, we think that if it is styled on BASIC, then it must be a toy language. It is like saying Chinese is inferior to English because the ideograms look funny, and so must not be good...?
One last point - in VB (5 & 6), when compiling to EXE (with compile to native code turned on), the VB code is first converted to C/C++ (internally - the converted file is not written anywhere AFAIK), then ran through the VC++ compiler to create the EXE. Sometimes, the OBJ file(s) are left behind (they are supposed to be deleted - if you look at the directory you are compiling to, sometimes you can see them created then deleted by VB, sometimes they get left behind).
OH MY!! OH MY!!! OOOOOHHHHHH MMMMMMMMYYYYYY!
I think you're on to someth
Dammit!
.236 Gbytes/inch^2 is nowhere near 18 Gbytes/inch^2 - unless those platters are huge...
.236 Gbytes/side is nowhere near 18 Gbytes/side - unless those platters are huge...
OK - I suck at math - can anyone see my error?
Should be:
OK - I suck at math - can anyone see my error?
Man, I suck...
78.540 inches^2 x .003 Gbytes/inch^2 = .236 Gbytes/inch^2 (???)
.003 Gbytes/inch^2 = .236 Gbytes/side (???)
This should be the following:
78.540 inches^2 x
Sorry...
You know, I was wondering the same thing - maybe Seagate's current drives have 6 platters in them? Of course, size wasn't mentioned...
.003 Gbytes into a square inch, and that 36 Gbytes fit on a double sided platter, we can determine the size of the platter by...
.003 Gbytes/inch^2 = .236 Gbytes/inch^2 (???)
.236 Gbytes/inch^2 is nowhere near 18 Gbytes/inch^2 - unless those platters are huge...
[pulls out napkin and pen]
1 Gbit = 1024 bits x 1024 bits = 1048576 bits
25 Gbits/inch^2 = 1048576 bits x 25 = 26214400 bits/inch^2
26214400 bits/inch^2 = 3276800 bytes/inch^2 = 3200 Kbytes/inch^2 = 3.125 Mbytes/inch^2 = 0.003 Gbytes/inch^2
Ok, so if we know that this thing can pack
[furious scribbling ensues...]
36 Gbytes / 2 sides = 18 Gbytes/side (duh)
PI x r^2 = surface area of a circle
So let's try a 5 inch platter (for a 5 1/4 inch drive):
3.14159 x 5^2 = 78.540 inches^2
78.540 inches^2 x
OK - I suck at math - can anyone see my error?
Help me, people...
You know, you are probably right on this one...
WOW! This would definitely screw things up. I had an idea of such a thing - not a virus (ok, it would be a virus) - but one that is propagated as a virus alert - it would be a macro virus that would clean up/alert the user of other macro viruses. Think of it as a virus that kills other viruses (and ONLY other viruses)...
(Most) doctors hate patients who study up on this stuff, because they hate to get second-guessed.
I agree with you there - when I go to the doctor and tell him "Yeah, I get an infection, so I take erythromyicin (sp) for it... Who prescribed it? I bought it down in Mexico!" - I get a very strange, mean look...
What kinda shit is this? I want a backplane system that is cheap - I want to be able to expand my system, so that next time I have the money for a new MB, I would get one, and plug it into the backplane - and increase my total power. Why hasn't such a system been made for home/business use? Many older machines used this kind of design - why don't we see such a thing today?
On another note - the one about trucks - I like a good truck dammit - and I don't care what it looks like, or what kind of options it has - just as long as it has the power to do what I need, and a large bed - I want to be able to put a stack of 4x8 plywood back there if needed - or a half cord of wood for my fireplace. And fuck leather seating - what is it with these yuppie mo'fos anyhow?
I love my putty colored tower! I wouldn't have it any other way! The top is flat, so I can sit my Jolt on it, or another tower! Then bolt them together!
I kinda wish all of my other "appliances" were like my computer - so when the tuner goes out in my TV, I wouldn't have to buy a new TV, just a new tuner. But then again, that is the potential of the computer - since most have sound cards, video card, sometimes a TV tuner - you can add a remote, etc.
This is the way I want my entertainment/house computer to be - an all in one solution, but one in which if one part fails, I can pop it out and get another - and I can still use the rest of the system in the meantime.
Most people can't change the oil on their cars, something which is these days about as complex as connecting to the internet.
Do you really believe this?
Changing the oil in most cars is stupid simple stuff - I mean, pop the oil fill cap, stick a pan under the car, and open the crankcase plug - let 'er drain, replace the plug, change the filter (probably the hardest step - seems like the engineers purposefully make it difficult to change), and fill with new oil - then take the old oil and recycle it.
There was a reason boneheads in HS took auto shop...
That isn't to say cars are getting easier to work on - just that changing oil is far easier than one might think (ok, it is messy - and I can understand someone not wanting to do it because of this - plus, with the cost of oil changes being so low, it isn't cheaper to do it yourself anymore)...
Yeah!
I would love to get one of these things for my truck (or even build one) - if I could only afford it. I live in Phoenix, AZ - where interior temperatures during the summer can actually cook food. I also like to drive "rough" in my truck (mountain trails are fun - I also tend to think of curbs as a minor annoyance) - so I have to wonder about this. Plus, in the winter, I can drive a couple of hours north and be in a snowy wonderland (with freezing temperatures).
This has always been the sticking point with me on getting a computer in my truck (I don't want just MP3s - I want engine monitoring, GPS, etc) - how to protect it and the drive. Mounting the drive on springs (like MP3CAR) would be OK, but the heat/cold? Especially the heat (the cold would be easy) when parked at the mall or something...
I have to agree with this - although I would put 3D Studio Max up there as well.
What is kinda funny is that not too long ago (about 6 months) I saw a copy of QB4.5 at Fry's of all places - all nice and shrink wrapped! Guess how much it was selling for?
Would you believe $150.00?
I nearly fell over - I wouldn't give a pile of monkey brains for it! What was really funny was it was sitting next to an LE version of VB5 - which was selling for $99.00...
I can't understand why M$ has to charge such over inflated prices for any of their compilers (ever seen the price for VB)? Too me, it seems like they do this out of elitism, to try and keep "shadetree" programmers from creating what they perceive as lower quality (read: less features) software for the masses...
They can bite me.
There should be a contest to build your own computer - from scratch. Put limits on the contest - maybe three classes: Mechanical, Electrical, and Electronic (electrical and electronic could use some mechanical components, and mechanical could only use electrical components for power, like a motor to drive gears or something). Electronic would be restricted to transistor level at best. I would love to see what people come up with...
Actually, most of the pictures I have seen of the ENIAC show that it would fit into a good size living room. The ENIAC was big - but it wasn't that big.
Thanks for refs - I am going to put in for a search for the first one - I already have the second.
I actually have an old "lights and wire" calculator type kit from Radio Shack, as well as the "real" computer kit they sold (has a small processor, a hex keyboard, binary lights, speaker, etc.). While these aren't really computers (well, the latter one, maybe - you can code it in hex opcode assembler), they are still fun to play with.
I will definitely let people know if I get the book - I actually have a couple of old computer history books from the 50's - these are a hoot to read!