"What are you talking about? DivX, XviD and ffmpeg are all creating MPEG-4 spec-compliant video streams. As far as the decoder can see, streams created by any of them were created by the same encoder."
So, honestly wondering, why can't it play DivX 3.x format? Many of my discs are in 3.x, and if there's a way to make them playable on this player, that would be fantastic. Are there any tools that cleanly seperate the MPEG-4 stream from an AVI, which ostensibly should work for all DivXs, including 3.x? Of course, one can convert an AVI to mpeg-4, but that involves dirty decomp-recomp, and that's the LAST ditch option. Anybody?
You raise an interesting point; one which made me think, and this is what I came up with: Region coding can be handled in two places: the hardware, and the firmware. The firmware of the player can be updated/hacked, just like all my standalone DVD players, so I can play the DVD's I FARKING BOUGHT IN JAPAN you MPAA Frafgd$##%#$% anyways... And since the hardware (the DVD drive) is just a PC DVD drive, you can connect that to your computer and update that as well, if neccesary.
My two bits on XVID: The whole DiVX frimfram is complex enough for the average user. Thanks to XViD for introducing another codec that to this day, while not groundbreaking, let alone neccesary, is making the video codec situation tricky to deal with.
I'm assuming the percents refer to the number of people who have moderated this post. But I still don't see how this makes any sense. 40 percent of people who moderated this post think it is insightful, while 70% find it informative? Since this is over 100% it implies that some person(s) moderated this both insightful and informative. I didn't think it was possible for a mod to moderate a post more than once. This is screwy..
"Norway's special division for white-collar crimes, Økokrim, has decided to appeal the acquittal of 19-year-old Jon Lech Johansen, accused of copyright violation for helping bypass DVD code protection, web site Nettavisen reports."
Sources say the legal team was threatened by the MPAA with a movie about them that totally skews the actual facts and makes them look like idiots. When asked if they meant it, the MPAA said, "One word: Takedown." The appeal was filed within the hour...
"It is widely believed that the next generation of flexible flat panel display technologies will be self luminous (non-backlit) organic light emitting diodes."
That's good to hear. IMHO, backlit light-emitting diodes were overkill in the lumens department.
On behalf of people who hold sacrosanct the 1st Amendment, I'd just like to say HA HA YOU TOTAL LOSERS. Harsh, maybe. But heartfelt. And, if you SERIOUSLY appeal this, as has been rumored, you will LOSE again. And I will send you another email quite similar to this one, except that next time, I'll rub in how you got beaten down twice. Heh. Losers.
I R'dTFA. My point is that he felt he needed to take the site down for whatever reason; either because he felt more problems would come in the future, or just to make a point. My point is that this situation did not need to occur in the first place.
"I'm holding out for a liquid sodium cooled computer, just like valves on decent cars."
According to the data sheet on Sodium, the melting point for good old Na is "370.87 Kelvin [or 97.72 C (207.9 F)]." For the slow, this means it's solid at any temperature below this. So, to use liquid sodium in a computer, the coolest you could get the system while keeping the sodium liquified is ~208F. I think I'll stick with H2-0 for now...
To: Alan.Deikman@znyx.com Cc: mcohen@schwabe.com Subject: I can't believe you guys shut down the free PCI device table!!!
I can't believe you guys shut down the free PCI device table!!! I'm flabbergasted. I can't think of any possible reason you would do this. Don't you have anything else better to do than close down an extrememly helpful website? The webmaster spent thousands of dollars out of his own pocket for the love of a product. The owners of that product now thank him for 6 years of work by kicking him in the proverbial nuts? We all know it was just a guy helping other guys out, and that he had no relation to your company. What exactly do you have to gain from this? What do you lose by having more systems support your architecture? This makes zero sense. He helped people to use your technology. He pushed your technology! He was free advertisement. And all the time he has been doing this, we have thought of you as one of the FEW, RARE consortiums that were not COMPLETELY out of touch with your users. Well, now we can see that you are. You are only interested in money, and you view all your clients as potential thiefs, and potential defendants. Yesterday you were an example, but today, you're just a statistic. You're just another consumer-crushing entity. Instead of a group that people look to for help, you've become a power-, money-, and blood-thirsty group that people fear because you have no respect for them, their interests, or their rights; only your bottom line. Well, time to push you from the small stack of reputable groups on the right, to the huge, towering pile of examples of immoral societal plagues on the left.
"While Christ is generally portrayed with nordic" "features in nordic cultures, he is also generally" "portrayed with asian features in asian cultures," "and african features in african cultures as well," "quite appropriately to the universality of his"
Man, I am going to come over there and smash your Enter key with a hammer if you don't let the lines wrap. I swear to God. (See? It's on-topic!)
Oops! I just did it too! That means "nowhere," and just like CENTRE, even though it's spelled differently and the french SAY it differently, you still pronounce it "nowhere." Check it out! That makes me a l33t european!
Fucking assholes. Only FRENCH people should compose in FRENCH you fucking morons.
To: CorpComm@lexmark.com, webmaster@lexmark.com Cc: info@scc-inc.com Subject: Attn: Legal and Consumer Relations
To whom it may concern:
I just read that you have tried to crush competition by using a poorly written law for a manner in which it is blatantly obvious that it was not created. Only a cheap company fears competition so much that it would sink to such depravity. Your actions and behavior show that you are duplicitous and unscrupulous and will do anything to keep us, the consumers, from having a choice. Speaking as a consumer, I can say with all honesty that we like choices, and that any company that tries to eliminate choice is an enemy of all consumers.
I run the IS department at my office building. I decide what gets bought. As is often the case, I am also approached to do computer work on the side for friends and associates. I have just purchased a computer for my parents this past Christmas, and have not yet purchased a printer. I was considering a Lexmark because they are inexpensive, even if they are often fragile. CONSIDER this message as notice that I will never again purchase a Lexmark product. Never again will I recommend a Lexmark product. If I hear of a friend or associate purchasing a Lexmark product, I will talk them out of it. If the price difference between a Lexmark product and a competitor is under $25, and I need to foot the difference to convince said persons to choose a competitor, I will do so. We the consumers are not cattle for you to lead by force. You stand for all that is wrong with "Corporate America" and must be shown that the consumers control the businesses, not the other way around.
Consider how many people feel like I do. What have you done?
This is amazing technology, and it will revolutionize digital cameras if/when it comes down in price. HOWEVER, this is not how the human optic system works. Even in our optics, we have seperate receptors for red, green, and blue, and our brains do the interpolating. As most will remember from basic elementary biology, our eyes detect light through rods and cones. All quotes are from this link. "The retina has ~126 million photo receptors, 120 million rods and 6 million cones." Rods gather any light they can, and compile the data together to show the best possible image in the dimmest light; therefore, rods will display a black and white image. This is why the darker it gets, the harder it is to differentiate yellow from white: you are depending more and more on the rods.
HERE is where it gets interesting, and where I get to my point. Cones are what we use to see color. An individual cone cannot see red green and blue as this marketing hype would lead us to believe. "The cones come in three types: Red (60%), Green (30%) and Blue (10%). The red and green cones are randomly distributed in the center of the fovea and the blue cones form an annulus around the outside." So in effect this camera will actually surpass the human eye.
As a side note, the link goes to a very interesting document that states how "126 million photoreceptors must be transmitted to the brain via 1 million fibers in the optic nerve [while] [t]he overall compression ratio of 126:1 is not evenly distributed." Check it out.
"To sum up: The chance of you winning the lottery is microscopic. The chance of someone winning the lottery is plausible, and even likely."
Okay, so you are saying that math confirms what we've been doing all along: that one of us has a "microscopic" chance to crack it, but given enough participants, someone cracking the code is "plausible, and even likely." Sounds good.
"Being smart-alecky in the face of common sense is very silly."
Well, ya got me there. I like to be a smart-ass, and I like to be silly. But still, I like to counter those aspects of my personality by making valid points.
Statatistics aside, people still win the lottery. Statistics can't say when it will happen; they just say the probability. Combine increasing computer speeds with searching the probability field at random, and there's no way to say if it won't happen tomorrow, next week, or just maybe the end of the known universe. The chances can be 1 in infinity-1, but the chance that it will happen in a small amount of time is still 1, still non-zero, age-of-the-universe irrelevant.
"'[W]aste of resources' is an understatement[.] [W]e're talking about something that the combined computer power of the world cannot achive in the currently known age of the universe."
Yeah! And it would take over 640k of ram! Nobody will EVER need over 640k of ram, ever!
Be careful of hyperbole, and that 'never' word, especially when it comes to computing power. Chances are you'll eventually get a laugh-o-gram from Mr. Moore's Law Offices...
"Anybody else automatically assume that it had ended because they found the key?"
While I'm not sure this is probable, I will agree that not posting the legal threat is highly unusual. They need to distribute a copy if only for posting on ChillingEffects.org. Also, my first call would be to the EFF. But I guess some people stick more firmly to their principles than others...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you need beta testers or purchasers, let me know :)
"What are you talking about? DivX, XviD and ffmpeg are all creating MPEG-4 spec-compliant video streams. As far as the decoder can see, streams created by any of them were created by the same encoder."
So, honestly wondering, why can't it play DivX 3.x format? Many of my discs are in 3.x, and if there's a way to make them playable on this player, that would be fantastic. Are there any tools that cleanly seperate the MPEG-4 stream from an AVI, which ostensibly should work for all DivXs, including 3.x? Of course, one can convert an AVI to mpeg-4, but that involves dirty decomp-recomp, and that's the LAST ditch option. Anybody?
"If it isn't region free, then it's worthless"
You raise an interesting point; one which made me think, and this is what I came up with: Region coding can be handled in two places: the hardware, and the firmware. The firmware of the player can be updated/hacked, just like all my standalone DVD players, so I can play the DVD's I FARKING BOUGHT IN JAPAN you MPAA Frafgd$##%#$% anyways... And since the hardware (the DVD drive) is just a PC DVD drive, you can connect that to your computer and update that as well, if neccesary.
My two bits on XVID: The whole DiVX frimfram is complex enough for the average user. Thanks to XViD for introducing another codec that to this day, while not groundbreaking, let alone neccesary, is making the video codec situation tricky to deal with.
"Moderations: 40% Insightful, 70% Informative"
I'm assuming the percents refer to the number of people who have moderated this post. But I still don't see how this makes any sense.
40 percent of people who moderated this post think it is insightful, while 70% find it informative? Since this is over 100% it implies that some person(s) moderated this both insightful and informative. I didn't think it was possible for a mod to moderate a post more than once. This is screwy..
Anybody remember the iCraveTV debacle?
"Norway's special division for white-collar crimes, Økokrim, has decided to appeal the acquittal of 19-year-old Jon Lech Johansen, accused of copyright violation for helping bypass DVD code protection, web site Nettavisen reports."
Sources say the legal team was threatened by the MPAA with a movie about them that totally skews the actual facts and makes them look like idiots. When asked if they meant it, the MPAA said, "One word: Takedown." The appeal was filed within the hour...
"It is widely believed that the next generation of flexible flat panel display technologies will be self luminous (non-backlit) organic light emitting diodes."
That's good to hear. IMHO, backlit light-emitting diodes were overkill in the lumens department.
To: PR@nai.com
. html
Subject: About the recent reviewer lawsuit...
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/18/business/18SOFT
On behalf of people who hold sacrosanct the 1st Amendment, I'd just like to say HA HA YOU TOTAL LOSERS. Harsh, maybe. But heartfelt. And, if you SERIOUSLY appeal this, as has been rumored, you will LOSE again. And I will send you another email quite similar to this one, except that next time, I'll rub in how you got beaten down twice. Heh. Losers.
I R'dTFA. My point is that he felt he needed to take the site down for whatever reason; either because he felt more problems would come in the future, or just to make a point. My point is that this situation did not need to occur in the first place.
Easy there, tiger...
"I'm holding out for a liquid sodium cooled computer, just like valves on decent cars."
According to the data sheet on Sodium, the melting point for good old Na is "370.87 Kelvin [or 97.72 C (207.9 F)]." For the slow, this means it's solid at any temperature below this. So, to use liquid sodium in a computer, the coolest you could get the system while keeping the sodium liquified is ~208F. I think I'll stick with H2-0 for now...
To: Alan.Deikman@znyx.com
Cc: mcohen@schwabe.com
Subject: I can't believe you guys shut down the free PCI device table!!!
I can't believe you guys shut down the free PCI device table!!! I'm flabbergasted. I can't think of any possible reason you would do this. Don't you have anything else better to do than close down an extrememly helpful website? The webmaster spent thousands of dollars out of his own pocket for the love of a product. The owners of that product now thank him for 6 years of work by kicking him in the proverbial nuts? We all know it was just a guy helping other guys out, and that he had no relation to your company. What exactly do you have to gain from this? What do you lose by having more systems support your architecture? This makes zero sense. He helped people to use your technology. He pushed your technology! He was free advertisement. And all the time he has been doing this, we have thought of you as one of the FEW, RARE consortiums that were not COMPLETELY out of touch with your users. Well, now we can see that you are. You are only interested in money, and you view all your clients as potential thiefs, and potential defendants. Yesterday you were an example, but today, you're just a statistic. You're just another consumer-crushing entity. Instead of a group that people look to for help, you've become a power-, money-, and blood-thirsty group that people fear because you have no respect for them, their interests, or their rights; only your bottom line. Well, time to push you from the small stack of reputable groups on the right, to the huge, towering pile of examples of immoral societal plagues on the left.
It was nice while it lasted.
Kurt
"While Christ is generally portrayed with nordic"
"features in nordic cultures, he is also generally"
"portrayed with asian features in asian cultures,"
"and african features in african cultures as well,"
"quite appropriately to the universality of his"
Man, I am going to come over there and smash your Enter key with a hammer if you don't let the lines wrap. I swear to God. (See? It's on-topic!)
See, here's where the metric system comes in handy! In Europe, this thing went 310 kilometers!!! In America, it would only have gone 192.634 miles.
Maybe this metric thing isn't so bad...
"Is this what ./'ers need during those long coding sessions[?]"
:-P
What's a dot-slasher?
"One might have hoped that tragic events in Afghanistan [centcom.mil] would have taught the US military that drugging your troops is a bad idea."
When someone takes vitamins, do you consider them to be taking drugs?
"Symantec's Virginia security centre"
WTF is up with the french out of nulle part?
Oops! I just did it too! That means "nowhere," and just like CENTRE, even though it's spelled differently and the french SAY it differently, you still pronounce it "nowhere."
Check it out! That makes me a l33t european!
Fucking assholes. Only FRENCH people should compose in FRENCH you fucking morons.
"Wow, only the third person to point that out! You're a swift one."
:)
Only the SECOND, thank you very much.
And that's at -1 threshold. At 1, I'm the first!
"[F]or albums like Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon there are segways between songs."
What? I thought segways just came out a couple years ago! Man, Pink Floyd really was ahead of their time...
To: CorpComm@lexmark.com, webmaster@lexmark.com
Cc: info@scc-inc.com
Subject: Attn: Legal and Consumer Relations
To whom it may concern:
I just read that you have tried to crush competition by using a poorly written law for a manner in which it is blatantly obvious that it was not created. Only a cheap company fears competition so much that it would sink to such depravity. Your actions and behavior show that you are duplicitous and unscrupulous and will do anything to keep us, the consumers, from having a choice. Speaking as a consumer, I can say with all honesty that we like choices, and that any company that tries to eliminate choice is an enemy of all consumers.
I run the IS department at my office building. I decide what gets bought. As is often the case, I am also approached to do computer work on the side for friends and associates. I have just purchased a computer for my parents this past Christmas, and have not yet purchased a printer. I was considering a Lexmark because they are inexpensive, even if they are often fragile. CONSIDER this message as notice that I will never again purchase a Lexmark product. Never again will I recommend a Lexmark product. If I hear of a friend or associate purchasing a Lexmark product, I will talk them out of it. If the price difference between a Lexmark product and a competitor is under $25, and I need to foot the difference to convince said persons to choose a competitor, I will do so. We the consumers are not cattle for you to lead by force. You stand for all that is wrong with "Corporate America" and must be shown that the consumers control the businesses, not the other way around.
Consider how many people feel like I do. What have you done?
This is amazing technology, and it will revolutionize digital cameras if/when it comes down in price. HOWEVER, this is not how the human optic system works. Even in our optics, we have seperate receptors for red, green, and blue, and our brains do the interpolating. As most will remember from basic elementary biology, our eyes detect light through rods and cones. All quotes are from this link. "The retina has ~126 million photo receptors, 120 million rods and 6 million cones." Rods gather any light they can, and compile the data together to show the best possible image in the dimmest light; therefore, rods will display a black and white image. This is why the darker it gets, the harder it is to differentiate yellow from white: you are depending more and more on the rods.
HERE is where it gets interesting, and where I get to my point. Cones are what we use to see color. An individual cone cannot see red green and blue as this marketing hype would lead us to believe. "The cones come in three types: Red (60%), Green (30%) and Blue (10%). The red and green cones are randomly distributed in the center of the fovea and the blue cones form an annulus around the outside." So in effect this camera will actually surpass the human eye.
As a side note, the link goes to a very interesting document that states how "126 million photoreceptors must be transmitted to the brain via 1 million fibers in the optic nerve [while] [t]he overall compression ratio of 126:1 is not evenly distributed." Check it out.
"To sum up: The chance of you winning the lottery is microscopic. The chance of someone winning the lottery is plausible, and even likely."
Okay, so you are saying that math confirms what we've been doing all along: that one of us has a "microscopic" chance to crack it, but given enough participants, someone cracking the code is "plausible, and even likely." Sounds good.
"Statatistics[sic] aside" /me slaps self.
"Being smart-alecky in the face of common sense is very silly."
Well, ya got me there. I like to be a smart-ass, and I like to be silly. But still, I like to counter those aspects of my personality by making valid points.
Statatistics aside, people still win the lottery. Statistics can't say when it will happen; they just say the probability. Combine increasing computer speeds with searching the probability field at random, and there's no way to say if it won't happen tomorrow, next week, or just maybe the end of the known universe. The chances can be 1 in infinity-1, but the chance that it will happen in a small amount of time is still 1, still non-zero, age-of-the-universe irrelevant.
"'[W]aste of resources' is an understatement[.]
[W]e're talking about something that the combined computer power of the world cannot achive in the currently known age of the universe."
Yeah! And it would take over 640k of ram! Nobody will EVER need over 640k of ram, ever!
Be careful of hyperbole, and that 'never' word, especially when it comes to computing power. Chances are you'll eventually get a laugh-o-gram from Mr. Moore's Law Offices...
"Anybody else automatically assume that it had ended because they found the key?"
While I'm not sure this is probable, I will agree that not posting the legal threat is highly unusual. They need to distribute a copy if only for posting on ChillingEffects.org. Also, my first call would be to the EFF. But I guess some people stick more firmly to their principles than others...