But with the proposed scheme, those rules could be circumvented by creating a new station for each user -- If the song is selected by only one person, that's not necessarily a democracy.
VOIP and related technology use loss-full technologies. That is, the sound quality will be degraded when using the to transmit, in favor if better bandwidth utilization.
I wouldn't rely on 802.11x giving you the bandwidth that you need either. But if the current budget that you're looking at is $25000, you could adopt a more versitile solution at a lower cost.
That is, you could purchase a single-board computer with an integrated ethernet card for about $400, a good sound card for about about $200, a large notebook hard drive for about $100, and then a few hundred dollars on a decent mic.
Each system would record one audio track as a cost of $750-1250 each. They would all operated independently, and at the end of the session they could easily be connected (via ethernet or 802.11x) to a central server for mastering. That way you don't have to worry about the bandwith. With a 40GB hard drive, each system could record quite a few thousand hours of audio without any loss of sound quality.
I have a Frontpath Progear (now owned by Sonic Blue). It uses a 400MHz Crusoe processor. They haven't made them in the last year or two, but you can still pick them up for a few hundred dollars on Ebay (I paid a little under $400 for mine about a year ago). Many of them came preinstalled with Slackware, so getting Linux to run on them isn't an issue.
Lets face it: we're all nerds. We like the flexibility of the toaster being able to talk to both the refrigerator and the washing machine without any collisions.
I have had a Twiddler (made by Handkey) for about a year now. It is a one-handed keyboard and mouse. It has worked well for me, and I wonder why this article proclaims the technology to be so prohibitive.
The Twiddler has 15 keys. You press any combination of three keys to type any character or series of characters. It's a little bit slow, but it works well. As for the mouse, the Twiddler had a stub-style pointer often found on laptops.
I can get speeds about as fast as on my desktop with my Twiddler. I have to hit 3 keys to type "A", but I also hit 3 keys to type my name, "Drew Bradford."
The Twiddler did cost me almost $200, so I can see how a lower-priced option would appeal to consumers, but the technology and products themselves have been on the market for quite some time.
From looking at their website, I cannot tell what kind of pricing they will offer. It seems to me that it will be a part of their normal "wireless web" pricing, which can be gotten with about 4000 monthly minutes for about $60. That doesn't seem so bad for a 140kbps wireless net connection.
Which operating systems have good support for dual or tri displays? I've used two and three displays with X Windows on Linux, with multiple single-head video cards. I found that it can be a little troublesome to set up, but it can do all sorts of crazy things once you set it up. (you can even have one monitor as a "preview window" that enlarges a section of the other screen to fit its screen. Which Windows operating systems can support multiple monitors on multiple video cards? How well do they work?
On the contrary, 'T' is the third key to the right of 'W'. While certainly it could have been closer, for instance: 'Q', 'S' and 'R' are all immediately adjacent to 'W', I believe that it is certainly possible to mistakenly hit 'W' when intending to hit 'T', and vice versa.
Those are the very same agreements that I mean. I don't know to what extent they exist right now, but they certainly allowed Microsoft to get quite a large market share in the desktop market.
Re:I'm pretty happy
on
Is Linux Dead?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"Still, Linux evangelists like Fedor say that, as long as new PCs come pre-loaded with Windows, the open source community faces an uphill battle spreading Linux beyond corporate IT departments into the home."
Maybe the Microsoft partnerships and service agreements that prohibited retailers from selling computers preinstalled with non-MS operating systems had something to do with it.
But that link doesn't point to a software solution at all. That's a hardware device, and it doesn't do noise/echo cancelling, it does videoconferencing. I'm sorry to say that you're a little off.
I have no problem with this if it's going to cut the cost. I am only mortally against it if there will not be open source drivers. Of course, Microsoft wouldn't want open source drivers/interpretation software, but with a big enough push from consumers, software developers, hardware manufacturers, etc., an open standard is certainly possible.
There is no doubt that the human brrain is better at the "fuzzy stuff" than a computer is, but computers aren't always as bad at it as some people think.
I know that there are a lot of "intelligent" matching algorithms now being developed and deployed that can see patterns even with distortion. I have heard rumors of some facial recognition software that was being considered for deployal at O'Hare International Airport last year (I don't know if it actually was or not), but the technology seemed to be proficient at picking up criminals/suspects even if they did some altering of their facial features, such as grow a beard, wear thick glasses, or get a tan.
My point is that certainly the human brain is better at picking up the "fuzzy stuff", but computers are getting better and better at it.
I know that for the last 2 or 3 years, my school has had a program called Interactive Physics. While it seems like it may be a little more basic than this program, the concept seems to be the same.
While I admit that I only have a little experience using it, from what I do know, using Interactive Physics, students can draw shapes on the screen, assign them physical properties, and then start the program and watch the animation that results.
What is the big difference that causes this program to merit an article and posting of its own? The major difference that I see between the two programs is that Interactive Physics only supports 2D animations (to the best of my knowledge), while the program mentioned in the aticle supports three.
I believe that you must also take in the context in which such things are said. It is legal to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, as long as doing so doesn't cause the death and destruction that is typically associated with mass hysteria.
It seems to me that he did clearly do things to encourage violence, but if his encouragement was unsuccessful, and he did not in fact cause violence, then his actions are definitely protected under the First Amendment.
I realize the irony in that if his speech is in vain, then it's legal, but we have to look at the consequences of such speech before we dispense punishments.
Did this study look at just standard Linux distro? Like standard installs of RH, or did it look at hardened versions designed to be secure? It seems to me that there are certainly extremely secure hardened versions of Linux, while Windows is generally limited to relatively standard installations.
It doesn't look like anything revolutionary to me. It's just a distributed system and a dynamic DNS put together. The coordinator still needs to be online at all times.
Slashdot Mirror
But with the proposed scheme, those rules could be circumvented by creating a new station for each user -- If the song is selected by only one person, that's not necessarily a democracy.
Flying without moving parts! Why couldn't someone come up with this sooner?
blimps... hot air balloons...
KNOPPIX
Extreme? This is /.!
Where are the nanobots that crawl over your platters, looking for bits that look a little worn out?
I WANT NANOBOTS!
My friend bought an Xbox and it caught on fire and burned down there house. Now they are homeless. F*** Bill Gates.
VOIP and related technology use loss-full technologies. That is, the sound quality will be degraded when using the to transmit, in favor if better bandwidth utilization.
I wouldn't rely on 802.11x giving you the bandwidth that you need either. But if the current budget that you're looking at is $25000, you could adopt a more versitile solution at a lower cost.
That is, you could purchase a single-board computer with an integrated ethernet card for about $400, a good sound card for about about $200, a large notebook hard drive for about $100, and then a few hundred dollars on a decent mic.
Each system would record one audio track as a cost of $750-1250 each. They would all operated independently, and at the end of the session they could easily be connected (via ethernet or 802.11x) to a central server for mastering. That way you don't have to worry about the bandwith. With a 40GB hard drive, each system could record quite a few thousand hours of audio without any loss of sound quality.
I have a Frontpath Progear (now owned by Sonic Blue). It uses a 400MHz Crusoe processor. They haven't made them in the last year or two, but you can still pick them up for a few hundred dollars on Ebay (I paid a little under $400 for mine about a year ago). Many of them came preinstalled with Slackware, so getting Linux to run on them isn't an issue.
Lets face it: we're all nerds. We like the flexibility of the toaster being able to talk to both the refrigerator and the washing machine without any collisions.
I have had a Twiddler (made by Handkey) for about a year now. It is a one-handed keyboard and mouse. It has worked well for me, and I wonder why this article proclaims the technology to be so prohibitive.
The Twiddler has 15 keys. You press any combination of three keys to type any character or series of characters. It's a little bit slow, but it works well. As for the mouse, the Twiddler had a stub-style pointer often found on laptops.
I can get speeds about as fast as on my desktop with my Twiddler. I have to hit 3 keys to type "A", but I also hit 3 keys to type my name, "Drew Bradford."
The Twiddler did cost me almost $200, so I can see how a lower-priced option would appeal to consumers, but the technology and products themselves have been on the market for quite some time.
From looking at their website, I cannot tell what kind of pricing they will offer. It seems to me that it will be a part of their normal "wireless web" pricing, which can be gotten with about 4000 monthly minutes for about $60. That doesn't seem so bad for a 140kbps wireless net connection.
Which operating systems have good support for dual or tri displays? I've used two and three displays with X Windows on Linux, with multiple single-head video cards. I found that it can be a little troublesome to set up, but it can do all sorts of crazy things once you set it up. (you can even have one monitor as a "preview window" that enlarges a section of the other screen to fit its screen. Which Windows operating systems can support multiple monitors on multiple video cards? How well do they work?
On the contrary, 'T' is the third key to the right of 'W'. While certainly it could have been closer, for instance: 'Q', 'S' and 'R' are all immediately adjacent to 'W', I believe that it is certainly possible to mistakenly hit 'W' when intending to hit 'T', and vice versa.
Those are the very same agreements that I mean. I don't know to what extent they exist right now, but they certainly allowed Microsoft to get quite a large market share in the desktop market.
"Still, Linux evangelists like Fedor say that, as long as new PCs come pre-loaded with Windows, the open source community faces an uphill battle spreading Linux beyond corporate IT departments into the home."
Maybe the Microsoft partnerships and service agreements that prohibited retailers from selling computers preinstalled with non-MS operating systems had something to do with it.
The article wraps it up beautifully by saying that "MSNBC is a Microsoft-NBC joint venture."
But that link doesn't point to a software solution at all. That's a hardware device, and it doesn't do noise/echo cancelling, it does videoconferencing. I'm sorry to say that you're a little off.
I have no problem with this if it's going to cut the cost. I am only mortally against it if there will not be open source drivers. Of course, Microsoft wouldn't want open source drivers/interpretation software, but with a big enough push from consumers, software developers, hardware manufacturers, etc., an open standard is certainly possible.
Hey, I wouldn't mind a $10 802.11b card!
There is no doubt that the human brrain is better at the "fuzzy stuff" than a computer is, but computers aren't always as bad at it as some people think.
I know that there are a lot of "intelligent" matching algorithms now being developed and deployed that can see patterns even with distortion. I have heard rumors of some facial recognition software that was being considered for deployal at O'Hare International Airport last year (I don't know if it actually was or not), but the technology seemed to be proficient at picking up criminals/suspects even if they did some altering of their facial features, such as grow a beard, wear thick glasses, or get a tan.
My point is that certainly the human brain is better at picking up the "fuzzy stuff", but computers are getting better and better at it.
Is this really a new technology?
I know that for the last 2 or 3 years, my school has had a program called Interactive Physics. While it seems like it may be a little more basic than this program, the concept seems to be the same.
While I admit that I only have a little experience using it, from what I do know, using Interactive Physics, students can draw shapes on the screen, assign them physical properties, and then start the program and watch the animation that results.
What is the big difference that causes this program to merit an article and posting of its own? The major difference that I see between the two programs is that Interactive Physics only supports 2D animations (to the best of my knowledge), while the program mentioned in the aticle supports three.
I believe that you must also take in the context in which such things are said. It is legal to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, as long as doing so doesn't cause the death and destruction that is typically associated with mass hysteria.
It seems to me that he did clearly do things to encourage violence, but if his encouragement was unsuccessful, and he did not in fact cause violence, then his actions are definitely protected under the First Amendment.
I realize the irony in that if his speech is in vain, then it's legal, but we have to look at the consequences of such speech before we dispense punishments.
Did this study look at just standard Linux distro? Like standard installs of RH, or did it look at hardened versions designed to be secure? It seems to me that there are certainly extremely secure hardened versions of Linux, while Windows is generally limited to relatively standard installations.
Why was the Solaris source closed, and the x86 version taken off of Sun's free download section?
[The virus] infects programs written for Linux, an alternative to Microsoft's Windows.
It doesn't look like anything revolutionary to me. It's just a distributed system and a dynamic DNS put together. The coordinator still needs to be online at all times.
Rumor has it that you can just hook a piezo buzzer to the data port.