Who said we had to use MPEG2 (miniDV/DV) to record to the CF disk? Using an MPEG-4 codec that 6GB would allow at least the same capacity as the miniDV tape.
Yes, the cost would be higher, as a 6GB Microdrive is expensive, and you'd also need an MPEG-4 encoder chip, but the size/weight of the camcorder would be significantly reduced, I'd think.
Also, Microdrives are often used in such constant-access situations. For example, anybody who owns a PDA and plays video files off a Microdrive (Or any other type of streaming media).
Actually it looks like you misunderstand how relative URLs work:p
Most image URLs on sites are relative, which means they don't store the full URL (IE, "http://foo.com/myimage.png"), but instead only the relative path ("myimage.png" or "./myimage.png").
The hostname is assumed to be the current host, unless that's overridden in the HTML.
Unfortunately, the creator of this website made the fatal error of using fully qualified URLs instead of relative URLs for his image files. If he were to realize what was going on, I'd imagine he'd immediately make that change.
So while you're correct in the context of THIS page, in general the Coral P2P cache will cache most images on most sites.
Define stable. I've been using it for ages (Over a year) and it's been perfectly stable. So by stable do you mean if it IS stable, or if they CALL it stable (1.0)?
Besides, Theora isn't stable, it's still in alpha. And yes, while above I said that it counts what it IS not what they CALL it, but alphas are not even feature complete, let alone stable.
Fact is the university isn't banning WiFi routers from being on the premesis. They even suggest 802.11a routers as alternatives to 802.11b/g (Most people miss that in the article, the university says 802.11a is just fine but 802.11b/g has to go).
Now, seeing as how they're allowing 5.4ghz WAPs, they have no right to specify that 5.4ghz WAPs are OK, but 2.4ghz WAPs are not. Being so specific as to ban WAPs based on their frequency, THAT falls under the regulation.
Actually, it is true, and the parent isn't a troll.
However, it's not ENTIRELY true.
It's true in that many of the previews of the movie use(d) the StarGate SG-1 opening theme as the background music. It's not true that this is now the main theme.
However, the parent post is PARTIALLY correct, while you are ENTIRELY incorrect. So perhaps before calling somebody a troll, you should get your facts straight.
In fact, I was about to post a similar comment, deriding the film for stealing/licencing the StarGate theme for their previews.
I don't think it could go either way; the FCC regulation is clear. NOBODY under ANY circumstances can regulate it but the FCC. A contract that seeks to regulate it is breaking the FCC regulation.
Who said that there had to be a tenency agreement for the FCC's regulation to be in effect?
Doesn't matter, it's still regulation, which is forbidden.
If a landlord forbids antennas under 1 foot long and says he'll fine you if you have one, he's also not allowed to do that; he's regulating the use, which only the FCC can do.
It's very clear; nobody but the FCC can regulate. There is no exception for universities.
Actually it is. Read the FCC docs linked from the article. 2.4ghz is unlicenced, which means ANY device MUST accept ANY interference from ANY other device.
As a previous poster said, if you build a device that saturates the entire 2.4ghz spectrum and prevents WiFi from working over the ENTIRE campus, there is NOTHING the school can do about it. That's the whole point of it BEING an unlicenced spectrum, it can be used for anything by anybody.
Preventing you from using that device would be against FCC regulations.
Sorry to say it, but RTFA. The university's announcement specifically states that people are using said WiFi networks on peoples' internal networks, connected to cable and DSL modems.
And no, they're not within their rights to stop you from running your WiFi network under ANY circumstances; all they can do is forbid you from connecting your WiFi network to THEIR network. They can't actually do anything about the WiFi network itself.
My reading of it (the FCC doc) is that the FCC has forbidden landlords from preventing you from doing it. Smoking, painting, loud music, christmas lights... Those all may be legal, but there are no regulations that protect their use.
Doesn't matter to me, I'm not in the US. Fact is, while people may/may not like the FCC for doing good/bad things, that IS the regulation, which the landlord is not permitted to break.
The difference in your example is that there is no regulation or law stating that all "taps" (Wireless devices) must accept any "disruption" (interference) from any "other tenant" (Other wireless device).
On the other hand, there IS such a regulation for WiFi... A landlord is not allowed to evict you for causing disruption on the 2.4ghz spectrum, even if it breaks everybody elses networks and cordless phones.
I believe that the point of the FCC regulation is that landlorts (A university) is not ALLOWED to make that rule (No WiFi).
It doesn't matter if there are too few channels, it's unlicenced so all devices MUST accept interference, regardless of source. Ever read the FCC text on the bottom of WiFi routers?
In other words, the FCC forbids ANYBODY from telling you that you're not allowed to use your WiFi (Or, as I read it, any other device with an antenna less than one foot in length).
So, if we're not allowed to complain when somebody (UofT) breaks the law and denies us our (Well, Americans') rights, when ARE we allowed to complain?
I have a Sony TV that has DRCv1. It was claimed as some sort of motion-blur removing feature, in the end all it does is sharpen the image. Yeah, there's probably more advanced stuff going on there, but it has no effect on motion blur at all, the overall effect it's just sharper, which isn't always a good thing.
Still, I like to run it on "low" (Options are "Off", "Low", and "High")
They already re-released Chrono Trigger for PSX, just like they did with the FF games (http://www.icybrian.com/games/chronotrigger/remak e.php). The game was identical except for animated cutscenes and enhanced music.
I'm trying to prove that taking results from just one site, as the parent article does, and treating them like an absolute fact, is stupid. It's only representative of that ONE site.
I chose startpagina.nl simply because it was the top of the list; I did't visit the site, nor do I know what's on it. However I later (as can be seen in another post) looked at the IE percentages of the other 9 sites in Nedstat's top 10. Only one showed a Mozilla presense similar to that of the parent article.
I used to run a popular BitTorrent related sites, with about 300 thousand pageviews per day. My stats matched those I'm seeing everywhere else; about mid-ninties for IE, with Mozilla at one or two percent.
That's the point, "most geeks" aren't representative of the overall population.
If you look at the other 9 sites on NedStat's top 10, there is only one site with Mozilla at 13%. The rest show IE in the mid ninties.
It's unfortunate there is no overall source as to what browser is most popular. However, overall it seems that most sites show IE as in the mid 90s as far as percentages are concerned.
Don't get me wrong, I WANT Firefox to gain ground, and I use Firefox myself, both on Linux and Windows. However the claims that it's captured nearly 15% of the market are silly.
As has been said in many previous posts, those stats JUST represent ONE site, and a tech-oriented one at that, making the results hugely biased.
For a comparison as to how useless those statistics are, I checked out the stats for the most popular site tracked by NedStatBasic. It's startpagina.nl with about 2.8 million pageviews per day.
If SID is supposed to be the Caller ID of email, then isn't spammers adopting it a GOOD thing? Doesn't that mean that somebody can create a list of the SIDs of spammers, providing a super-effective spam filter for a mail server that only accepts SID identified mail?
The game is for XBox and PS2, right? While this doesn't work on the PS2, from what I understand EA could easily release a client-side patch for the xbox version to fix this. This is one of the benefits of having a hard drive in a console.
Of course I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that xbox games can and are patched.
Slashdot Mirror
Who said we had to use MPEG2 (miniDV/DV) to record to the CF disk? Using an MPEG-4 codec that 6GB would allow at least the same capacity as the miniDV tape.
Yes, the cost would be higher, as a 6GB Microdrive is expensive, and you'd also need an MPEG-4 encoder chip, but the size/weight of the camcorder would be significantly reduced, I'd think.
Also, Microdrives are often used in such constant-access situations. For example, anybody who owns a PDA and plays video files off a Microdrive (Or any other type of streaming media).
Actually it looks like you misunderstand how relative URLs work :p
Most image URLs on sites are relative, which means they don't store the full URL (IE, "http://foo.com/myimage.png"), but instead only the relative path ("myimage.png" or "./myimage.png").
The hostname is assumed to be the current host, unless that's overridden in the HTML.
Unfortunately, the creator of this website made the fatal error of using fully qualified URLs instead of relative URLs for his image files. If he were to realize what was going on, I'd imagine he'd immediately make that change.
So while you're correct in the context of THIS page, in general the Coral P2P cache will cache most images on most sites.
We may not know if the java version is of alpha quality, but as it's extremely buggy and unstable (It even says as much on the site), it's not stable.
Define stable. I've been using it for ages (Over a year) and it's been perfectly stable. So by stable do you mean if it IS stable, or if they CALL it stable (1.0)?
Besides, Theora isn't stable, it's still in alpha. And yes, while above I said that it counts what it IS not what they CALL it, but alphas are not even feature complete, let alone stable.
Fact is the university isn't banning WiFi routers from being on the premesis. They even suggest 802.11a routers as alternatives to 802.11b/g (Most people miss that in the article, the university says 802.11a is just fine but 802.11b/g has to go).
Now, seeing as how they're allowing 5.4ghz WAPs, they have no right to specify that 5.4ghz WAPs are OK, but 2.4ghz WAPs are not. Being so specific as to ban WAPs based on their frequency, THAT falls under the regulation.
Actually, it is true, and the parent isn't a troll.
However, it's not ENTIRELY true.
It's true in that many of the previews of the movie use(d) the StarGate SG-1 opening theme as the background music. It's not true that this is now the main theme.
However, the parent post is PARTIALLY correct, while you are ENTIRELY incorrect. So perhaps before calling somebody a troll, you should get your facts straight.
In fact, I was about to post a similar comment, deriding the film for stealing/licencing the StarGate theme for their previews.
I don't think it could go either way; the FCC regulation is clear. NOBODY under ANY circumstances can regulate it but the FCC. A contract that seeks to regulate it is breaking the FCC regulation.
Who said that there had to be a tenency agreement for the FCC's regulation to be in effect?
Doesn't matter, it's still regulation, which is forbidden.
If a landlord forbids antennas under 1 foot long and says he'll fine you if you have one, he's also not allowed to do that; he's regulating the use, which only the FCC can do.
It's very clear; nobody but the FCC can regulate. There is no exception for universities.
Actually it is. Read the FCC docs linked from the article. 2.4ghz is unlicenced, which means ANY device MUST accept ANY interference from ANY other device.
As a previous poster said, if you build a device that saturates the entire 2.4ghz spectrum and prevents WiFi from working over the ENTIRE campus, there is NOTHING the school can do about it. That's the whole point of it BEING an unlicenced spectrum, it can be used for anything by anybody.
Preventing you from using that device would be against FCC regulations.
Sorry to say it, but RTFA. The university's announcement specifically states that people are using said WiFi networks on peoples' internal networks, connected to cable and DSL modems.
And no, they're not within their rights to stop you from running your WiFi network under ANY circumstances; all they can do is forbid you from connecting your WiFi network to THEIR network. They can't actually do anything about the WiFi network itself.
My reading of it (the FCC doc) is that the FCC has forbidden landlords from preventing you from doing it. Smoking, painting, loud music, christmas lights... Those all may be legal, but there are no regulations that protect their use.
Doesn't matter to me, I'm not in the US. Fact is, while people may/may not like the FCC for doing good/bad things, that IS the regulation, which the landlord is not permitted to break.
The difference in your example is that there is no regulation or law stating that all "taps" (Wireless devices) must accept any "disruption" (interference) from any "other tenant" (Other wireless device).
On the other hand, there IS such a regulation for WiFi... A landlord is not allowed to evict you for causing disruption on the 2.4ghz spectrum, even if it breaks everybody elses networks and cordless phones.
I believe that the point of the FCC regulation is that landlorts (A university) is not ALLOWED to make that rule (No WiFi).
It doesn't matter if there are too few channels, it's unlicenced so all devices MUST accept interference, regardless of source. Ever read the FCC text on the bottom of WiFi routers?
The university is breaking the law by forbidding WiFi.
c h/ DA-04-1844A1.pdf
The parent article/post points this out with this link:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmat
In other words, the FCC forbids ANYBODY from telling you that you're not allowed to use your WiFi (Or, as I read it, any other device with an antenna less than one foot in length).
So, if we're not allowed to complain when somebody (UofT) breaks the law and denies us our (Well, Americans') rights, when ARE we allowed to complain?
I have a Sony TV that has DRCv1. It was claimed as some sort of motion-blur removing feature, in the end all it does is sharpen the image. Yeah, there's probably more advanced stuff going on there, but it has no effect on motion blur at all, the overall effect it's just sharper, which isn't always a good thing.
Still, I like to run it on "low" (Options are "Off", "Low", and "High")
They already re-released Chrono Trigger for PSX, just like they did with the FF games (http://www.icybrian.com/games/chronotrigger/remak e.php). The game was identical except for animated cutscenes and enhanced music.
12ms are on the market now, so if by a 100% improvement they mean 100% improvement over 12ms, that's reasonable.
But with 8ms LCDs coming out soon, this announcement is decidedly less impressive.
Besides, when Samsung's 17" OLED display comes out next year, we'll all forget about response times.
I'm trying to prove that taking results from just one site, as the parent article does, and treating them like an absolute fact, is stupid. It's only representative of that ONE site.
I chose startpagina.nl simply because it was the top of the list; I did't visit the site, nor do I know what's on it. However I later (as can be seen in another post) looked at the IE percentages of the other 9 sites in Nedstat's top 10. Only one showed a Mozilla presense similar to that of the parent article.
I used to run a popular BitTorrent related sites, with about 300 thousand pageviews per day. My stats matched those I'm seeing everywhere else; about mid-ninties for IE, with Mozilla at one or two percent.
That's the point, "most geeks" aren't representative of the overall population.
If you look at the other 9 sites on NedStat's top 10, there is only one site with Mozilla at 13%. The rest show IE in the mid ninties.
It's unfortunate there is no overall source as to what browser is most popular. However, overall it seems that most sites show IE as in the mid 90s as far as percentages are concerned.
Don't get me wrong, I WANT Firefox to gain ground, and I use Firefox myself, both on Linux and Windows. However the claims that it's captured nearly 15% of the market are silly.
Most people count Netscape as Mozilla, since Netscape is (currently) just a rebranded Mozilla.
As has been said in many previous posts, those stats JUST represent ONE site, and a tech-oriented one at that, making the results hugely biased.
1 03 09
For a comparison as to how useless those statistics are, I checked out the stats for the most popular site tracked by NedStatBasic. It's startpagina.nl with about 2.8 million pageviews per day.
Here are the browser stats:
IE 5/6: 96.7%
Mozilla: 2.7%
Other: 0.6%
You can see the stats here:
http://www.nedstatbasic.net/s?tab=1&link=5&id=7
If SID is supposed to be the Caller ID of email, then isn't spammers adopting it a GOOD thing? Doesn't that mean that somebody can create a list of the SIDs of spammers, providing a super-effective spam filter for a mail server that only accepts SID identified mail?
The game is for XBox and PS2, right? While this doesn't work on the PS2, from what I understand EA could easily release a client-side patch for the xbox version to fix this. This is one of the benefits of having a hard drive in a console.
Of course I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that xbox games can and are patched.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but how does NX differ from XDMCP? I'm not too clear on that.