With NiMH AA batteries costing just slightly more than the alkaline versions, it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend $100 or more on a charger if that's all you're going to use it for. It's going to be way cheaper in the long run to buy a cheap trickle charger and use the money you save on the charger to buy more batteries. Even if you only get 100 charge cycles out of them (instead of the 500-1000 that the manufacturers claim), you're still money way ahead. NiMH batteries can be charged at.1C almost indefinitely without damaging the battery. It's only when you charge at much higher current that you need to be concerned about damaging the battery by overcharging. Of course, the downside to trickle charging is the long recharge time. With the newer, high capacity batteries it can take a full day to charge up a set of AA's. If you can live with the long recharge time there's really no point in spending the money on a fancy charger.
Audio in commercials is often compressed (in in dynamic range, not quality or time)
I've actually been noticing a trend toward the opposite. Some commercials, particularly those shot in letterbox, seem to be using more of the available dynamic range than most of the shows. It always catches my attention when the subwoofers really start kicking in during commercials.
Overall, though, you're right. The audio in most commercials does not light up the subwoofers or give the tweeters much of a workout.
I recall reading somewhere that 30-40 years ago, before there were 187 cable/satellite channels, the operators of the New York City water system could tell with a high degree of accuracy how many people were watching which shows by comparing water flow with the timing of commercials. A minute or so after a hit show went to commercial there would be a huge surge in water demand as all the toilets started flushing.
Patent protection does NOT protect drug companies from competition. It just protects them from other companies making the exact same drug without permission (and, one assumes, royalties). Other companies are free to compete by developing their own drugs. How do you think all those different brands of antihistamines made it to market?
Netflix is incorporated in Delaware and the main corporate offices are in Los Gatos, California. They may well have distribution centers in Utah, as they do in many other states, but they are not "based" in Utah.
I suspect any censorship of titles done by Netflix is more a result of states such as Alabama prosecuting some companies for sending to the state materials that do not meet with their community standards. There was an adult-oriented satellite service that was shut down because Alabama sued them for broadcasting what the state deemed obscene material into the state -- regardless of the fact that the transmission was encrypted so only those that paid for the service could view it.
Well, technically, it wasn't a bong, they were just calling it that. The Vapir heated the contents to a precise temperature, intended to be well below the point of ignition. The idea is to release the "active" ingredients from the substance in question without causing tar and other nasty carcinogens to enter the inhalation stream. The USB connection was so a doctor at a remote location could monitor the administration of the substance.
They mentioned legitimate uses such as someone trying to quit smoking who would use the device to get the nicotine he's addicted to without inhaling all the really nasty byproducts of combustion.
I saw a show the other night where they were demonstrating a computerized bong with a USB connection. And it wasn't just a prop for the show; it's a real product.
In the scenario you've described, it isn't even copyright infringement. It has long been considered "fair use" to video tape an over-the-air broadcast and to share the tape with friends. To any reasonable person, sending a copy of "Futurama" to your buddy via ReplayTV is an obvious extension of the video tape "fair use". (Of course, being obvious to a reasonable person is no guarantee of what the courts might decide.) This is especially so since ReplayTV limits the number of times you can share a show and it prevents re-sharing a show that has been sent to you. That's more restrictive than the video tape situation since I can share the tape as many times as I want and nothing is stopping my friends from making copies and giving them to their friends.
the internet sharing feature would have been upheld as fair use - it is certainly not like p2p: recipients of shared shows cannot then forward them to others.
I think there's a fair chance that forcing the removal of the show sharing feature may backfire on big media. My understanding is it's already pretty easy to pull shows off the ReplayTV onto a computer, and that this is a by-product of being able to share shows among the units within a single household, so it won't be going away. Now, instead of having the ReplayTV limit the number of times a show can be shared and preventing the re-sharing of a show, people who want to share will be forced to use some type of p2p. So, instead of show sharing being limited to five people, it will be open to an unlimited number of people.
ReplayTV has always had a 30-second advance button. From everything I've read, there's no intention to remove this. It's not as good as having the commercials automagically skipped, but it's not far off and it's much better than trying to time the fast-forward.
While they legally could remove those features in current models, D&M has already publicly stated they will not do so.
I'm sure this feature change is just an attempt to play nice with big media. As a practical issue, the loss of show sharing is not likely to be that big a deal for most people. It's always been of use only to those with broadband internet and a lot of patience. Now the people who want to share will have to snag the show off the ReplayTV with their computer and file share with those interested in the show. Not a big loss.
I don't think one radio is going to fill your needs. The smaller radios that are easy to travel with aren't likely to have computer interfaces. Those with computer interfaces are likely to be a pain when you travel. The RX-320 mentioned in the article isn't physically large, but you do need the computer to make it work.
Depending on what you're trying to listen to in Africa, you could probably get by with a fairly cheap portable. The major broadcasters tend to send some pretty powerful signals in that direction. If that's all you're looking to tune in, almost any SW radio should work fine.
The Radio Netherlands web site has a pretty good list of receivers along with reviews. Like all such reviews, I'm sure not everyone would agree with their ratings, but it's a place to start. I'll leave it to you to find the web site in the hopes it will reduce the/. effect.
It's a matter of personal preference/interest. Some people find it fascinating to dig out of the muck a radio signal that started at a small transmitter halfway around the globe. Some people would rather watch paint dry.
There's a whole world of things to listen to out there. Ships at sea, utility transmissions, weather data, radio FAX... I've mostly been into broadcast SW. I find it interesting to listen to news from various places around the world. Both the flavor of the local news and their spin on world news can be entertaining and enlightening. There are also shows on local culture and events that can give you some idea of what life is like in places you may never visit. Maybe you find that interesting, maybe not.
Hang on, then why the hell would I want to attach one to a PC? Surely even the pleasure of DXing doesn't get augmented with use of the PC.
Believe it or not, the radio interface -- all the switches, dials, and displays -- add a LOT to the cost of the radio. By hooking your computer up to a black box with nothing but an ON/OFF switch, you use something you already have for the interface and save a lot of money on the radio. The RX-320 would probably cost twice as much if it had all the standard dials and displays.
The pleasure of listening to SW can be increased considerably with the use of the PC. You can download extensive lists of station broadcast schedules and easily program the radio to try all the known frequencies for a particular broadcaster before settling on the best one. If I want to listen to the BBC, I can quickly pull up all the current BBC freqs and try them all. One day I may get a better signal from the Caribbean, the next I get a better signal from Singapore. This setup makes it easy to try them all.
It's also great for identifying those rare catches when you're really DXing. Push a button and the software tells you which stations are scheduled to be broadcasting on that freq at the moment. It's nothing you couldn't do by flipping through books and pages of notes, but it's a whole lot easier and faster.
There are also signal processing programs that can clean up noisy signals that the typical notch filter and passband tuning just can't handle. You're not going to get that kind of processing without passing the signal through a computer. And as long as you're using the computer anyway, might as well control the radio with it.
The best part of this whole deal is on Miss Vermont's web page. Once you get past the idiotic animated intro, there's a cartoon US flag with "Free Speech" flashing on and off. Either somebody with a wicked sense of humor hacked the site or Miss Vermont is rather selective in her application of rights.
It's distribution on the cheap. This whole thing sounds like the Loud Cloud deal the FastTrack guys tried to put forth a couple years ago. They were selling it to potential distributors as a way to distribute their files without the need for any infrastructure and with effectively no bandwidth costs.
They were initially going to force regular FastTrack users into assisting with the distribution if they had downloaded the file(s) in question. (They would force the file(s) to be shared.) Then a few people, myself included, started screaming rather loudly, and they eventually started looking for a different business model.
The problem with this scheme, as well as all its previous incarnations, is it doesn't directly provide any value to the entities bearing the cost. It silently pushes the bandwidth costs onto the ISPs of the P2P users. Eventually those costs will be borne by all internet customers. At least with this scheme they're making an attempt to provide some reward to some of those who will bear the cost. Those customers not using Kazaa will just have to deal with even higher ISP costs without receiving added value.
I think it was all the more disturbing in Carter's case because, if memory serves, he trained to be a nuclear engineer. I'd think part of the training would include learning how to properly pronounce the subject.
I really wish Bush would do whatever it takes to start pronouncing it correctly. He takes enough grief for his spontaneous malapropisms; he doesn't need to add to it with things that can be readily corrected.
I've always thought of it as a mispronunciation, not as anything related to his accent. Are you saying everyone in Texas mispronounces the word nuclear?
I had great hopes after the speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln where I'm pretty sure he pronounced it correctly. Alas, during the recent press conference with the Japanese Prime Minister it was back to nucular.
So far, no one has suggested ReplayTV intends to remove features available to current users. The quotes in the referenced article mention only future products. They technically could alter the features available to current users, but, short of a court order to do so, I can't imagine why they would.
You still watch live TV? Since two days after I got my ReplayTV the only thing I've watched live is sports. All other TV watching has been stuff that ReplayTV has previously recorded. I can't imagine ever going back to watching live. The ability to skip the commercials is far too valuable.
I think you're listening to too many Tivo owners. The ReplayTV CA works very well in most situations. It does have a bit of a problem with single commercials that run longer than 60 seconds, but those are pretty rare. When it fails to work properly, you simply have to watch a bit of commercial.
ReplayTV has also always had a manual 27s skip feature that's fully supported and has a dedicated button on the remote. I don't think the 30s advance, even formal support of it, is going to get any PVR manufacturer in any legal trouble.
I strongly suspect even the ReplayTV CA wouldn't have caused any trouble if news reports about it hadn't misreported how it works in combination with the sharing feature. CA happens strictly on playback. The commercials are still in the recorded show, and they are shared along with the rest of the show when you send the show to a friend. The big uproar about CA seemed to be due to the misconception that the commercials are eliminated when the show is recorded and the shared version has no commercials. This is completely untrue. The ReplayTV CA is fundamentally no different than the CA feature available on VCRs for years. The ReplayTV version just works better due to the near-instantaneous nature of disk access.
Slashdot Mirror
With NiMH AA batteries costing just slightly more than the alkaline versions, it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend $100 or more on a charger if that's all you're going to use it for. It's going to be way cheaper in the long run to buy a cheap trickle charger and use the money you save on the charger to buy more batteries. Even if you only get 100 charge cycles out of them (instead of the 500-1000 that the manufacturers claim), you're still money way ahead. NiMH batteries can be charged at .1C almost indefinitely without damaging the battery. It's only when you charge at much higher current that you need to be concerned about damaging the battery by overcharging. Of course, the downside to trickle charging is the long recharge time. With the newer, high capacity batteries it can take a full day to charge up a set of AA's. If you can live with the long recharge time there's really no point in spending the money on a fancy charger.
Overall, though, you're right. The audio in most commercials does not light up the subwoofers or give the tweeters much of a workout.
Ad moderation! What a concept! But who'll do the ad metamoderation?
I think the obvious answer is televisions in the bathroom and kitchen.
I recall reading somewhere that 30-40 years ago, before there were 187 cable/satellite channels, the operators of the New York City water system could tell with a high degree of accuracy how many people were watching which shows by comparing water flow with the timing of commercials. A minute or so after a hit show went to commercial there would be a huge surge in water demand as all the toilets started flushing.
Patent protection does NOT protect drug companies from competition. It just protects them from other companies making the exact same drug without permission (and, one assumes, royalties). Other companies are free to compete by developing their own drugs. How do you think all those different brands of antihistamines made it to market?
Netflix is incorporated in Delaware and the main corporate offices are in Los Gatos, California. They may well have distribution centers in Utah, as they do in many other states, but they are not "based" in Utah.
I suspect any censorship of titles done by Netflix is more a result of states such as Alabama prosecuting some companies for sending to the state materials that do not meet with their community standards. There was an adult-oriented satellite service that was shut down because Alabama sued them for broadcasting what the state deemed obscene material into the state -- regardless of the fact that the transmission was encrypted so only those that paid for the service could view it.
Well, technically, it wasn't a bong, they were just calling it that. The Vapir heated the contents to a precise temperature, intended to be well below the point of ignition. The idea is to release the "active" ingredients from the substance in question without causing tar and other nasty carcinogens to enter the inhalation stream. The USB connection was so a doctor at a remote location could monitor the administration of the substance.
They mentioned legitimate uses such as someone trying to quit smoking who would use the device to get the nicotine he's addicted to without inhaling all the really nasty byproducts of combustion.
I saw a show the other night where they were demonstrating a computerized bong with a USB connection. And it wasn't just a prop for the show; it's a real product.
In the scenario you've described, it isn't even copyright infringement. It has long been considered "fair use" to video tape an over-the-air broadcast and to share the tape with friends. To any reasonable person, sending a copy of "Futurama" to your buddy via ReplayTV is an obvious extension of the video tape "fair use". (Of course, being obvious to a reasonable person is no guarantee of what the courts might decide.) This is especially so since ReplayTV limits the number of times you can share a show and it prevents re-sharing a show that has been sent to you. That's more restrictive than the video tape situation since I can share the tape as many times as I want and nothing is stopping my friends from making copies and giving them to their friends.
ReplayTV has always had a 30-second advance button. From everything I've read, there's no intention to remove this. It's not as good as having the commercials automagically skipped, but it's not far off and it's much better than trying to time the fast-forward.
While they legally could remove those features in current models, D&M has already publicly stated they will not do so.
I'm sure this feature change is just an attempt to play nice with big media. As a practical issue, the loss of show sharing is not likely to be that big a deal for most people. It's always been of use only to those with broadband internet and a lot of patience. Now the people who want to share will have to snag the show off the ReplayTV with their computer and file share with those interested in the show. Not a big loss.
I don't think one radio is going to fill your needs. The smaller radios that are easy to travel with aren't likely to have computer interfaces. Those with computer interfaces are likely to be a pain when you travel. The RX-320 mentioned in the article isn't physically large, but you do need the computer to make it work.
/. effect.
Depending on what you're trying to listen to in Africa, you could probably get by with a fairly cheap portable. The major broadcasters tend to send some pretty powerful signals in that direction. If that's all you're looking to tune in, almost any SW radio should work fine.
The Radio Netherlands web site has a pretty good list of receivers along with reviews. Like all such reviews, I'm sure not everyone would agree with their ratings, but it's a place to start. I'll leave it to you to find the web site in the hopes it will reduce the
It's a matter of personal preference/interest. Some people find it fascinating to dig out of the muck a radio signal that started at a small transmitter halfway around the globe. Some people would rather watch paint dry.
There's a whole world of things to listen to out there. Ships at sea, utility transmissions, weather data, radio FAX... I've mostly been into broadcast SW. I find it interesting to listen to news from various places around the world. Both the flavor of the local news and their spin on world news can be entertaining and enlightening. There are also shows on local culture and events that can give you some idea of what life is like in places you may never visit. Maybe you find that interesting, maybe not.
The pleasure of listening to SW can be increased considerably with the use of the PC. You can download extensive lists of station broadcast schedules and easily program the radio to try all the known frequencies for a particular broadcaster before settling on the best one. If I want to listen to the BBC, I can quickly pull up all the current BBC freqs and try them all. One day I may get a better signal from the Caribbean, the next I get a better signal from Singapore. This setup makes it easy to try them all.
It's also great for identifying those rare catches when you're really DXing. Push a button and the software tells you which stations are scheduled to be broadcasting on that freq at the moment. It's nothing you couldn't do by flipping through books and pages of notes, but it's a whole lot easier and faster.
There are also signal processing programs that can clean up noisy signals that the typical notch filter and passband tuning just can't handle. You're not going to get that kind of processing without passing the signal through a computer. And as long as you're using the computer anyway, might as well control the radio with it.
Just be sure to add "this_is_not" at the beginning of all the file names. Put the joke in plain sight and see if they still fall for it.
The best part of this whole deal is on Miss Vermont's web page. Once you get past the idiotic animated intro, there's a cartoon US flag with "Free Speech" flashing on and off. Either somebody with a wicked sense of humor hacked the site or Miss Vermont is rather selective in her application of rights.
It's distribution on the cheap. This whole thing sounds like the Loud Cloud deal the FastTrack guys tried to put forth a couple years ago. They were selling it to potential distributors as a way to distribute their files without the need for any infrastructure and with effectively no bandwidth costs.
They were initially going to force regular FastTrack users into assisting with the distribution if they had downloaded the file(s) in question. (They would force the file(s) to be shared.) Then a few people, myself included, started screaming rather loudly, and they eventually started looking for a different business model.
The problem with this scheme, as well as all its previous incarnations, is it doesn't directly provide any value to the entities bearing the cost. It silently pushes the bandwidth costs onto the ISPs of the P2P users. Eventually those costs will be borne by all internet customers. At least with this scheme they're making an attempt to provide some reward to some of those who will bear the cost. Those customers not using Kazaa will just have to deal with even higher ISP costs without receiving added value.
I think it was all the more disturbing in Carter's case because, if memory serves, he trained to be a nuclear engineer. I'd think part of the training would include learning how to properly pronounce the subject.
I really wish Bush would do whatever it takes to start pronouncing it correctly. He takes enough grief for his spontaneous malapropisms; he doesn't need to add to it with things that can be readily corrected.
I've always thought of it as a mispronunciation, not as anything related to his accent. Are you saying everyone in Texas mispronounces the word nuclear?
I had great hopes after the speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln where I'm pretty sure he pronounced it correctly. Alas, during the recent press conference with the Japanese Prime Minister it was back to nucular.
So far, no one has suggested ReplayTV intends to remove features available to current users. The quotes in the referenced article mention only future products. They technically could alter the features available to current users, but, short of a court order to do so, I can't imagine why they would.
You still watch live TV? Since two days after I got my ReplayTV the only thing I've watched live is sports. All other TV watching has been stuff that ReplayTV has previously recorded. I can't imagine ever going back to watching live. The ability to skip the commercials is far too valuable.
I think you're listening to too many Tivo owners. The ReplayTV CA works very well in most situations. It does have a bit of a problem with single commercials that run longer than 60 seconds, but those are pretty rare. When it fails to work properly, you simply have to watch a bit of commercial.
ReplayTV has also always had a manual 27s skip feature that's fully supported and has a dedicated button on the remote. I don't think the 30s advance, even formal support of it, is going to get any PVR manufacturer in any legal trouble.
I strongly suspect even the ReplayTV CA wouldn't have caused any trouble if news reports about it hadn't misreported how it works in combination with the sharing feature. CA happens strictly on playback. The commercials are still in the recorded show, and they are shared along with the rest of the show when you send the show to a friend. The big uproar about CA seemed to be due to the misconception that the commercials are eliminated when the show is recorded and the shared version has no commercials. This is completely untrue. The ReplayTV CA is fundamentally no different than the CA feature available on VCRs for years. The ReplayTV version just works better due to the near-instantaneous nature of disk access.