Hopefully this will revive the manned spaceflight programs all over the world, preferably in the form of true collaboration and not just let's-all-keep-reinventing-the-wheel kind of silly competition.
We need to get off this planet sooner or later and unmanned probes won't do that.
Got a point there. I hope this will be addressed in a future Mencoder. Whenever they add that feature, I'll re-encode all Futuramas with the episode and commentary soundtracks in one file. Right now I've ripped two versions of each episode: normal episode soundtrack and the hilarious commentary tracks.
Aspect ratios?
-aspect 16:9
Cropping? Multiple video versions or seam-less branching?
If cropping is a serious problem, you might want to run -vf cropdetect and set -vf crop parameter yourself. I don't usually bother fiddling with it.
DivX encoding is far too time consuming to blindly automate.
Maybe, if you want to create an exact copy of the DVD. I don't.
I have ripped my entire library of about 70 DVDs into DivX with it. With a script you can just insert the DVD and walk away.
It all began as an effort to be able to watch entire seasons of Simpsons, Futurama or Black Adder in one go without having to change discs and/or deal with cumbersome menus and copyright announcements that you can't fast-forward (FOX is particularly bad in this aspect).
Now I've got a fanless VIA EPIA mini-ITX box connected to my TV with the media on a 250 GB portable hard drive. Interestingly, a cordless trackball mouse is actually a better remote than your ordinary remote control when you get used to it.
The chance that both hard drives would die simultaneously would be about the same as the chance that something bad would happen to your negatives.
I cannot agree with that: hard drives are complex, mechanical devices with moving parts. There is no way in hell that their reliability could compete with that of a film sitting alone, undisturbed in its storage can.
No, you just need to store the film carefully in a controlled environment.
I recently found rolls of film at my parent's place.
They turned out to be photos my father took 40 years ago. I don't know about how well the colors would turn out if I had had them developed now, but under the lens the negatives still looked sharp and unscratched.
For the last 25 years they'd been sitting in a kitchen cupboard.
Yes, assuming that you have a device that can read that card in ten years. The same goes for digital tapes, too. With the constant push for DRMd media players, I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years CD/DVD drives refuse to access old CD/DVD-R discs. Hell, already a few years ago I ran into a desktop Sony DVD player which refused to read CD-Rs unless they were of the Audio-variety (=more expensive due to a CD-R tax).
On the other hand, you can always access the film negatives because you've got the "access devices" embedded in your head.
Your post about snail-mail doesn't even make sense. Snail mail doesn't get accidentally lost at the press of a DEL-key.
That's why we have this handy thing called *backups*
Backups require human intervention and, knowing what lazy bastards human beings (myself included) in general are, that means that backups aren't done as often as we should or they're are not done at all.
With film you don't have to keep on doing backups.
If you are paranoid then get a spare memory card, spare harddrive and in addition save data on a couple of CD-Rs. Propability that ALL of those fail simultaneously is practically zero.
And that's easier and cheaper than storing the original film negatives rolled up in a plastic can which are then stored in a dark, cool basement?
Look, I am not bashing digital photography in general. It's great and inexpensive way of shooting a lot of volume. I am, however, dismayed at how it is seen as a silver-bullet for all photography especially since the volatility of digital media is already a problem (NASA's data tapes from 60s, for instance).
You use email for anything important? If it's that important that you have to print it out after, why don't you just use another medium in the first place. I don't know maybe writing it?
I use e-mail for important stuff - if I have something critical to communicate I will both e-mail and fax the info (with a real fax machine; I don't trust computer/modem fax programs).
If you want to store digital media right you've basically got one option: digital tape (DLT), a tape drive and a computer that can be used to access the data.
CD-R(W)s are a joke. I have had Plextor CD-Rs become unreadable in a couple of years they spent in a dark closet in my house. I suspect DVD-+R(W)s are even worse due to the higher data density.
With the ever increasing use of digital photography, I've become wary of the same problem that plagues digital media in general: it's so volatile.
Properly stored original film negatives last decades, whereas digital media is gone in a blink of an eye when your harddrive/memory card breaks down or you accidentally erase your media.
It's the same thing as with e-mail. I routinely print out all my e-mail correspondence (sent and received) these days because I've lost my mails too often.
he was troubled that some very prestigious scientists had signed the statement.
Indeed.
But I'm sure that the administration will feel generous and provide all these scientists a short series of re-educational seminars on a tropical paradise island just south of Florida.
an issue complicated by the fact that a check written in purple crayon on a McDonald's napkin is not necessarily a priori invalid
How about getting rid of cash and checks in the first place and simply rely on electronic money?
I for one am sick and tired of carrying cash and coins in particular. That's why I mainly use my debet/credit card and tend to avoid places that accept only cash.
Checks are even worse. Where I grew up the checks went out of circulation in the 1980s and I personally find them extremely cumbersome and confusing way of transfering money.
Because, believe it or not, name and reputation is essentially what defines us as scientists. Got no name, you're no-one. It is absolutely essential to be recognized as the author.
However, what you are completely overlooking is that "your" research and "your" results are based on centuries of tradition and thought by others.
Indeed. Just like me, they published their research and have ever since been recognized by the history as the discoverers of that particular bit of knowledge. That's what I mean by getting recognition.
Chances are, in fact, that others had the same idea before but didn't patent it or did publish it.
I just read my post again and I don't know where you got the idea that I wouldn't publish my results. Of course I publish everything in mainstream scientific journals - even a patent is a publication.
I suppose your main point of criticism is the patent. In a patent I publish my implenentation of an idea so that others may benefit from it. I do this in exchange for a limited time period of protection for it so that I get a financial reward for coming up with it. After that period has expired the invention will go public domain and everybody wins.
And may you die with no one recognizing the value of your work, or even seeing it.
Looks like people on Slashdot really don't bother to reading posts properly.
Did I say I'm hoarding or hiding the information? No! That's what I said was wrong with the current interpretation of copyrights and patents.
I would not be a scientist if I didn't publish my data openly. What I do, however, reserve rights to is to be recognized publicly as the instigator and original inventor of the idea/research/implementation published.
If my idea has commercial value, I'll patent it. This will be the best of both worlds. I get the proper reward for my work, everyone's free to license the patent and, in time, it will become public domain.
Slashdot Mirror
Guilty as charged and proud of it. :)
Hopefully this will revive the manned spaceflight programs all over the world, preferably in the form of true collaboration and not just let's-all-keep-reinventing-the-wheel kind of silly competition.
We need to get off this planet sooner or later and unmanned probes won't do that.
I don't bother with them.
Multiple audio tracks?
Got a point there. I hope this will be addressed in a future Mencoder. Whenever they add that feature, I'll re-encode all Futuramas with the episode and commentary soundtracks in one file. Right now I've ripped two versions of each episode: normal episode soundtrack and the hilarious commentary tracks.
Aspect ratios?
-aspect 16:9
Cropping? Multiple video versions or seam-less branching?
If cropping is a serious problem, you might want to run -vf cropdetect and set -vf crop parameter yourself. I don't usually bother fiddling with it.
DivX encoding is far too time consuming to blindly automate.
Maybe, if you want to create an exact copy of the DVD. I don't.
You don't have Futurama 4 DVD out yet?
Just to play the devil's advocate:
I don't see them ignoring piracy, but fighting it.
I have ripped my entire library of about 70 DVDs into DivX with it. With a script you can just insert the DVD and walk away.
It all began as an effort to be able to watch entire seasons of Simpsons, Futurama or Black Adder in one go without having to change discs and/or deal with cumbersome menus and copyright announcements that you can't fast-forward (FOX is particularly bad in this aspect).
Now I've got a fanless VIA EPIA mini-ITX box connected to my TV with the media on a 250 GB portable hard drive. Interestingly, a cordless trackball mouse is actually a better remote than your ordinary remote control when you get used to it.
I cannot agree with that: hard drives are complex, mechanical devices with moving parts. There is no way in hell that their reliability could compete with that of a film sitting alone, undisturbed in its storage can.
Before DMCA there was a thing called fair use under which you could make a copy of any media you had bought.
After DMCA fair use is out and it's too late to complain.
Deal with it.
I recently found rolls of film at my parent's place.
They turned out to be photos my father took 40 years ago. I don't know about how well the colors would turn out if I had had them developed now, but under the lens the negatives still looked sharp and unscratched.
For the last 25 years they'd been sitting in a kitchen cupboard.
Yes, assuming that you have a device that can read that card in ten years. The same goes for digital tapes, too. With the constant push for DRMd media players, I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years CD/DVD drives refuse to access old CD/DVD-R discs. Hell, already a few years ago I ran into a desktop Sony DVD player which refused to read CD-Rs unless they were of the Audio-variety (=more expensive due to a CD-R tax).
On the other hand, you can always access the film negatives because you've got the "access devices" embedded in your head.
Your post about snail-mail doesn't even make sense. Snail mail doesn't get accidentally lost at the press of a DEL-key.
Backups require human intervention and, knowing what lazy bastards human beings (myself included) in general are, that means that backups aren't done as often as we should or they're are not done at all.
With film you don't have to keep on doing backups.
And that's easier and cheaper than storing the original film negatives rolled up in a plastic can which are then stored in a dark, cool basement?
Look, I am not bashing digital photography in general. It's great and inexpensive way of shooting a lot of volume. I am, however, dismayed at how it is seen as a silver-bullet for all photography especially since the volatility of digital media is already a problem (NASA's data tapes from 60s, for instance).
I use e-mail for important stuff - if I have something critical to communicate I will both e-mail and fax the info (with a real fax machine; I don't trust computer/modem fax programs).
CD-R(W)s are a joke. I have had Plextor CD-Rs become unreadable in a couple of years they spent in a dark closet in my house. I suspect DVD-+R(W)s are even worse due to the higher data density.
Hard drives aren't much better either.
Properly stored original film negatives last decades, whereas digital media is gone in a blink of an eye when your harddrive/memory card breaks down or you accidentally erase your media.
It's the same thing as with e-mail. I routinely print out all my e-mail correspondence (sent and received) these days because I've lost my mails too often.
I'd think that the friction would burn the plastic BB to crisp before impact.
I know there is a penis enlargement joke lurking somewhere in there...
Unless, of course, it gives you and your company that extra competetive edge.
I am not particularly fond of Rt. Hon. Tony Blair's policies, but I can appreciate how he defends them in public.
Indeed.
But I'm sure that the administration will feel generous and provide all these scientists a short series of re-educational seminars on a tropical paradise island just south of Florida.
All inclusive.
I hope you're not talking about sticking a pink carnation in your hat and, er, making the old sign...
Which kind of bothers me.
The last thing I would like to see is a prolonged political/economical stand-off between the EU and USA.
The present silliness with the freedom fries madness over there and general uninformed anti-American crap over here is already enough.
How about getting rid of cash and checks in the first place and simply rely on electronic money?
I for one am sick and tired of carrying cash and coins in particular. That's why I mainly use my debet/credit card and tend to avoid places that accept only cash.
Checks are even worse. Where I grew up the checks went out of circulation in the 1980s and I personally find them extremely cumbersome and confusing way of transfering money.
Because, believe it or not, name and reputation is essentially what defines us as scientists. Got no name, you're no-one. It is absolutely essential to be recognized as the author.
However, what you are completely overlooking is that "your" research and "your" results are based on centuries of tradition and thought by others.
Indeed. Just like me, they published their research and have ever since been recognized by the history as the discoverers of that particular bit of knowledge. That's what I mean by getting recognition.
Chances are, in fact, that others had the same idea before but didn't patent it or did publish it.
I just read my post again and I don't know where you got the idea that I wouldn't publish my results. Of course I publish everything in mainstream scientific journals - even a patent is a publication.
I suppose your main point of criticism is the patent. In a patent I publish my implenentation of an idea so that others may benefit from it. I do this in exchange for a limited time period of protection for it so that I get a financial reward for coming up with it. After that period has expired the invention will go public domain and everybody wins.
Looks like people on Slashdot really don't bother to reading posts properly.
Did I say I'm hoarding or hiding the information? No! That's what I said was wrong with the current interpretation of copyrights and patents.
I would not be a scientist if I didn't publish my data openly. What I do, however, reserve rights to is to be recognized publicly as the instigator and original inventor of the idea/research/implementation published.
If my idea has commercial value, I'll patent it. This will be the best of both worlds. I get the proper reward for my work, everyone's free to license the patent and, in time, it will become public domain.