Maybe run-on encoding no that's for sentences and faulty punctuation he fails at even that I want to know if I can patent the run-on encoding algorithm just leave only the first capitalization and the final punctuation what do you think?
i am a linux newb. the first distro i ever successfully installed was debian. i really don't know what the big deal is.
Me neither. I first installed Debian Rex back in '96, downloading the bootfloppies and all 'Base', 'Required' and 'Standard' packages through a very slow modem to install from my hard drive. It was my first Linux experience and I loved every minute of it... of course I spent a couple of weeks reading everything I could get my hands on, first.
if you have ever used fdisk and have the most vague concept of what a swap partition is then i think you can install debian.
Of course, before that first install i'd gotten to the point of examining the partition table with an obscure hex editor (the only one I could find that would allow it... the rest being, basically, file-based) and even putting my name in the mbr's free space. I had no probs with fdisk... matter of fact I hatedcfdisk... still do.
and oh my god once you realize what apt-get is you will never use another distro.
I have a love-hate relationship with packaging systems. I love the convenience, but hate that they take so much out of my hands. I tried LFS when it first started, moved back to a packaged system for awhile, stupidly went back to mickeysoft... until XP ate its own filesystem, and am back with debian. And now I'm ready to give the latest version of LFS a shot, already downloaded all the source files and everything, and am waiting for a few days free to give it my undivided attention.
For newbies who want to learn what real unixen OSes are all about, and don't mind a shitload of reading and fixing stuff they've screwed up, I recommend a basic command line Slackware install that is used to bootstrap LFS. Once they get LFS working they will not be afraid of any packaged distro.
Taking a 'know-it-all' stance and assuming what someone says to be wrong (even based on experience) isn't science either. If something doesn't work you have to offer some proof before slamming it.
There's a famous quote from (I believe) the turn of the last century... however my terrible memory forgot the name of the prominent scientist who said it or the exact wording so I'll try to paraphrase:
Even if your theory was proved beyond all reasonable doubt I still wouldn't accept it!
Then of course there's Einstein's response to Bohr et al advancing Quantum Theory... "God doesn't play dice with the universe!"
Scientific history is filled with examples of top tier scientists taking unreasonable, emotional stances against advances that are contrary to what they've always accepted.
For me, Heinlein nose-dived in quality in the middle of 'Time Enough For Love'. The first half, IMO, is the best stuff he's ever written. The second half is a bottomless pit of steaming camel dung. I will recommend TEFL without qualm, just stop at the mid-book break.
Don't get me wrong- I have great respect for RMS, and agree with him on many things. I think we need people like him who are unwilling to bend and stick to their principles. But RMS needs to become a little better at how he shows himself to the world, or listen to those who can help him do so.
I hate to sound like an apologist for Mr. Stallman (I already defended him once today and that's usually my limit) but when so many people are against your position, and you know you're right, you should not only be forgiven, but praised, for achieving the reputation that RMS has.
If Bill Gates had to put up with constant opposition to his phylisophical stance I'd bet he'd have folded faster than my sister with a busted straight. Look how he handled the constant legal challenges to his business practices... he stepped down!
Too late. Charles Petzold has already done it. See CODE . It should be on every geek's bookshelf.
I second that. Very good book, second only to Forrest M. Mimms's coverage in a Radio Shack book from the early 80's which I've forgotten the name of after my ex-girlfriend stole it (she really knew how to hurt me) and I couldn't find another copy anywhere. I really miss that book keeping warm at night.
A few days ago, posting in another story, I reported good results converting a 320Kbps mp3 to 160Kbps (Q5) ogg... at least through my crappy pc speakers. I mentioned that I was planning to hook up to a (fairly) good stereo and retest.
I just did. I still hear no difference between the original mp3 and the converted ogg. So everyone who's not and audiophile and don't have 10,000 dollar audio systems in their homes are safe converting high quality mp3s to slightly lower quality oggs with 50% space saving.
And now the bad news. Anything less than Q8 (256Kbps nominal) oggs drop too much on the low end for my taste... Paul McCartney's bass just doesn't sound good enough on Abbey Road that I encoded at Q6. At Q8 I can't hear any difference from the original.wav.
Please tell me, when you say "converted," that you did not transcode from mp3 to ogg.
As an experiment I converted a 320Kbps mp3 to 160Kbps (Q5) ogg. They both sounded exactly the same through my crappy speakers.
As soon as I hunt down an old pair of walkman headphones (for the mini plug) I'll cobble together a mini-plug to rca patch cord and hook up to my stereo. Maybe then I'll hear a difference.
Err... the horrible bit was CRC shutting down the online part of Mathworld. They already owned the rights to the intellectual "property" by virtue of purchasing it for physical publication from Eric. No details of the agreement have been published, but Wolfram already owned (and in fact published) the content on a CD-ROM.
And now CRC gets the rights to everything else put up on the mathworld site (see towards the bottom of Eric's commentary). Clearly mathworld is now tainted.
Maybe an open source effort is needed here. Have to reinvent a lot of wheels though.
It's "than" NOT "then" - this is about the fortieth time I've read this grammatical mistake on/. this week. Did *everyone* here sleep through English class?
It's "than", NOT "then"; this is about the...
hehehe
Why do posts like this come around only when I'm NOT a moderator? I actually copy/pasted it to my desktop to read again and grab quotes from for my own use. (A little trick I learned that lets me 'fake' intelligence;-)
Slashdot Mirror
man intro
(Edited to get past 'lameness filter')
INTRO(1) Linux Programmer's Manual INTRO(1)
NAME intro - Introduction to user commands
DESCRIPTION This chapter describes user commands.
AUTHORS Look at the header of the manual page for the author(s) and copyright conditions. Note that these can be different from page to page!
Linux 1993-07-24 INTRO(1)
Thanks for making me aware of that.
:) (Seriously.)
Now I know more
I bet you could even know less.
Maybe run-on encoding no that's for sentences and faulty punctuation he fails at even that I want to know if I can patent the run-on encoding algorithm just leave only the first capitalization and the final punctuation what do you think?
From the amateur account:
;^>
I doubt I shall ever see a more beautiful judge
I want pictures... Naked pictures!
P3 166
Why the clocked-down P3?
Whoops, forgot the links:
LFS
Slackware
i am a linux newb. the first distro i ever successfully installed was debian. i really don't know what the big deal is.
Me neither. I first installed Debian Rex back in '96, downloading the bootfloppies and all 'Base', 'Required' and 'Standard' packages through a very slow modem to install from my hard drive. It was my first Linux experience and I loved every minute of it... of course I spent a couple of weeks reading everything I could get my hands on, first.
if you have ever used fdisk and have the most vague concept of what a swap partition is then i think you can install debian.
Of course, before that first install i'd gotten to the point of examining the partition table with an obscure hex editor (the only one I could find that would allow it... the rest being, basically, file-based) and even putting my name in the mbr's free space. I had no probs with fdisk... matter of fact I hated cfdisk... still do.
and oh my god once you realize what apt-get is you will never use another distro.
I have a love-hate relationship with packaging systems. I love the convenience, but hate that they take so much out of my hands. I tried LFS when it first started, moved back to a packaged system for awhile, stupidly went back to mickeysoft... until XP ate its own filesystem, and am back with debian. And now I'm ready to give the latest version of LFS a shot, already downloaded all the source files and everything, and am waiting for a few days free to give it my undivided attention.
For newbies who want to learn what real unixen OSes are all about, and don't mind a shitload of reading and fixing stuff they've screwed up, I recommend a basic command line Slackware install that is used to bootstrap LFS. Once they get LFS working they will not be afraid of any packaged distro.
Taking a 'know-it-all' stance and assuming what someone says to be wrong (even based on experience) isn't science either. If something doesn't work you have to offer some proof before slamming it.
There's a famous quote from (I believe) the turn of the last century... however my terrible memory forgot the name of the prominent scientist who said it or the exact wording so I'll try to paraphrase:
Even if your theory was proved beyond all reasonable doubt I still wouldn't accept it!
Then of course there's Einstein's response to Bohr et al advancing Quantum Theory... "God doesn't play dice with the universe!"
Scientific history is filled with examples of top tier scientists taking unreasonable, emotional stances against advances that are contrary to what they've always accepted.
My house! I'll only charge them $500.00 a month plus unlimited access.
As opposed to this favorite scene from 'The Simpsons':
Mole Man (to proprieter of the 'Nothing but King and Chricton Book Store': Do you have any Robert Ludlum?
Proprieter: Get out!
For me, Heinlein nose-dived in quality in the middle of 'Time Enough For Love'. The first half, IMO, is the best stuff he's ever written. The second half is a bottomless pit of steaming camel dung. I will recommend TEFL without qualm, just stop at the mid-book break.
Don't get me wrong- I have great respect for RMS, and agree with him on many things. I think we need people like him who are unwilling to bend and stick to their principles. But RMS needs to become a little better at how he shows himself to the world, or listen to those who can help him do so.
I hate to sound like an apologist for Mr. Stallman (I already defended him once today and that's usually my limit) but when so many people are against your position, and you know you're right, you should not only be forgiven, but praised, for achieving the reputation that RMS has.
If Bill Gates had to put up with constant opposition to his phylisophical stance I'd bet he'd have folded faster than my sister with a busted straight. Look how he handled the constant legal challenges to his business practices... he stepped down!
Of course we've heard Stallman attacking non-free software providers.. who are selling software to pay their rent.
I'm amazed people let this stand unchallenged so long... RMS has never attacked anyone for selling software. Only for locking away the source code.
Maybe this guy should spin this off into a book,
Too late. Charles Petzold has already done it. See CODE . It should be on every geek's bookshelf.
I second that. Very good book, second only to Forrest M. Mimms's coverage in a Radio Shack book from the early 80's which I've forgotten the name of after my ex-girlfriend stole it (she really knew how to hurt me) and I couldn't find another copy anywhere. I really miss that book keeping warm at night.
A few days ago, posting in another story, I reported good results converting a 320Kbps mp3 to 160Kbps (Q5) ogg... at least through my crappy pc speakers. I mentioned that I was planning to hook up to a (fairly) good stereo and retest.
.wav.
I just did. I still hear no difference between the original mp3 and the converted ogg. So everyone who's not and audiophile and don't have 10,000 dollar audio systems in their homes are safe converting high quality mp3s to slightly lower quality oggs with 50% space saving.
And now the bad news. Anything less than Q8 (256Kbps nominal) oggs drop too much on the low end for my taste... Paul McCartney's bass just doesn't sound good enough on Abbey Road that I encoded at Q6. At Q8 I can't hear any difference from the original
Please tell me, when you say "converted," that you did not transcode from mp3 to ogg.
As an experiment I converted a 320Kbps mp3 to 160Kbps (Q5) ogg. They both sounded exactly the same through my crappy speakers.
As soon as I hunt down an old pair of walkman headphones (for the mini plug) I'll cobble together a mini-plug to rca patch cord and hook up to my stereo. Maybe then I'll hear a difference.
no main() function.
Freshmeat has this... TRPlayer - A text-based RealMedia player. So hope is alive.
The library is 20 months old and still at version 0.1. Have any developers actually done anything with it? Now I'm curious.
And now CRC gets the rights to everything else put up on the mathworld site (see towards the bottom of Eric's commentary). Clearly mathworld is now tainted.
Maybe an open source effort is needed here. Have to reinvent a lot of wheels though.
It's an update of a 32 bit shell running on top of a 16 bit operating system. And MSDOS is 20 years old.
It's "than" NOT "then" - this is about the fortieth time I've read this grammatical mistake on /. this week. Did *everyone* here sleep through English class?
It's "than", NOT "then"; this is about the...
hehehe
They need the AltaVista NEAR operator: foo NEAR bar.
*Groan*. Right. That's like saying "it's good to see convenience store robbers get away all the time."
'Twould be better for a hundred convenience store robbers to get away than for even one of our freedoms to be infringed.
Why do posts like this come around only when I'm NOT a moderator? I actually copy/pasted it to my desktop to read again and grab quotes from for my own use. (A little trick I learned that lets me 'fake' intelligence ;-)
Well done friartux!