I get the same thing with people telling me "oh click on this link it's funny" or whatever.
Truth be told, I bought my computer to do work. The fact that I can play games, movies, music and MythTV on it is just a bonus. Being able to *work* was the primary concern.
If people buy computers on the basis of whether it could run Flash or not they're probably the wrong people to own computers anyways.
It's called defamatory libel. S.298 of the CCC here in Canada:-)
Basically the CCC defines "what isn't" libel
- things that are resonably expected to be true - of public interest [safety/concern not voyeurism] - published within the boundaries of the laws of the land
If you knowingly publish, cause to be published, or otherwise produce something in print, radio, newspaper, television, etc, that causes loss, contempt, or harm to another, you may be found liable for libel.
Rumors are not specifically libel, if you can reasonably prove that people would have considered the rumor as not fact you are not guilty of libel. But you also would have to prove that it caused loss, contempt or harm [physical, property, etc].
If I say "Company $X sucks." and their stock price goes down, it could be that reasonable people decided for themselves based on the crap quality of the products produced by company $X.
on the otherhand, if I'm a trusted reviewer and I say "product $X is crap" without actually reviewing it and people change their buying habits as a result, that could be libel.
I seem to recall using webcams and the like in 2000 over the interweb. Granted webcam != broadcast TV but the principle is the same just the scale is different.
How the hell isn't this patent just blatantly invalid?/me hides in Canada...
Most people touting FLAC are not editing or mixing. They're just really impressed that they can waste space and pretend they can hear signals below the S/N levels.:-)
Yeah, until you hit multi TiB collections then have to sort out how you backup, or transfer RAIDs when the drives are old.
Also, if you just encode it once you don't have to worry about "OMG I NEED A RM FILE!! OH NOES" cuz you already have an mp3 or m4a or whatever. Why would you need the same audio in more than one or two formats?
It depends on various things like your speakers/amp, sound card, room acoustics, noise floor, etc.
For most people lame with q=2 and 192kbps joint-stereo is as good as the original CD even with good acoutics and gear. 128kbps never cut it as far as I'm concerned for anything but portables or noisy environments. M4A is just a step up [e.g. better quality at the same bitrate] but even without it MP3 is fine.
The problem I have with storing mass amounts in FLAC is when I want to share or transfer the music it takes forever and you really have to plan ahead. I'd rather hack a stockpile of m4a's and just cp them as required.
And the percentage of people touting FLAC vs. the # of people doing mixing is?
I agree there are uses for FLAC [and the like]. I just disagree that most people need to use it [and thus require TB storage arrays].
Most people are probably like me, buy a CD or DVD, make a rip for their digital archive [e.g. multimedia box] and play it back in their homes or portables. I seriously doubt most people rip stuff then make a DJ mix, etc...
As for going down in bitrate... um... if the 256kbps audio is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the original... it might as well be the original. Sure the bits are different but the sound produced is perceptible as the same. I've re-coded stuff before for my portables and frankly I can't really tell the difference. Specially since you typically listen to portables in noisy environments where the noise floor masks most subtle noises.
If you can't hear the difference between a high bitrate m4a and the original... does it matter?
That's the thing, the "difference" is only in your mind [not sensory]. Recall the whole point of psychoacoustic based encoders is they take advantage of the disparity of S/N ratios on various bands. If you have a 10dB masking on a given band, encoding it with full 96dB range [e.g. 16-bit PCM samples] doesn't make sense.
Imagine you can't see the colour red. Would adding more bits to the red channel make the picture better? If you can't hear that masked tone, adding more bits won't make it any better.
At the point where you are encoding at >=192kbps the encoder doesn't have to cut out resolution you can perceive so you're essentially home free.
VOBs are just MPEG-2 streams. Also nothing says you have to do your movie as one huge 15GB VOB. You could break it into 1GB parts and then delete the temps as you go.
mencoder can transcode pretty much anything, unfortunately only into AVI [the MPG output sucks bad], but ffmpeg can do some other streams [notably though it doesn't like 5.1 AC3 streams though...].
You don't need to store your audio as FLAC. Only weirdo audiophiles do that [unless you own the masters then it's ok]. Use 192 to 256kbps M4A and be done with. As for the movies, you should be able to convert ON THE FLY to DVD so you don't need to store uncompressed frames or whatever. As for the camera, just use high bitrate JPEG.
Unless you are publishing your audio, videos or photos you don't need a 100% representation. Often that 97% quality but 1/10th the size copy will be fine for your own enjoyment and use.
If you can both fetch data/code for the processor to crunch and feed your graphics card with GL commands then you win. It's not always about bandwidth but about bus availability. For instance, most processors go far underutilized as it is. But in the "crunch" times latency is king and being able to return a result quickly is more important. So moving the I/O devices off the memory bus is a good thing in terms of bandwidth and also latency.
As for your DMA comment it's actually better now. You can read from memory and feed to the I/O at the same time.
As for the dual-die issue, there is going to be redudant logic in the 2nd die. That's unavoidable. It's another independent processor. Moving the cores, cache, APICs and etc into a single die will save on some of the front end. If there is an internal crossbar between the cores [e.g. not the FSB] then it's even better.
The only benefit for Intel of the dual-die is so they can beat AMD to the punch with an inferior product. I mean it doesn't even have proper power saving support yet. You can buy that crap if you want. But personally I'll wait for a properly worked out quad-core before I decide to take the leap.
than uninformed asshats with a cause all in the name of "saving the children."
Why not protest the war or lack of education funding in the more poorer districts? I think children need more, oh I dunno, text books and trained staff than they need protection from "the boogie woogies" of video games...
Oh right, cuz the guy is a press whore no-talent assclown who just wants to be known as the biggest loser in the world./me loves me some video games...
Um, actually PCI/PCIE traffic ***IS*** memory bandwidth. Most devices on the market are memory mapped, and even those which art port based still use the same god damn bus. That all this is moved to an HT link and off the memory bus means you have more bandwidth.
Since you can't sort out even that little detail I'd like to just assume you're a clueless newb. Go hide now.
Damages change with the circumstances. If you can't prove they knowingly violated your patents sometimes all you can win is an injuction and court costs.
Usually for smaller companies patent issues never even get into courts, e.g.
At least for AMD they are going 65nm in their first quad-core so the die size will be comparable to the dual-core. HT links are used for PCI/PCIE devices too. Even in a single processor box you benefit from HT. That said in server setups HT links are gold because they are used for NUMA.
Anyways, I don't even know what we are discussing anymore. All I'm saying is dual-die == dumb, wait for a properly designed quad-core. That doesn't mean specifically AMD but hey if they hit it first all the power to them.
Intel's "me first" bullshit is not something professionals should be looking at. They're usually incomplete [e.g. reports that the power states are not fully supported in the dual-die are already coming out] and short lived. Their dual-core Core 2 Duo series are nice and worth a look if you are building a new box, but I'd stay away from the dual-die.
Who is saying a quad-core is larger than two dual-core dies? What I am saying is a dual-core die takes $X mm^2, a quad-core takes $X+$Y mm^2 and that $Y $X.
Otherwise, why would Intel EVER move to true dual-core or quad-core? Why not just put 4 dies on the processor?
Also HT links ARE memory bandwidth. I can access memory from another NUMA node via HT while simultaneously performing an operation in my process local node....
Don't bother replying. I don't really care that much for what you have to say.
Slashdot Mirror
AES-256 + disk encryption + password="mittens" == moot.
How about we train people who hold sensitive data on how to manage it?
There's a shocking cool idea...
Tom
I get the same thing with people telling me "oh click on this link it's funny" or whatever.
Truth be told, I bought my computer to do work. The fact that I can play games, movies, music and MythTV on it is just a bonus. Being able to *work* was the primary concern.
If people buy computers on the basis of whether it could run Flash or not they're probably the wrong people to own computers anyways.
Tom
It's called defamatory libel. S.298 of the CCC here in Canada :-)
Basically the CCC defines "what isn't" libel
- things that are resonably expected to be true
- of public interest [safety/concern not voyeurism]
- published within the boundaries of the laws of the land
If you knowingly publish, cause to be published, or otherwise produce something in print, radio, newspaper, television, etc, that causes loss, contempt, or harm to another, you may be found liable for libel.
Rumors are not specifically libel, if you can reasonably prove that people would have considered the rumor as not fact you are not guilty of libel. But you also would have to prove that it caused loss, contempt or harm [physical, property, etc].
If I say "Company $X sucks." and their stock price goes down, it could be that reasonable people decided for themselves based on the crap quality of the products produced by company $X.
on the otherhand, if I'm a trusted reviewer and I say "product $X is crap" without actually reviewing it and people change their buying habits as a result, that could be libel.
Tom
They do what?
I run 64-bit OSes on both my AMD and Intel boxes. Flash be damned for all I care.
Tom
I seem to recall using webcams and the like in 2000 over the interweb. Granted webcam != broadcast TV but the principle is the same just the scale is different.
/me hides in Canada...
How the hell isn't this patent just blatantly invalid?
Tom
Most people touting FLAC are not editing or mixing. They're just really impressed that they can waste space and pretend they can hear signals below the S/N levels. :-)
Tom
You can fill your drive with a few really really big rips, or be like me and fill it with many many quality rips.
"drives as big as they are" is no excuse unless you only plan on having like 50 albums in your collection...
Tom
Yeah, until you hit multi TiB collections then have to sort out how you backup, or transfer RAIDs when the drives are old.
Also, if you just encode it once you don't have to worry about "OMG I NEED A RM FILE!! OH NOES" cuz you already have an mp3 or m4a or whatever. Why would you need the same audio in more than one or two formats?
Tom
It depends on various things like your speakers/amp, sound card, room acoustics, noise floor, etc.
For most people lame with q=2 and 192kbps joint-stereo is as good as the original CD even with good acoutics and gear. 128kbps never cut it as far as I'm concerned for anything but portables or noisy environments. M4A is just a step up [e.g. better quality at the same bitrate] but even without it MP3 is fine.
The problem I have with storing mass amounts in FLAC is when I want to share or transfer the music it takes forever and you really have to plan ahead. I'd rather hack a stockpile of m4a's and just cp them as required.
Tom
And the percentage of people touting FLAC vs. the # of people doing mixing is?
I agree there are uses for FLAC [and the like]. I just disagree that most people need to use it [and thus require TB storage arrays].
Most people are probably like me, buy a CD or DVD, make a rip for their digital archive [e.g. multimedia box] and play it back in their homes or portables. I seriously doubt most people rip stuff then make a DJ mix, etc...
Tom
Use open source software.
... um ... if the 256kbps audio is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the original ... it might as well be the original. Sure the bits are different but the sound produced is perceptible as the same. I've re-coded stuff before for my portables and frankly I can't really tell the difference. Specially since you typically listen to portables in noisy environments where the noise floor masks most subtle noises.
As for going down in bitrate
Tom
If you can't hear the difference between a high bitrate m4a and the original ... does it matter?
That's the thing, the "difference" is only in your mind [not sensory]. Recall the whole point of psychoacoustic based encoders is they take advantage of the disparity of S/N ratios on various bands. If you have a 10dB masking on a given band, encoding it with full 96dB range [e.g. 16-bit PCM samples] doesn't make sense.
Imagine you can't see the colour red. Would adding more bits to the red channel make the picture better? If you can't hear that masked tone, adding more bits won't make it any better.
At the point where you are encoding at >=192kbps the encoder doesn't have to cut out resolution you can perceive so you're essentially home free.
Tom
VOBs are just MPEG-2 streams. Also nothing says you have to do your movie as one huge 15GB VOB. You could break it into 1GB parts and then delete the temps as you go.
...].
mencoder can transcode pretty much anything, unfortunately only into AVI [the MPG output sucks bad], but ffmpeg can do some other streams [notably though it doesn't like 5.1 AC3 streams though
Tom
You forgot the 16 channels of 192KHz 32-bit audio you need to. That's 84GiB on it's own!!! :-)
Tom
You don't need to store your audio as FLAC. Only weirdo audiophiles do that [unless you own the masters then it's ok]. Use 192 to 256kbps M4A and be done with. As for the movies, you should be able to convert ON THE FLY to DVD so you don't need to store uncompressed frames or whatever. As for the camera, just use high bitrate JPEG.
Unless you are publishing your audio, videos or photos you don't need a 100% representation. Often that 97% quality but 1/10th the size copy will be fine for your own enjoyment and use.
Tom
Well given that I don't speak German... and I can reasonably write English at at least a high school level, I'll say danka.
Can't we unite in hatred of Jack and stop picking on Tom?
Tom
mein english ist gude ya?
:-)
... [well that and proofreading and honestly who proofreads slashdot posts?]
At least I know enough to let people play videa games and not be disturbed.
psst, this is why editors exist
Tom
If you can both fetch data/code for the processor to crunch and feed your graphics card with GL commands then you win. It's not always about bandwidth but about bus availability. For instance, most processors go far underutilized as it is. But in the "crunch" times latency is king and being able to return a result quickly is more important. So moving the I/O devices off the memory bus is a good thing in terms of bandwidth and also latency.
As for your DMA comment it's actually better now. You can read from memory and feed to the I/O at the same time.
As for the dual-die issue, there is going to be redudant logic in the 2nd die. That's unavoidable. It's another independent processor. Moving the cores, cache, APICs and etc into a single die will save on some of the front end. If there is an internal crossbar between the cores [e.g. not the FSB] then it's even better.
The only benefit for Intel of the dual-die is so they can beat AMD to the punch with an inferior product. I mean it doesn't even have proper power saving support yet. You can buy that crap if you want. But personally I'll wait for a properly worked out quad-core before I decide to take the leap.
Tom
I wouldn't be so pedantic about my grammar. Your mother speaks far worse in the bed, at least she did last night.
Tom
than uninformed asshats with a cause all in the name of "saving the children."
/me loves me some video games...
Why not protest the war or lack of education funding in the more poorer districts? I think children need more, oh I dunno, text books and trained staff than they need protection from "the boogie woogies" of video games...
Oh right, cuz the guy is a press whore no-talent assclown who just wants to be known as the biggest loser in the world.
Tom
Um, actually PCI/PCIE traffic ***IS*** memory bandwidth. Most devices on the market are memory mapped, and even those which art port based still use the same god damn bus. That all this is moved to an HT link and off the memory bus means you have more bandwidth.
Since you can't sort out even that little detail I'd like to just assume you're a clueless newb. Go hide now.
Tom
Oh yeah, definitely for the license bit.
Bah, patents give Morbo gas.
Tom
Damages change with the circumstances. If you can't prove they knowingly violated your patents sometimes all you can win is an injuction and court costs.
Usually for smaller companies patent issues never even get into courts, e.g.
IP company: Stop using our IP
Victim: Okies.
Tom
At least for AMD they are going 65nm in their first quad-core so the die size will be comparable to the dual-core. HT links are used for PCI/PCIE devices too. Even in a single processor box you benefit from HT. That said in server setups HT links are gold because they are used for NUMA.
Anyways, I don't even know what we are discussing anymore. All I'm saying is dual-die == dumb, wait for a properly designed quad-core. That doesn't mean specifically AMD but hey if they hit it first all the power to them.
Intel's "me first" bullshit is not something professionals should be looking at. They're usually incomplete [e.g. reports that the power states are not fully supported in the dual-die are already coming out] and short lived. Their dual-core Core 2 Duo series are nice and worth a look if you are building a new box, but I'd stay away from the dual-die.
Tom
I think you are missing something...
...
Who is saying a quad-core is larger than two dual-core dies? What I am saying is a dual-core die takes $X mm^2, a quad-core takes $X+$Y mm^2 and that $Y $X.
Otherwise, why would Intel EVER move to true dual-core or quad-core? Why not just put 4 dies on the processor?
Also HT links ARE memory bandwidth. I can access memory from another NUMA node via HT while simultaneously performing an operation in my process local node.
Don't bother replying. I don't really care that much for what you have to say.
Tom