I know you were just kidding about this, but if you check out Operation Acoustic Kitty (from an earlier/. story), you'll see this is just what happened to the CIA team in charge of turning a cat into a surveilance device - their "prototype" kitten was run over by a taxicab on it's maiden outing.
I've always wondered what will happen to companies that write commercial compilers and/or tutorials for writing programming code (whether it be C++, C, Basic, whatever) if Palladium becomes the standard. Will the computer enthusiast be able to write (and thus learn) new programming languages? I find it hard to believe that a compiler could digitally sign all code, and thus it would be impossible for the average Joe to write a "Hello World." I remember writing my first program (a blackjack game, I believe) in 4th grade in Visual Basic. Isn't that how most (if not all) computer professionals got in the business? Will self-discovery and self-learning be possible anymore?
I suspect these little quarrels between ICANN, South Africa, and other groups are harbingers of major DNS conflicts in the future. For example, what if Microsoft, instead of South Africa, demanded a particular TLD?
This sounds similar to something that equally evil corporate behemoth Clear Channel attempted / is attempting with the.cc domain. Check an article here.
The city lights also automatically turn on/off via an X10 cronjob on my home Linux server.
Methinks they'll be off for awhile under once the/. effect's been unleashed on that poor server.
Now, really, I see this taking the place of Beta, MiniDV, and D8 in the content-creation field. It could be rather good for them, because it provides digital video (something Beta doesn't) along with HD support, something MiniDV and D8 can't.
Looking at the cost of media ($35-45 a tape) and equipment ($2k+ a deck), it's safe to assume that should this format flourish anytime soon, it will do so in the high-end consumer / low-end professional market.
Unfortunately, the features just aren't there.
First of all, no professional HD camera maker will ever support D-VHS. Why would one pay big money for a HD camera only to have it support a lossy compression scheme?
How about consumer cameras? There really is no point in using D-VHS over Digital8 or MiniDV when dealing with regular, consumer grade cameras (non-HD) - it's more expensive, bulkier (keep in mind how LARGE vhs tapes are!), unproven, and compressed!
I don't see it taking off in the archival market, either, as no one serious about video would ever archive footage on a lossy compression scheme or with media as susceptable to wear and tear VHS.
Wouldn't some sort of optical solution be much easier to successfully implement?
True. For some reason "GigaWire" sounds more like a Transformers name than a piece of up-and-coming technology.
That, and it's an anagram of iGag Wire, Apple's newest "human-interface" product.
When I was a consultant for the US Army Corps of Engineers, they used KPMG. KPMG would do a monthly scan of the network and send us a report for changes we needed to make on servers and workstations. I think they also used them for the backbone network services, but not 100% sure.
It was also KPMG, I believe, that once tried to enforce a policy through litigation that prevented anyone from linking to their website (not to mention their now infamous "theme song"). I think I'd look elsewhere.
I spent a few years and well over a thousand dollars struggling with this same problem. I finally realized that analog video capture simply does not work.
A key issue with many boards is bandwidth. The general idea is that one hooks the RCA / S-video outputs of your VCR/TV/Camera into the computer, and it does the rest. The problem, for many boards (I don't know about this Creative setup specifically - although it seems to be taxing on the processor, if nothing else) is that this conversion either (a) if done well, takes an enormous amount of resources, or (b) must be done poorly.
The other big problem, and one which seems to be the case here, is compression. For some reason I have never encountered an analog capture board that saves its video in consolidated, lossless files. For my personal work, small, compressed 320x240 files simply do not cut it.
The best way I've found to turn you computer into a digital VCR is to purchase a digital video camera with RCA / S-video inputs. Record your source to the camera and then send it via firewire to your computer. The incoming signal is entirely digital - all your computer has to do is save it to disk. As far as file format goes, there exists a standard DV format (for Windows, at least) that allows lossless compression without the file shenanigans of this Creative board (and most others).
Just my 2 cents.
I don't think people were kidding when they wondered aloud yesterday whether Slashdot was taking some sort of promotional kickback for their stories.
I'm honestly not being troll, but after seeing "ads" for Provigil, the Nomad Jukebox 3, Vonage VoIP, Compuserve 7.0, and now UT 2003 (not to mention a vaporous product from Transmeta) all within about thirty-six HOURS of each other, I can't help but wonder if this is a sign of the economic times.
Not that I'd have a problem if that turns out to be the case - but the truth would be nice.
Perhaps it's time for a change of slogan. Slashdot: Stuff for Nerds. News that matters.
It's a balancing act between losing your good name and generating revenue efficiently.
I think you meant to say "between keeping your good name and generating revenue efficiently" - otherwise I'd say there'd be little to "balance";).
I mean, how does the glass know when the drinker has drunk enough for the night?
Actually, it's possible that by analyzing the rate of change of the amount of beer in the glass with respect to time, the glass could pretty effectively guess when it's enough. Granted, my personal experiences may be far from the norm, but I'd bet the following system would work:
if dV/dt > C (where V = volume of beer in the glass, and C is a fixed constant), then the glass should be refilled (i.e.: the drinker quickly consumed the beer at a rate indicitive of their thirstiness).
However, if dV/dt is less than C, then the glass should not be refilled (either (a) the drinker is nursing the beer, in which case they're in no hurry to be filled up anyways or (b) they're intoxicated enough to have to slow down a bit).
Ah, the joys of alcohol calculus. Breathes new life into the cliche phrase "friends don't let friends drink and derive.":)
This means that all those companies that send me spam are bound to help me lose weight, reduce my debt, and work in the comfort of my own home!
This is terrific!
I can't get to the specs page for this particular PDA (it's/.ed) but I can only imagine that it's no more than 1.3 megapixels.
In fact, it's actually much worse than this. According to the article, it features a.1 megapixel (100,000 pixels max resolution) camera capable of, at most, a 320x240 image.
I absolutely agree with you. This is the same concept that's doomed many an "all-in-one" electronic device (be it a computer, a video game console, etc.): it's far better to excel at just one thing than to be mediocre at many.
Would you pay >$400 US for a 10mb MP3 player that takes digital pictures on par with a circa-1997 webcam? I know I wouldn't.
Furthermore, with Flexplay, there is no need to hook up a telephone line to your player, no need to provide credit card information to anyone and selection is not limited to a small set of stores and titles.
That's cause... there aren't any stores or titles, as of yet.
"Broadcast Quality" is a meaningless term. [...] for broadcast, dvd is better than anything you'll see on TV.
The FCC requires all on-air programming to conform to a strict definition of "broadcast quality", one which has absolutely nothing to do with the downstream picture you see on TV, cable, satellite, etc. This definition involves a series of quantifications (luminance s/n ratio, chroma s/n, resolution, differential gain, differential phase, subcarrier color framing, RS-170A sync, comb filtered inputs, subcarrier frequency drift, multiburst response or bandwidth) that are best highlighted when viewed under a vectorscope or a wavescope.
No, DVD's are not "broadcast quality."
Yeah, that's a great idea. Take away the only legal way to use Photoshop / Premiere / Pagemaker, etc., and that'll really curb piracy.
What does Adobe expect - people will just stop editing images? People will stop publishing.pdf's? Now they're going to have to steal copies of the software, even if they wanted to pay for it!
*I realize that there are other programs to edit all kinds of documents, but, as Windows has shown, people have a tendency to want to stick with the software they've originally learned.
Slashdot Mirror
I know you were just kidding about this, but if you check out Operation Acoustic Kitty (from an earlier /. story), you'll see this is just what happened to the CIA team in charge of turning a cat into a surveilance device - their "prototype" kitten was run over by a taxicab on it's maiden outing.
Well, if Win2k was NT5, and WinXP is NT6, then I suppose it's due time that the next generation NT7 makes it's "impact" on the world.
I've always wondered what will happen to companies that write commercial compilers and/or tutorials for writing programming code (whether it be C++, C, Basic, whatever) if Palladium becomes the standard.
Will the computer enthusiast be able to write (and thus learn) new programming languages? I find it hard to believe that a compiler could digitally sign all code, and thus it would be impossible for the average Joe to write a "Hello World."
I remember writing my first program (a blackjack game, I believe) in 4th grade in Visual Basic. Isn't that how most (if not all) computer professionals got in the business? Will self-discovery and self-learning be possible anymore?
Google.com Search
Web | Images | Groups | Directory
Searched the web for Dirty Tricks of Presentors. Results 1 - 2 of 2. Search took 0.57 seconds.
Did you mean: Dirty Tricks of Presenters
Sony's PlayStation business currently generates around 60% of the firm's profits. That figure has exceeded 100% at times.
Huh?
But Al Gore lives in Tennessee!
I suspect these little quarrels between ICANN, South Africa, and other groups are harbingers of major DNS conflicts in the future. For example, what if Microsoft, instead of South Africa, demanded a particular TLD? .cc domain. Check an article here.
This sounds similar to something that equally evil corporate behemoth Clear Channel attempted / is attempting with the
The city lights also automatically turn on/off via an X10 cronjob on my home Linux server. /. effect's been unleashed on that poor server.
Methinks they'll be off for awhile under once the
Now, really, I see this taking the place of Beta, MiniDV, and D8 in the content-creation field. It could be rather good for them, because it provides digital video (something Beta doesn't) along with HD support, something MiniDV and D8 can't.
Looking at the cost of media ($35-45 a tape) and equipment ($2k+ a deck), it's safe to assume that should this format flourish anytime soon, it will do so in the high-end consumer / low-end professional market.
Unfortunately, the features just aren't there.
First of all, no professional HD camera maker will ever support D-VHS. Why would one pay big money for a HD camera only to have it support a lossy compression scheme?
How about consumer cameras? There really is no point in using D-VHS over Digital8 or MiniDV when dealing with regular, consumer grade cameras (non-HD) - it's more expensive, bulkier (keep in mind how LARGE vhs tapes are!), unproven, and compressed!
I don't see it taking off in the archival market, either, as no one serious about video would ever archive footage on a lossy compression scheme or with media as susceptable to wear and tear VHS.
Wouldn't some sort of optical solution be much easier to successfully implement?
Reminds me a bit of a chapter in the 1991 Honda Accord's user manual, entitled "Shitting the Five Speed."
Yes, that's free as in Û"Äèܽ.
True. For some reason "GigaWire" sounds more like a Transformers name than a piece of up-and-coming technology.
That, and it's an anagram of iGag Wire, Apple's newest "human-interface" product.
"We call it the traffic jam," said Bill Blume, mission design manager
We call it the slashdot effect.
When I was a consultant for the US Army Corps of Engineers, they used KPMG. KPMG would do a monthly scan of the network and send us a report for changes we needed to make on servers and workstations. I think they also used them for the backbone network services, but not 100% sure.
It was also KPMG, I believe, that once tried to enforce a policy through litigation that prevented anyone from linking to their website (not to mention their now infamous "theme song"). I think I'd look elsewhere.
I spent a few years and well over a thousand dollars struggling with this same problem. I finally realized that analog video capture simply does not work.
A key issue with many boards is bandwidth. The general idea is that one hooks the RCA / S-video outputs of your VCR/TV/Camera into the computer, and it does the rest. The problem, for many boards (I don't know about this Creative setup specifically - although it seems to be taxing on the processor, if nothing else) is that this conversion either (a) if done well, takes an enormous amount of resources, or (b) must be done poorly.
The other big problem, and one which seems to be the case here, is compression. For some reason I have never encountered an analog capture board that saves its video in consolidated, lossless files. For my personal work, small, compressed 320x240 files simply do not cut it.
The best way I've found to turn you computer into a digital VCR is to purchase a digital video camera with RCA / S-video inputs. Record your source to the camera and then send it via firewire to your computer. The incoming signal is entirely digital - all your computer has to do is save it to disk. As far as file format goes, there exists a standard DV format (for Windows, at least) that allows lossless compression without the file shenanigans of this Creative board (and most others).
Just my 2 cents.
I don't think people were kidding when they wondered aloud yesterday whether Slashdot was taking some sort of promotional kickback for their stories.
I'm honestly not being troll, but after seeing "ads" for Provigil, the Nomad Jukebox 3, Vonage VoIP, Compuserve 7.0, and now UT 2003 (not to mention a vaporous product from Transmeta) all within about thirty-six HOURS of each other, I can't help but wonder if this is a sign of the economic times.
Not that I'd have a problem if that turns out to be the case - but the truth would be nice.
Perhaps it's time for a change of slogan. Slashdot: Stuff for Nerds. News that matters.
It's a balancing act between losing your good name and generating revenue efficiently. ;).
I think you meant to say "between keeping your good name and generating revenue efficiently" - otherwise I'd say there'd be little to "balance"
I mean, how does the glass know when the drinker has drunk enough for the night? :)
Actually, it's possible that by analyzing the rate of change of the amount of beer in the glass with respect to time, the glass could pretty effectively guess when it's enough. Granted, my personal experiences may be far from the norm, but I'd bet the following system would work:
if dV/dt > C (where V = volume of beer in the glass, and C is a fixed constant), then the glass should be refilled (i.e.: the drinker quickly consumed the beer at a rate indicitive of their thirstiness).
However, if dV/dt is less than C, then the glass should not be refilled (either (a) the drinker is nursing the beer, in which case they're in no hurry to be filled up anyways or (b) they're intoxicated enough to have to slow down a bit).
Ah, the joys of alcohol calculus. Breathes new life into the cliche phrase "friends don't let friends drink and derive."
This means that all those companies that send me spam are bound to help me lose weight, reduce my debt, and work in the comfort of my own home!
This is terrific!
I can't get to the specs page for this particular PDA (it's /.ed) but I can only imagine that it's no more than 1.3 megapixels.
.1 megapixel (100,000 pixels max resolution) camera capable of, at most, a 320x240 image.
In fact, it's actually much worse than this. According to the article, it features a
I absolutely agree with you. This is the same concept that's doomed many an "all-in-one" electronic device (be it a computer, a video game console, etc.): it's far better to excel at just one thing than to be mediocre at many.
Would you pay >$400 US for a 10mb MP3 player that takes digital pictures on par with a circa-1997 webcam? I know I wouldn't.
Nothing I can say except wow.
Yeah, that's about the same thing palminfocenter.com is saying right now...
"...eleven-thousand hits in HOW LONG??!!"
How long until this site itself gets it's own Cease and Desist for whatever unfounded reason?
Surprisingly, it's already happened.
Furthermore, with Flexplay, there is no need to hook up a telephone line to your player, no need to provide credit card information to anyone and selection is not limited to a small set of stores and titles.
That's cause... there aren't any stores or titles, as of yet.
"Broadcast Quality" is a meaningless term. [...] for broadcast, dvd is better than anything you'll see on TV.
The FCC requires all on-air programming to conform to a strict definition of "broadcast quality", one which has absolutely nothing to do with the downstream picture you see on TV, cable, satellite, etc. This definition involves a series of quantifications (luminance s/n ratio, chroma s/n, resolution, differential gain, differential phase, subcarrier color framing, RS-170A sync, comb filtered inputs, subcarrier frequency drift, multiburst response or bandwidth) that are best highlighted when viewed under a vectorscope or a wavescope.
No, DVD's are not "broadcast quality."
Yeah, that's a great idea. Take away the only legal way to use Photoshop / Premiere / Pagemaker, etc., and that'll really curb piracy. .pdf's? Now they're going to have to steal copies of the software, even if they wanted to pay for it!
What does Adobe expect - people will just stop editing images? People will stop publishing
*I realize that there are other programs to edit all kinds of documents, but, as Windows has shown, people have a tendency to want to stick with the software they've originally learned.