Wouldn't doing the deinterlacing before encoding give much better compression ratios?
It usually does...it's what I do when I reencode my TiVo rips to burn them to SVCD. I didn't know if it could be done on-the-fly, but another poster has already answered that question.
Interesting...but it costs more than my car, and it doesn't look like it'd fit too well into a 5.25" drive bay. Blank costs were a bit on the high side (though not as bad as DVD-R{AM}, at least), and I'm guessing it only records @ 1x.:-)
If I had the $$$, it looks like it'd be a fun gadget to have. Until then, my 12x10x32 Lite-On will have to do.
Standard broadcast tv is low resolution and interlaced. Putting progressive component ports on this thing implies display of something higher quality.
They could be doing on-the-fly deinterlacing, either in recording or (more likely) on playback. Some of the bigger TVs already do this...mainly HD monitors, IIRC (sometimes, they also throw in line doubling as an added bonus).
Inverse 3:2 pulldown would also be cool (it would enable higher-quality recording as your framerate falls from 29.97 to 23.976 while your bitrate stays the same), but I don't know how you could detect whether you should attempt it. It would only work for stuff that originated on film...stuff that never hits film, like news, sports, and soaps, would be screwed up if you applied inverse 3:2 pulldown to it.
Your records will still be playable long after your CD's have become obsolete.
The needle doesn't track too well when you're driving, though. Also, you can't burn your own records (at least I haven't seen any "Vinyl-Recordable" or "Vinyl-ReWritable" drives for sale lately).
(FWIW, I usually don't play CDs in the car either...tape is good enough, is easier to handle, and you don't have to worry about scratching it.)
I got 45,000 requests on the 2nd day (first full day). I think each attack has something like 7 requests in it, checking for various ways in, not just one.
The SQL query that extracts the count from my logfiles only looks for one type of activity. I said something about needing to fix the query to consider the other requests Nimda makes back when it first hit, but I never got around to it.
At least the 'net so far today doesn't seem to be bogged down like it was when Nimda first hit...
Ditto...I'm up to nearly 13k hits logged since Nimda began, vs. a bit under 10k Code Red hits. The weird bit is that the number of Nimda-infected hosts is much lower...400 vs. 3500 for Code Red. Maybe it spends so much time banging away at the same system that it doesn't spread itself as effectively as Code Red.
The departmental colors (Red = Command, Blue = Medical, Gold = Engineering/Security) are present in the piping on the otherwise staid blue uniforms. In other words, the guys with the Gold piping are gonna get smoked.
You're thinking of TNG/DS9/Voyager colors. Enterprise is using TOS colors, which means red and gold are swapped around.
I didn't say the CPUs were faulty; I simply stated that *I'm* not buying them if there's a risk of the mobo going up in flames just because my dog may have knocked the case over.
Hmm...how about locating your computer such that your dog can't knock it over? Never mind what might happen if the processor heat sink fell off (not likely anyway, if it's properly installed); your computer's hard drive is not likely to be happy with that kind of treatment, especially if it's spun up when the computer is knocked over. One of mine is in a closet (where every server belongs); the others are either sandwiched between the desk and the printer stand, stacked next to the desk, or on top of the desk.
That's funny, I don't. In fact, if cost is an issue you shouldn't be. Use Pricewatch man. I'm sure that you'll find that the difference is sufficiently more than $7.00 dollars.
The last time I checked (which was admittedly a while ago), Crucial beat nearly everyone else's price for DDR SDRAM. While the Pricewatch vendors have since lowered their prices (256MB PC2100 registered starting at $38 vs. $41 at Crucial), it's anyone's guess whose parts they usually use. Even if a Pricewatch vendor advertises its product as Micron memory, it's probably just Micron's chips on who-knows-whose board. Last time I checked, Crucial sold DIMMs that were completely assembled by Micron...chips, boards, everything.
Factor in the free 2nd-day shipping and it looks like Crucial is still cheaper overall.
(No, I don't work for Crucial or Micron...but I've bought from them on more than one occasion and don't see myself buying memory from other vendors anytime in the near future.)
Yes, but the specs call for the 5V to be able to kick out at least 30A. I don't know if this can happen with a "standard" supply. Anyone who knows more about power supplies wish to comment on the current capability of the 5V node?
You'll need to check the specs for your particular power supply. For instance, the Enermax EG365P-VE that I'm currently using is rated for 32A on both +3.3 and +5. If you have one of the "name-brand" power supplies, tracking down specs for it shouldn't be too difficult.
at least not here in St. Louis...Our local "we run anything we want, but claim to be WB" network has Enterprise debuting Saturday...they also have rights to run other "UPN" shows, like WWF Smackdown...
It's probably just an arrangement similar to what was done with Voyager in areas where there's no UPN affiliate...sell it to one of the other stations in first-run syndication, like was done with TNG and DS9.
BUT... the Navy doesnt fly (through air OR space, it doesnt matter). perhaps starfleet is some kind of Air Navy? =)
Those sure aren't Air Force jets taking off of and landing on aircraft carriers.
A photo ran with an article recently on one of the news sites (don't remember which one). The article was about the Air Force ramping up in the Middle East. The photo that was run with the article was of an F-14 taking off from an aircraft carrier.
Morons.
(Then again, they probably figure most people wouldn't know any better...and in that, they're probably right.)
Says who? The F-111s at at least one base in England in the mid-80s all had names. Some even had nose art, though none of it was as risque as what got painted onto fighters and bombers during WWII.
I'll allow that not all of 'em get names (maybe the squids don't name any of theirs; as an Air Force brat, I wouldn't know), but to state that none are named is inaccurate.
That said, the rest of your post is accurate enough.
Unless you have the reference image, you're screwed. Changing RGB values by 0 or 1 will not be detectable, and will easily blend in with the noise of most images.
The only thing you can't do is compress the image with JPEG or other "lossy" compression routines.
Applying steganographic encoding to an image before JPEG compression wouldn't work too well, but it should be possible to apply it after compression. You could hide your data in the low bit or two of the DC coefficients without noticeable degradation. It might even be possible to use the lower-frequency AC coefficients, though I don't know if I would want to bet on it (haven't looked into it too closely). Your payload won't be too great (assuming that chroma is decimated 2:1 on both axes and that you use only the low bit of each DC component, that's only six bits per 256 pixels), but it could work well enough for short messages.
Maybe if they can get enough cars to come with the hardware preinstalled, they have a shot.
IIRC, the Big 3 have partnerships with XM and Sirius, so it's possible that your next car will be suitably equipped for one of these. XM has signed up GM as a partner, while Sirius has signed up Ford and DaimlerChrysler.
That said, it would still take several years for any significant percentage of cars to have a satellite-radio receiver, as most sane people don't "upgrade" their cars on the same schedule that they upgrade their computers.
"Søren" would be more correct, as not everybody uses the same character set.
The document character set for HTML 4 is the Universal Character Set, the character set defined by ISO 10646 and by Unicode.
The document character set for a particular page, HTML 4 or otherwise, is whatever is set by the page's creator in the Content-Type meta tag. For my personal site, for instance, the document character set is US ASCII...and it validates as HTML 4.01 Strict with this selection. There might be a default setting...the charset parameter is optional. While the default character set for HTML 4.x might be UCS, the default character set for HTTP is ISO-8859-1. This would indicate that you should include a charset parameter in the Content-Type meta tag, in which case neither of the defaults (for HTML or HTTP) will come into play.
(FWIW,/. doesn't specify a character set. They're using HTML 3.2, which would appear to default to ISO-8859-1. I've seen Japanese characters show up in some people's sigs, though...or was that K5? They're using HTML 4.0 Transitional...)
Quick hint: use the source, Luke (Of the original/. page, that is) (ALT F3 in Opera):
Søren
"Søren" would be more correct, as not everybody uses the same character set. Whatever browser and OS you're using, it should render correctly (or as close as possible). This should render correctly on any browser: Søren. (It also keeps you from having to do keyboard gymnastics (such as Alt-0248) to enter foreign-language characters.)
This is not ex post facto because the acts performed
were crimes at the time they were committed.
<devils-advocate>
Assuming for the moment that somebody in the distant past did commit some sort of computer crime that was on the books at the time (or any other crime, for that matter), if the statute of limitations has already expired, wouldn't conjuring up a law to extend/abolish the statute of limitations for the purpose (express or implied) of going after such an individual still run afoul of something? If not the prohibition on ex post facto laws, isn't there something else that would apply? </devils-advocate>
(IANAL, of course, so I could be completely off-base on this.)
I propose a new Constitutional amendment. The Three-Constitutional Strikes And You're Out amendment. If an elected official votes for three laws that are later found unconstitutional (no statue of limitation, applied retroactively), they are kicked out of office and barred from all government work for life.
Take it a step further...since they've worked to deny us our rights, deny them theirs. Getting kicked out of elected office under such an amendment ought to count the same as a felony conviction or a dishonorable discharge, and should have the same losses—no vote, no guns, etc.
As someone else has already pointed out, though, your idea makes too much sense to ever become law.:-?
As a "Federal terrorism offense," the five year statute of limitations for hacking would be abolished retroactively -- allowing computer crimes committed decades ago to be prosecuted today
This can't be the case...haven't the people who thought this up run across this passage before?
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
You can't prosecute an action that wasn't a crime at the time the action occurred. Then again, with the body blows the Constitution has taken in recent times (mainly in various parts of the Bill of Rights, especially the First, Second, and Tenth Amendments), maybe the drafters of this legislation haven't run across this passage before.
Try doing that on a fresh NT4 install...it doesn't work so well with IE2 (which is what's in a fresh NT4 install). www.microsoft.com won't even come up in IE2, so you have to download a newer browser on another box (preferably another NT box or Win9x; you can't use Win2K as it won't let you download all the files to a directory for a later installation) and somehow transfer it to the new server (CD-R or FTP will work). Before that, you have to install SP3, though...and again, you'll need to download that on another machine.
I'll agree that once you get IE4+ going, Windows Update makes keeping a server up-to-date ridiculously easy. Getting the server to the point where it will work with Windows Update can be a minor pain, though.
His site is unreadable to visitors using NS 4.0x...
Dan, please make your website complaint [enough] with standards so that all browsers can at least see the basic text.
Seeing as how Nutscrape has a problem implementing standards properly (its CSS implementation blows goats), I don't see how you could do more than a basic design without either (1) breaking all the rules to make a site that renders properly in Nutscrape or (2) make a site that follows established standards, and screw the people (both of them) who are still using Nutscrape 4.x.
A third way would be to detect the browser and send either a standards-compliant page or a "lobotomized-for-Nutscrape" page. I did this in the redesign of this commercial site and refined it a bit further when I redid my personal site. It's not that I personally care if people who continue using outdated, buggy software can access my site...for the dot-com site, accessibility was considered important enough to figure out a work-around.
Here's a test for you: pull up my site in Nutscrape 4.x and in another browser (Mozilla, IE, Lynx, Opera...it doesn't matter). Save the returned HTML (grab the stylesheet, too) to a file somewhere on your webserver and have W3C's validator check both. You'll see that one validates as HTML 4.01 Strict, while the other doesn't validate as anything. Now load the page that validated properly into Nutscrape and tell me what you get. It's a mess, isn't it? It displayed just fine in your other browser, though (unless your other browser was IE 2 or something similarly ancient).
That's the theory but it isn't all that easy to implement for the small guys, or all that cheap unless you go high volume. It makes Apple's old ADB look simple. To sell a USB device it requires a $2000+ (or something like that) per year membership to get unique manufacterer & device IDs and get compatibility testing in order to use the logo.
So much for rolling your own USB devices, unless you intend to just grab some (hopefully) unused ID and hope for the best. With that kind of roadblock, is it any wonder that serial and parallel ports are still with us? At least you can still roll your own parallel-port EPROM burner without getting bent over.
(Yes, I know that two large isn't a big deal for an established hardware vendor...but what about someone who just does this stuff as a hobby? Oh, I forgot...the average Joe isn't expected to actually create stuff; he's only expected to consume whatever is made available, and to be grateful for it.)
The speed of the bus in a computer is a big point these days. Processors and RAM are getting so fast that now the limiting factor on overall speed is the device that moves data around in a computer: the bus.
Indeed. Gigabit Ethernet is close to the theoretical maximum bandwidth for 32-bit 33-MHz PCI. IEEE-1394b is more than triple that speed, which would put it well beyond what ordinary PCI can deliver. Does this mean that this new flavor of FireWire will require 64-bit 66-MHz PCI (rarely seen outside servers and workstations), or will it sit on some other bus (such as HyperTransport)?
Slashdot Mirror
If I had the $$$, it looks like it'd be a fun gadget to have. Until then, my 12x10x32 Lite-On will have to do.
Inverse 3:2 pulldown would also be cool (it would enable higher-quality recording as your framerate falls from 29.97 to 23.976 while your bitrate stays the same), but I don't know how you could detect whether you should attempt it. It would only work for stuff that originated on film...stuff that never hits film, like news, sports, and soaps, would be screwed up if you applied inverse 3:2 pulldown to it.
(FWIW, I usually don't play CDs in the car either...tape is good enough, is easier to handle, and you don't have to worry about scratching it.)
At least the 'net so far today doesn't seem to be bogged down like it was when Nimda first hit...
Ditto...I'm up to nearly 13k hits logged since Nimda began, vs. a bit under 10k Code Red hits. The weird bit is that the number of Nimda-infected hosts is much lower...400 vs. 3500 for Code Red. Maybe it spends so much time banging away at the same system that it doesn't spread itself as effectively as Code Red.
Factor in the free 2nd-day shipping and it looks like Crucial is still cheaper overall.
(No, I don't work for Crucial or Micron...but I've bought from them on more than one occasion and don't see myself buying memory from other vendors anytime in the near future.)
Morons.
(Then again, they probably figure most people wouldn't know any better...and in that, they're probably right.)
I'll allow that not all of 'em get names (maybe the squids don't name any of theirs; as an Air Force brat, I wouldn't know), but to state that none are named is inaccurate.
That said, the rest of your post is accurate enough.
That said, it would still take several years for any significant percentage of cars to have a satellite-radio receiver, as most sane people don't "upgrade" their cars on the same schedule that they upgrade their computers.
(FWIW, /. doesn't specify a character set. They're using HTML 3.2, which would appear to default to ISO-8859-1. I've seen Japanese characters show up in some people's sigs, though...or was that K5? They're using HTML 4.0 Transitional...)
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/sgml/entities.html#h-24 .2.1
Assuming for the moment that somebody in the distant past did commit some sort of computer crime that was on the books at the time (or any other crime, for that matter), if the statute of limitations has already expired, wouldn't conjuring up a law to extend/abolish the statute of limitations for the purpose (express or implied) of going after such an individual still run afoul of something? If not the prohibition on ex post facto laws, isn't there something else that would apply?
</devils-advocate>
(IANAL, of course, so I could be completely off-base on this.)
As someone else has already pointed out, though, your idea makes too much sense to ever become law. :-?
I'll agree that once you get IE4+ going, Windows Update makes keeping a server up-to-date ridiculously easy. Getting the server to the point where it will work with Windows Update can be a minor pain, though.
A third way would be to detect the browser and send either a standards-compliant page or a "lobotomized-for-Nutscrape" page. I did this in the redesign of this commercial site and refined it a bit further when I redid my personal site. It's not that I personally care if people who continue using outdated, buggy software can access my site...for the dot-com site, accessibility was considered important enough to figure out a work-around.
Here's a test for you: pull up my site in Nutscrape 4.x and in another browser (Mozilla, IE, Lynx, Opera...it doesn't matter). Save the returned HTML (grab the stylesheet, too) to a file somewhere on your webserver and have W3C's validator check both. You'll see that one validates as HTML 4.01 Strict, while the other doesn't validate as anything. Now load the page that validated properly into Nutscrape and tell me what you get. It's a mess, isn't it? It displayed just fine in your other browser, though (unless your other browser was IE 2 or something similarly ancient).
(Yes, I know that two large isn't a big deal for an established hardware vendor...but what about someone who just does this stuff as a hobby? Oh, I forgot...the average Joe isn't expected to actually create stuff; he's only expected to consume whatever is made available, and to be grateful for it.)